Re: Gaia

[mattk@xxxxxxxxx]

Mike Lepore wrote:

> Natural selection, a materialist process and not a theistic one, can
> also cause complex systems to end up having purpose.  I wouldn't know
> what other word beside 'purpose' to use in such contexts as:  the
> purpose of the heart is to pump blood; the purpose of the lens of the
> eye is to focus light.  I don't know whether an entire ecosystem
> can do the same, but to hypothesize that is has done so doesn't
> involve a violation of scientific method.

The problem with the word purpose is that it introduces an element of
consiousness into the process. The heart pumps blood, its function is to
pump blood, it has evolved blindly into a complex pump through natural
selection. The heart does not have a purpose. You have a purpose when you
leave the house to buy a newspaper, your dog does not have a purpose when
it accompanies you without any understanding of what you are doing (other
than to empty its bladder!).

Theories of Gaia that I have read do not amount to hypothesis, if by
hypothesis we are using its strict scientific meaning. A hypothesis has
scientific evidential backing, it seems to explain a process and scientific
experimentation seems to point to it being correct. It only falls short of
being a theory because the mechanism hasn't been explained sufficiently.

Matt Kelly.

--
E/irigh lasadh as an splanc seo




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------