>Remeber that this round got started because PCP ONCE AGAIN began
>a discussion (and a new node, I think) around the idea "let's do
>a meaning of life".
Yes, I remember quite well how you jumped onto the Rosen wagon after I
posted a node on the meaning of life. Not (yet) having read "Life Itself" I
don't want to participate in that debate. However, I wish to note that
although you continuously accuse people of saying things about Rosen's work
without having read it, you yourself apparently did not do the effort to
read the node I posted. If you had, you might have noticed that it had very
little to do with a definition of life in Rosen's sense of "what
distinguishes living (biological) systems from mechanical systems?".
My point was about "the meaning of life" in the everyday, common sense of
"what are we living for? what is the purpose of us being here on earth?".
Though these questions are in some way related, I suppose everybody will
agree that this is a wholly different issue. That is why I don't understand
your irritation at me not mentioning Rosen. I don't believe we should from
now on consider "life" to be a Rosen trade mark, and bring to court every
author who uses the word "life" without including a reference to Rosen.
Don't misunderstand me: I don't want in any way to deny the importance of
Rosen's ideas, or the quality of his work, and have been quite impressed by
some older papers of him. It's just that the fact that Rosen has written an
important book on a definition of life does not mean he should be regarded
as a prophet whose unbelievers deserve castigation...
_______________________________________________________________________
Dr. Francis Heylighen Systems Researcher
PO, Free University of Brussels, Pleinlaan 2, B -1050 Brussels, Belgium
Phone: +32-2-629 25 25; Fax: +32-2-629 24 89 (**new numbers!)
Email:fheyligh@vnet3.vub.ac.be; URL: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/HEYL.html