--------------B0128625DC002FAF2601CA1B
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <3598EC03.F883D294@hsc.vcu.edu>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:45:39 -0400
From: Don Mikulecky <mikuleck@hsc.vcu.edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: walt@anice.net.ar
Subject: Re: Non Physical Experience
References: <199806262237.SAA46720@venus.vcu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Don Mikulecky replies:
Walter Fritz wrote:
> > For example, the activity of DNA-polymerases (which pick nucleotides
> > out of the environment and incorporate these into an elongating
> > polynucleotide chain, taking an existing DNA-strand as the model)
> > needs correction by proof reading DNA-polymerases, since wrong
> > nucleotides can be built in.
>
> and
>
> > For instance, one can say that an enzyme interprets the environment,
> > since it is able to pick out only one substrate among many possible
> > ones. Also, an enzyme must be motivated to be active.
>
> and
>
> > Of course one can say that I use anthropomorphic reasoning because I
> > use terminology which so said only applies to humans (and/or animals).
> > However, I could argue just the same that someone accusing me of
> > anthropmorphism is him/herself anthropocentric. Haha!
>
> Only a system having an objective, senses and actuators can act. Calling
> DNA-polymerase and an enzyme such systems is unreasonable. By this kind
> of unprecise thinking the issue is muddled rather then cleared up.
> Excuse me for criticising.
> Clearly you are unfamiliar with Oyama's book which speaks to this issue
> clearly.
All sensors in biology ultimately boil down to a binding reaction, or heat
or light, changing the conformation of a molecule. Thus the DNA SYSTEM is
repete wth senses. We daily increase our dependence on the idea that
cellular systems "talk" to each other continuously. We need to understand
their language. The nervous system is but one highly specialized case of
this.
> > I am convinced that until we have a much better understanding of our
> > selves, we will just be applying band aids to the symptoms of our
> > destructive actions.
>
> Yes how very true. That is why I explore our minds in my homepage
> (address below).
>
> > More important, I am also convinced that we cannot understand
> > ourselves without dealing with the non physical aspects of
> > our human understanding.
>
> While I believe I understand what you mean, you should use less
> misleading terminalogy. I suppose by "non physical aspects" you mean
> concepts, patterns, relationships, situations, experience, the conscious
> and unconscious.
Something is wrong with the dichotomy physical vs non-physical?????
> All these are very important and good concepts. Only, so I maintain,
> they are physical entities and not "non physical".
> We should try to understand them well, before stating that they
> necessarily are non physical.
> huh?????
> Walt
> http://www.anice.net.ar/intsyst/
respectfully,Don Mikulecky
--------------B0128625DC002FAF2601CA1B--