Helmut, Edwina, Jon, list,
Few borders in any realm, animate or inanimate, are clearly defined.
There is a continuum. The inanimate realm has extremes from sharp
boundaries (a crystal) to extremely vague boundaries (the earth's
atmosphere). The borders of living things are an intermediate
Edwina, Jon, List,
I agree, that a molecule (and an atom, a particle...) is a token. But, when something happens with this molecule due to a natural law, eg. the law of gravitation, is then the spatial section of this law that works upon the molecule a token of the law? I was thinking no,
Helmut, Edwina, List:
HR: my point was, that a token is embodied, but a molecule has no clear
borders (of it´s body) ...
In this context, "embodied" does not necessarily mean that a Token "has a
body," it just means that it is existentially instantiated in some way.
The word "Token" is a Type,
Helmut, list - the molecule doesn't need to have a discrete self
with distinct borders in order to be a 'token' of a 'type'. The fact
that its composition is specific; i.e., a specific number of
electrons/protons/neutrons - gives it a distinct identity that
differentiates it from another TYPE
Helmut,
Your idea of “self-defined bodies” is essentially the “autopoiesis” of Maturana
and Varela, and the idea of final causation being intrinsic to animate bodymind
is shared by Gregory Bateson and, I think, by Peirce. My book Turning Signs
joins these concepts with Robert Rosen’s
Gene's Lawrence quote is apposite and not at all inconsistent with a decent
theology that recognizes what Lawrence says. What theology might add is
that part of creation is the existence of word, words. These single us out
and call us to account and must be included in any effort to frame a
Edwina, I think that what you call atheism, some people call “religious
naturalism” — a more positive expression of the “wonder of creation.”
https://religiousnaturalism.org/
gary f.
From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca]
Sent: 8-Apr-17 19:37
To: Peirce List
