Folks like RD like to invoke "Copernican revolution" in support of materialistic notions of human nature. But they use this term uncritically. Even the Copernican revolution's overturning of one feature of our common sense (the notion that the sun goes around the earth) relied upon other common sense notions. The same is true for any scientific revolution: to appreciate its continuity with the past one must.... (to be continued: going to ice cream with daughter)
How about defining it as an instance of functional complexity? And treating the list of properties as following necessarily from this definition? Okay, this is very diamond-in-the-rough (or perhaps zirconium...) but here goes my thoughts on the matter: (Complexity) Many diverse parts (functional) acting for the sake of the whole I think I need to add something like "not as the instrument of another" or something like that. Given that they act together as one whole and given entropy, etc., the organism will need to posses more order than its surroundings (homeostasis). It will therefore need to take in energy (nutrition), which it will use to sustain its readiness to interact with its environment so as to preserve its own being (homeostasis again?), but which will eventually break down (death), so that in order for that life form to continue it will need to duplicate itself (reproduction), which, upon occurring, will involve both development (growth) to maturity and...
Comments