Philosophy Now Forum

http://dali.urvas.lt/forviewing/pic25.jpg
Been into Dali, Raphaelesque Head Exploding recently

Hi Joseph Its interesting what you say, as that effort had little distance in it.. Perhaps I should revisit it and move it forwards. A major problem I have is perfectionism. Perhaps I just have to accept the sloppiness of reality, embrace it even, if I am to get where I want. Also, thanks for your ...

I think I still prefer your effort here.

That said, I like this a lot!

We don't have to become Aristotelians to accept teleonomy—I sure ain't. My conception of final causes is non-essentialist and purely immanent—Spinozist for sure. To me teleonomy is one of the most plain facts of biology—even Jacques Monod, that consummate existentialist, recognized this. Don't tell ...

Bytesplicer -

do you think it is conceivable to construct a theory of biological information that does not rely on measurement but that objectively exists? I hope there is such a possibility.

But as evolution has to have its variations ready before the environment makes them "adaptations" then there is no teleology possible and only plays the game of the religious. Yes, but adaptation happens for the good of the organism. In this sense we can speak of final causes. Food includ...

people use teleological language when describing evolution. It really bugs me. I think that the use of final causes as an explanation in biology is not entirely misguided, just not in the traditional form you are likely referring to. Teleology is out, teleonomy is in, as I like to say. food Also, n...

Also, picked this out from the conversation

Evolution is the result of change - it is not a cause in any sense.

Thanks whoever said this, this is a particular pet peeve of mine.

Yes, something like that. What I read was a general "idea" paper that left with no firm conclusions, but it analyzed some possible influences of nutrient resources on speciation. For example, heavily fluctuating nutrient regimes (on a geological time scale) may increase allopatric speciati...

I mean, I have seen papers that deal with the effects of energy resources on speciation fossil invertebrates, so this sort of thing might be valid, but I can't see this being a major factor.

First of all, please end the long quotations. I suspect that the reason it is just you two now is because no one else wants to sift through all the waste. I think chaz wyman is right. Energy is not a highly limiting factor to organisms, so it does not seem to be a major determinant of evolution/etc....

What about Cosmological Natural Selection?

In the interest of full disclosure, I will note that I have already read AO and its successor (although I am rereading it). I will keep my comments in the context of where we are at, although I cannot completely prevent cross-fertilization from "later-on". I think the BwO can be many thing...

Starting with Desiring-Production is fine. Whatever works. As for a schedule, if that would facilitate things best for you, then I'm fine with it, although either way will suit me.

PS, another resource which I have found helpful is a compilation of early essays/misc. by Deleuze called Desert Islands, published by Semiotext(e). ( http://www.amazon.com/Desert-Islands-1953-1974-Semiotext-Foreign/dp/1584350180/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1280200845&sr=1-1-fkmr0 ) It also ...