[MD] Distinguishing Levels

[Heather Perella]

Platt,


> SA:   Platt you are talking about elements, but
> there
> > mixture and bonding is still inorganic and that is
> > unpredictable.  Whatever kind of mixture or
> bonding
> > these elements involve themselves with coming from
> the
> > mantle to the earth's surface as lava will
> definitely
> > have a play in what kind of soil that part of the
> > earth will have.  What will that soil, inorganic
> > level, be?  Oh, and if it rains a lot or is very
> dry
> > that will also play a hand in what kind of
> inorganic
> > level will be present.  So many factors are
> involved.
> 
     Platt responded:  "That the composition of dirt
may vary from place to place I have no doubt. Nor do I
doubt that one cannot predict
> exactly what the 
> composition will be until it's tested. That's why I
> send a sample of 
> the dirt in my back yard to the local dirt testing
> facility so I know 
> how best to fertilize it to grow petunias But what
> that has to do with 
> evolution toward betterness I haven't the foggiest.

     Volcano's, mineral content, erosion, What will
come up that volcano that makes the soil possible for
certain kinds of plants to grow here or there?  Did
you know a volcano is erupting under the ocean near
Hawaii?  Nobody knew, I'm sure the ocean did not know,
not even the inorganic magma knew what its'
compositions would be when that crack in the earth
finally gave way and at that moment whatever the
composition of the magma was at that particular moment
in time, that's the kinds of inorganic material
surfacing as lava making certain material grow in
structure that will soon make another island near all
the other island chains that are Hawaii.  The magma is
constantly mixing and at certain regions of the earth
different inorganic mixtures of lava surface.  When
the crust is broken whatever mix of magma is at that
place, at that point in time then that's what
inorganic material will be on the surface.  If the
crack in the crust held a little longer or broke
earlier we would notice different inorganic materials
surfacing.  What mixture will surface producing a soil
for the next level, organic level, is all
unpredictable by the inorganic level.

     SA earlier:  "First off, we'll see as to how much
control we
> > will have on what our babies will look like.  'A
> cure
> > for cancer will be here very soon' has been a
> slogan
> > I've heard since the 1980's.  Yet, not to go off
> > track, I'm not sure what this manipulation by
> humans
> > has to do with "What will my son look like?"

     Platt said:  "IMO if scientists will eventually
be able through
> gene manipulation to 
> produce babies immune to cancer and other diseases
> and extend human 
> life hundreds of years, they will be able to produce
> babies to look 
> like whoever you specify."

     The intellectual level can bring us here, but
what of the biological level predicting this?  It's
not happening.

     Platt said:  "The fact that as of now
> the looks of your 
> baby aren't predictable simply means the technology
> of genetics still 
> has a ways to go. But, all the mechanisms are known.
> The biological 
> pattern of a human being is no mystery."

     Sure a human being, but there are billions of us,
the diversity is as high as their are people on this
earth, and that unpredictability of the biology is
because of the other factors in development that
biology, DNA, is not predicting, such as food, water,
quality of air, etc...  Now the intellectual level
might know this, but how does skin know this?  It
doesn't.

     Platt said:  "Anyway, your
> baby's looks have 
> little to do with an evolutionary leap forward."

     Your talking about evolution here, I'm not.
 
      SA earlier:  "Platt, scientists are very, very
far off from
> > knowing exactly how to produce round noses versus
> > pointed noses and to have these combined with long
> > legs, well, this is all just talk.  The field of
> > evolutionary development where the understandings
> that
> > go on inside of womb is a new, young field.  I
> know
> > Gould in his book, "The Structure of Evolutionary
> > Theory" from ca. the year 2000 was calling on
> people
> > to practice in this field he called so open and
> > unknown.  How anything inside the womb actually
> gets
> > from here to there even in a weeks time is terra
> > incognito, or in other words, a field in science
> that
> > still has much to reveal for we just don't know. 
> > There are some scientists that know that certain
> > markers go on and off and when this happens
> certain
> > genes are triggered and it is the sequence of
> genes
> > that are triggered that develops a wing of a fruit
> fly
> > either on the back or coming out of the head of
> this
> > creature.  Yet, the why the triggering happens
> when it
> > does, and how that triggering is triggered and to
> even
> > know what genes are.  Sure the human DNA is being
> > mapped, but what those genes do on the map - well
> > nobody knows."

 
     Platt said:  "You have a lot less faith in
science and technology
> than I do."

     Science might be able to predict this, but skin? 
Come on now, please. 

> >      Platt said:  "By contrast, the formula for 
> > > a successful metaphysics escapes the most
> dedicated
> > > practitioner of 
> > > intellect."
> > 
     SA said:  "I doubt this statement as well,
because the
> > metaphysics of cosmology became what is now
> astronomy.
> >  Thus, a metaphysics that changed into a science,
> even
> > as Natural Philosophy became known more as a
> Natural
> > Science in the 1800's due to data streaming in
> more
> > and more according to an orientation that matched
> > theories in a way that mirrored the by then well
> > established science known as physics.
> 
     Platt said:  "I was speaking about knowing a
formula for a
> successful metaphysics, 
> not about knowing the history of astronomy or
> natural science. If you 
> know of such a formula, please share it with the
> rest of us."

     These are successful metaphysics of what is.  You
think highly of science, right.  Well, since these
metaphysics turned into science in time, they are
successful formula's for metaphysics.

     SA earlier:  "I never thought of this one, but
you pointed
> out another unpredictable chaos, inorganic, and
> biological level force known as the weather.  Even
> now-a-days,
> > society and thus, intellect is being blamed at
> times
> > for influencing the weather.  What is the weather
> or
> > the forces in the weather made up of?  All these
> > levels on a very unpredictable scale." 
> 
     Platt said:  "But not unpredictable so as to
affect evolution
> towards betterness. Or 
> do you believe an unpredictable change in the
> weather will create a new 
> life form higher than humans?"

     Well, a mountain rises here and bam a desert,
that will change everything in a region once forested.
 I'm not getting stuck your muck about narrowly
placing humans as the only evolutionary creatures
possible.  All your if's of what if this happened or
that happened you are asking questions that have no
predictability other than what I know that absolutely
will happen when I shoot an arrow at a target it will
hit-miss, always.
 
> >      Platt said:  "But the forces that change a
> > society are neither
> > > understood nor 
> > > predictable (except in Pirsig's thesis a general
> but
> > > undefined move 
> > > towards betterness) and individual thoughts are
> > > likewise beyond any 
> > > certainty whatsoever. I have no idea what
> thoughts
> > > my brain will 
> > > generate in the next two minutes, or what
> > > revolutionary idea I will 
> > > come up with tomorrow that will change the
> world."
> > 
     SA earlier:  "You could plan ahead and come up
with an idea
> as to what you could do tomorrow or next year for
> that matter."
>  
     Platt said:  "I could but I can't predict I will
plan anything
> ahead two minutes from 
> now, nor can I predict with certainty that what I
> plan will actually 
> occur. However, that something will happen I can
> predict."

     Yes, the intellectual level is like that.
 
     Platt said:  "I think you are saying that since
you cannot predict
> the outcome of a 
> spin of inorganic roulette wheel that it responds to
> DQ. What I am 
> saying is nothing in the inorganic, biological, or
> social levels 
> responds to DQ so as to move evolution any higher
> than what it has 
> already accomplished in the life form of a human
> being."

     Move evolution any higher?  What does higher
mean?  Are you talking about as tall as a mountain or
as high as the clouds?  As high as a bird flies?  They
are higher than humankind.  Even the moon and sun are.
 

Your the contrast that provides this discussion fruit,
I'm not saying your the fruit or I'm the fruit, it's
the contrast and philosophical discussion providing
fruit.  I sometimes wonder if you really start to
believe yourself or not?

Thanks,
SA   

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com