[MD] Is it serious?

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 26 May 2009 at 11:18, Steven Peterson wrote:

> Hi Platt,
> 
> You said:
> > An "urge to survive gene?" Why would such a gene exist? Isn't that the
> > question? And why did it "emerge?"
> 
> There isn't any interesting answer about why a particular gene exists.
> New genes are created through errors in replicating old genes. (I
> don't have the scientific background to say anything about why errors
> occasionally occur.)

I and some others are interested in how life (genes) began. I and Pirsig 
wonder why life forms (genes) have an urge to survive. Pirsig asked:


" If life is strictly a result of the physical and chemical forces of 
nature then why is life opposed to these same forces in its struggle to 
survive?" (Lila, 11)


Interesting question don't you think?


> You seem to want a different sort of answer than that. What are your
> criteria for a valid answer? Why do you fault science for not finding
> an answer in the form you want? Are you sure that the sort of question
> you have has a scientific answer? Are you trying to read the
> intellectual pattern of intentionality back onto biological genes?


Intent to survive seems to built into genes. If not, when did the intent
begin? Do you find it illogical for a scientist to claim that life is without 
purpose, excluding his own? As for the sort of question I have having a 
scientific answer, I don't expect one. Science, as Pirsig points out, 
sweep such questions under the rug. But, I do expect answers from 
those engaged in metaphysics. 

As always, I could be wrong.

Best,
Platt