Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Schema of the CEI presentation
The systems view of human and global life
PIER LUIGI LUISI INTRODUCTION 1. We have at this meeting three different religious traditions confronting each other, and also
science. The position of science with respect to religion is generally considered critical. Actually it has not been always a problem, as there was a time when people in this part of the world were pious and good natured and believed that all things in this world were created, once and for always, by God. This peaceful time ended when a British Scholar, by name Charles Darwin, wrote a blasphemous book, called the Origin of species (we are now in 1859) claiming that the species were not fixed, but changed with time‐the notion of evolution; and adding blasphemy to blasphemy, this author added that even the origin of life could have been a natural event, with life coming out from the inanimate matter thanks to natural laws. But his most horrible blasphemy, according to several Darwinian scholars, for example Telmo Pievani, was the idea that there would be no plan, no predetermined goal, in the action of nature and evolution‐an idea that h3e considered “a murder”‐ because of that apparently Charles Darwin lost his faith. As Darwin had predicted and expected, a conflict arose between science and Christianity, a problem which has already been known in the field of cosmology, with Galileo and Copernicus. This conflict is still going on in the life sciences, especially due to the creationist movement in the States, and in its more modern form of the intelligent design. However, also judging from my personal experience, once we disregard the fundamentalists of the creationism, the dialogue between science and Christianity about evolution, about the origin of life, about the plans of nature, can go ahead in a useful and intelligent way. Actually, the dialogue between Christian religion and science can proceed more easily than in the case of the eastern religions.
2. Let us consider for example Buddhism and Induism, in the form for example of Shankara’s
Advaita/Vedanta. In principle, form an ontological point of view, such a dialogue is not easy‐at first sight, it looks impossible. In fact, science’ main tenet is that the things of this world‐stones and stars, tides and lightening, plants and animals, etc.‐ are real, are solid object of reality, on which we can build a construction to understand the world, the universe. Conversely, both Advaita/Vedanta and Buddhism consider the things of this world as mere appearances, as mental constructions. To consider the objects as real, is part of our ignorance, says Buddhism, and actually things are empty, namely without any intrinsic existence, as each of them is conditioned by a myriad of other causes and conditions; and in the Advaita/Vedanta, all things are part of the initial indivisible one, which coincides with the cosmic consciousness, and our aim is to go back to this indivisible one, the Brahman. How is then possible to have a dialogue between these two opposite fronts? Of course the dialogue is possible when the participants are on the same stage, which is the stage of the apparently real world. Starting from this common stage, both science and religious traditions look for the truth, and then the dialogue can be fruitful. I am since almost 30 years, part of the Mind and Life Institute, institute by the Dalai Lama with Francisco Varela back in 1987, and I can testimony of the progress made both by Buddhist and scientists thanks to this continuous interchange of ideas and experiences. Things are more difficult with Vedanta people, who, in
my limApril 2traditiofound molecuFrom tand cosciencefield, a
1: MAIN CO 3. From a
mechamechacompoone coXX cent
4. A new NeumaPiaget man‐mwas beorganizsimple perfecta bee helical how an
Thanksbecamspeakinconceptry to e
ited experie016 in Dhaons, going bvery difficules possesshis brief intomplex, ande, adding w confrontat
ONCEPTUA
a historical nistic viewnism formeonents‐with ould understtury and ve wind beguann, Gregorand Ilya Pr
made systemecoming clezed systemphysical syt sphere, anhive, or of pattern of nd why som
s to the intee dominanng, we are pts and termexplain.
ence, are maramsala wback in theult to cons conscioustroduction, d I will limwhenever potion with so
L PILLARS O
perspectivw of Descared by indepthe idea thtand the enery first partun to blowry Bateson, rigogine, wms, giving alar that soms composeystems, thinnd each comthe regulara tornado.
me of these s
ense discust in our innow in thems which ha
more fundamith the Dal Veda and front the ness and thit is appareit myself toossible, andme analogo
OF MODERN
e, science rtes and Npendent pahat putting ntire systemt of last cenw in the miHeinz von Fho begun tso the birth
me natural sd by more nk of the somposed by r circular wWhich werself‐organiz
ssion and dnterpretatio sciences oave became
mentalist. I jai Lama anVedanta thposition ofhe principlesent that theo simply did in the strious concept
N ANTIREDU
has been dNewton. Acarts, and thtogether thm. This viewntury. iddle of ninFoerster, Alto study theh to the fielsystems spo parts‐ firstoap bubblesbillions of s
wavers whenre the forcezed systems
evelopmenon of the rof complexite popular al
just come fnd represenhousands of scientists s of life in the spectrumiscuss somengent limitsts in the rel
UCTIONIST S
dominated ccordingly, he emphasihe informatw underwen
neteen cenan Turing, Ne notion ofld of cybernontaneouslyt of all thes which formsoap molecn a stone ises responsibs would bec
nt of these reality of nty, a very glso in the m
rom a meetntants of thf years bacwho were
hemselves. of things te main cons of my limigious tradi
SCIENCE
in the last the world s was in thtion obtainent a profoun
tury, with Norbert Wief self‐organnetics and ay tend to ase living orgam spontaneules perfects thrown inble for this come living?
ideas, a serature. Becaeneral term
mass media‐
ting hold athe old Indiack, and as ae holding t to discuss isncepts of thited knowleitions.
two centucould be
he study ofed on the snd crisis at
people likeener, Paul Wnization in nartificial intessemble theanisms, buteously, eachtly aligned;n the waterself‐organi?
ries of noveause of thm, which en‐and which
2
t the end ofan religiousa scientist Ithat naked
s very largehe modernedge in the
ries by theseen as af the singleingle parts,the end of
e John vonWeiss, laternatural andelligence. Itemselves int then alsoh of them aor think ofr; or to thezation, and
el conceptsat, broadlyncompassespartly I will
2
f s
e n e
e e , f
r t
o a f e
s y s
5. I will lim
of knowlife sciemolecudealingchemismolecustill groattribu
6. This laparticuso trivihas bebut theworld‐tFor sciparticucomplegenerathe Veexampthis wo
1.1. T
7. It may
give yoimmedonce wor thatis an ima coupthe noprinciplet me Fritjof C
mit myself twledge, moence, althoule. We liveg with genstry, agriculules of DNAounded on mte. No consast observaular meetingal: that scieen excludeey do not utheir faith rience, thenular to moleex and richal vision of edanta worle does notorld are mer
THE SYSTEMS
appear theou still a rdiately somwe say that tt all qualia amportant pople of interrtion of systple of non‐loadd that thCapra (the a
to life scienoves with oough renovae in the cennetics, molltural chemA, RNA, as wmolecules, sciousness, ation wouldg, is importence deniesd by sciencuse the autremains a pn, all phenecules and t one, certascience, derld and to t deny realre dream lik
S VIEW OF LIF
en, if I say treductionise importanthe ground and phenomoint that werelated conctems view;ocalization. his concernsauthor of th
ce, recogniother conceated by thentury of the ecular biol
mistry, cosmwell as antibwhich are sno mind, ond sound tritant howevs all kind of ce. It is not hority and rivate act.omena wetheir mutuaainly not baeprived of tthe Christiaity, as Advake imagines
FE
that our lifet, materialnt addition is moleculamena can be have to clcepts whichof emergeWhat doess me personhe Tao of Ph
zing that queptual princese new pagene, and logy, pharmmetics, …‐In bodies, protseen as inannly matter. ivial to all er to point transcendeso, that allthe miracle
are experal interactioased on simranscendenan world‐baita/Vedans deprived o
e science is istic view.and correc
ar, we do nobe reduced arify. In fach depart strent properts all this menally, as I ahysics).
uantum phyciples. Let maradigm, isin our scienmacology, other woreins, drugs…nimate mat modern sout sometence and all scientists es of God t
riencing areon. The termmple reductnce, is in stbut in a difta adherenof reality.
still groundAs a mattction to thot mean thato moleculect, modern srongly fromties; and a cean? Let us m the auth
ysics, whichme then firss still grounntific world medicine, ds, the ma…. Thus, lifeter deprive
cientists. I hing that fol kind of divare atheistso explain th
e necessarim “mutual tionism‐ asrong opposfferent wayts do, claim
ded on molter of factis materialiat modern ses and atomscience of cm the reduccorollary ofbegin with tor of a basi
h is outside st notice thnded on theof life scienindustrial in heroes ae sciences oed of any tra
believe thor many pevine interves‐ some arehe phenom
ily due to interactions we will sesition, for ey. The Chriming that a
lecules, that, we havistic scenarscience is rems. Not at acomplexity ctionist viewf all that, wthe systemic book, tog
3
my domainhat most ofe notion ofnces we areand petrolare still theof today areanscendent
hat, in thiseople is notention. Gode believers,mena of the
matter, ins” is a veryee. But theexample, tostianity forall things of
at I want tove to bringrio. In fact,eductionist,all, and thisis based onw. They arewhich is thes view, andgether with
3
f f e e e t
s t , e
n y e o r f
o g s e e
8. Our cothat ormany phospitabody athat thsingle importproperview. Tparts in
9. The lasdialogua comm
the que
8. Many oexampmedicaoften u
ommon realrganized asparts whichal, or a corpnd the intehe property parts, taketant is the wrties of eacThis view isndependent
st point is aue with religmon ground
estion “wha
other examle the comal doctors, nuse, let us z
lity in everysemblies ofh make a ceporation, oeraction of aof the syst
en in isolatiweb of connh compones really at vt from each
about deathgious peopld between
at is death?
mples on themon markenurses, admzoom in the
yday life is f parts. Theell, or a flor a factory.all organs wtem‐ life in ion, but tonection, theent are duevariance wih other, as i
h, and this ile, and I expscience an
”.
e importanet, or the sministrative e metabolis
such, that wese can be wer, or a m. You see hwith each othis case‐ i
o the mutue network oe to the intth the viewn the time o
is an intereperienced td religion a
ce of the mstructure ofpersonnel,m of a simp
we are surrthe parts wmachine, buhere in the other. The mis due not sal interactiof links, to ftegrated enw of the woof Descarte
esting subjethe followinabout the q
mutual intef an hospita cleaning pple cell: not
rounded bywhich makeut also a soslide the e
main tenet oso much toons of all form a whonsemble, anorld as a ms or Newto
ct. I have ang: that it is question “w
ractions caal, with theeople…Or, tice the my
y systems, me up an orgocial systemexample of of the systeo the propecomponentole unity. And this is thmachine, coon.
a long expe much easie
what is life?
n be given.e interactioin an examyriads of rea
4
meaning byganism, them such as athe humanems’ view isrties of thets. What isctually, thehe systemsmposed by
rience wither to get to”—than on
. This is foron betweenmple which Iactions and
4
y e
n s e s e s y
h o
r
d
compocatalys
9. Actuallcompoactuallylook fothe clacompoelse. TconditiinterdeKuruna
10. Let mecompleinteresreactiothe bac
The notionapplies of elephant lmovementwithout an
onents. Hersed by a larg
ly, I have usound condity a case foror some comassic pictureound exists This is just oned by allependence.a, (compasseuse this pexity. The qsting:. Life con. Life is a gcterium is t
n of a globcourse notocalized? At of migratny point of
re, each poge enzymat
sed this pictions the ner co‐dependmpound whe of emptinfor only a to say tha other part Of course ion) or thepicture to aquestion iscannot be loglobal prophe whole n
bal propertyt to the bacAnd also, loting birds, wlocalization
oint is a cic, specific p
ture to explext one, anddent arisinghich is not cness. And ifew secondat this ideas, is presenfrom this ethical comask another: where in ocalized in operty, due toetwork of r
y without acterium aloooking at thwe are alwn, without a
chemical coprotein.
ain some od is conditi. And in all conditionedit is also a ds, or less: a of the mnt of course picture sommponent, arr very impothis picturone single po the mutueactions, is
a centre ofne, but to he bee hiveways witnesany directo
ompound,
f the classiconed by a pthis netword by any othrepresentait disappe
mutual co‐din Buddhis
me of the mre missing.ortant quere is life locpoint, in onal interactio the entire
f localizatioany living oe, or at thessing an orr, master, o
each line
c tenet of Bprevious sterk, there is her, which ation of imars, transfodependencem, in whichmain eleme
stion for thcalized? Ane single comons of all cosystem
on is a quitorganism. We termite nrganized, “ior dictator.
a chemica
Buddhism. Inep. Each cono prima caexists per s
mpermanencormed into e, where oh the main tents of Bud
he modernnd the answmpound, inomponents
te general Where is thnest, or to intelligent” The whole
5
al reaction,
n fact, eachompound isausa. If youse, you findce, as eachsomething
one part istenet is thedhism, like
n theory ofwer is veryn one single. The life of
concept. Ite life of anthe swarmensemble, ensemble,
5
,
s
d g s e e
f y e f
t
with all itconsideredOf course,
The sMr. Lexper
11. Changworldglobaoceanand rmigranegatthe la 1.2. T
12. About Vedantelse, thjustice epistempresenemergeIt concfollowiwill ememergealreadytime usThe proetc.…a
ts interactid the unity. NY is all NYame is trueLuisi localizerimented.
ging scale, d: the irratial warming, ns; and thisricher at theants with cotive loop ofast part of m
THE EMERGEN
this notionta traditionhere is nothto modern mic conceptt in Buddhent propertcerns howeng: that whmerge‐new entism, is ay one hundsed to give operties of re not prese
ons and cA collectiv
Y. e, in cognitived? There i
one good ional energwhich in tu productione expenses onsequencef conditioninmy presenta
NT PROPERT
of systemsn –as well ahing that hascience, asts which areism or Vedties, sometever the prhen the partin the sena philosophdred years aas the simpwater, as aent neither
orrespondie unity. And
ve science, s not a poi
example ogy consumpurn condition of energy of a multites for the sng causes mation.
IES s thinking, was Buddhismas a value ins this principe quite newanta thoughing which roperties ots assemblense that thhical idea tago, ‐the soplest exampa transparenin hydroge
ng emerged somethin
for subtler int of my b
of systems tption is theons climate,is in the hatude of poostability of mutually de
we can tham‐ is basedn isolation. ple of systew and originght. The m is directly of the systee to form anhey are nothat was do‐called Brple the formnt, non inflaen nor in oxy
ent propertg more triv
concepts liody, where
thinking is e origin of , biodiversitands of muor people, mdemocracypendent. W
an say that on that‐evHowever, tms thinkingnal, and actuost importarelated to tem, and thn organizedot present eveloped oitish emergmation of wammable liygen, are em
ties, in its vial: where i
ke the “selfe this localiz
in the prespollution, wty, deforestltinationals,most of temy and peaceWe will com
is not a noverything dto say simpg has been eually, as weant is the idthe concepte importansystem, nein the singoriginally bygentism‐ anwater from hquid which mergent pro
globality, is New York
f”. Where iszation can
sent problewhich is thtation, the s, which becm destined e….all in thme back to t
ovelty, actuaepends on ly so, it woenriched bye will see, ndea of emet of organiznt bottom ew propertigle parts. Ey British phnd the authhydrogen a seeds at zeoperties.
6
has to bek localized?
s the self ofbe seen or
ems of ourhe cause ofstate of ourcame richerto becomeis case is ahis point in
ally the oldeverythinguld give noy a series ofot so muchergence, orzed system.line is thees may andEmergence,hilosophersors of thatnd oxygen.ero degree,
6
e ?
f r
r f r r e
g o f r e , s t ,
13. To us,
elemenoxygenproperconsidenucleicfrom cfamiliebe deteused inin a larAnd itaccepexplaaccepposteignoraagreeoxygesingle
this soundsnts‐be hydrn, be ammrties. Thingsered n emec acids, ‐peell to tissues, families tected, whicn language, ge series oft is not a simpted by all ined, on thpts the ariseriori bonuance is sime that the pen, and thate amino acid
s now triviarocarbons froniac froms become hergent propr se are noes, from tisto tribes, ech are not pin music, inf books andmple thing. researcherhe basis of ing of noves. The que
mply due toproperties ot the propeds.
al: of courserom hydrogm nitrogen however muperty, as theot life. Or wsue to orgatc.… At eacresent in thn geometry, meetings. And this fors in the fiethe properel propertieestion, whe our technof water carties of hae
e, each timgen and carand hydrouch less trie single comwhen we coans, from och step of ihe lower lev, in cosmolo or two maineld‐ the emrties of thees, due to ether this ical or comnnot be deemoglobin c
me we form rbon, be a sogen… of cvial when wmponents‐ onsider the rgans to orncreased covel of compogy, and ha
reasons. Thmergent proe constituenthe increasis an onto
mputing incaerived fromcannot be d
a product sugar from course we we considebe proteinsprogressio
rganisms, anomplexity, nlexity. And s been disc
he first is, thoperties cannt parts. In se of compological tenapability, is the propeerived from
in chemistrcarbon, hydhave each r that also s or sugars on in complnd from indnew propethis concep
cussed in th
hat –as it isnnot be prother wor
plexity, as anet, or whs still debatrties of hydm the prope
7
ry from thedrogen andtime newlife can beor lipids orexity goingdividuals torties are topt has beene literature
s commonlyedicted, orrds, sciencea granted ahether thisted. But alldrogen anderties of the
7
e
w e r g o o e
y r e a s e
14. The secthe quafrom thneurobreachewhere emerge This itranscsciencdifficuout frThis iexperemerappea
15. Anothenotion thinkinmind asame tinteracemerge
2: WHICH K 16. With a
differe
cond imporalia. Thus, the body (bebiologists ad a critical he, under
ent propert
is in connecendence ace, all this ult point. Trom an alteis quite accriment and gent propears to acqui
er point aboof emergen
ng. The notand consciotime a quection is not ence, at a c
KIND OF SE
all this in mnt sight. Ind
rtant point to jump direetter body/nd cognitivdegree of cr the astonty of the bra
ction with and God, buis immanenThere is no ernate stockceptable, esee that it irties. Becauire the mea
out emergence is not inion that sousness, is astion: isn’t at all a Buertain level
LF‐ORGANI
mind, we cadeed, we ar
is this: thatectly to somenvironmenve scientistcomplexity.nishing hypain.
the point ut needed snt, coming fdoubt thatk of Cuppereven thoughis so. Quite use this becning of a w
ence, of quitn good consome new pactually alieso, that to
uddhist way, may repre
ZATION PRO
an now loore away fro
t emergencemething diffnt) and evets, as an e. You see hpothesis, m
I made at something tfrom withint Volta pile r and zinc dh you maydifferent iscomes an asword solutio
te differentsonance wiroperty orin to this trao see life ay of thinkinesent a poin
ODUCES LIF
k at these om the redu
e is the magficult, minden conscioumergent pere the fromeans that
the beginnto introducn, from theelectricity isks, with ay not unders the case ossumption, n to someth
t nature. I wth the teneginates froaditional oras an emerng? Even lesnt of disagre
FE?
systems wuctionist vie
gic box by wis seen as asness is seeroperty of ntispiece ot conscious
ing, that sce qualia an biological is an emerg conductiverstand whyf consciousand here thing we do
would like tets of Buddhm matter, riental thinkgent propess of Vedaneement or a
hich surrouew, in which
which scienan emergenen, by manythe brain
of Francis Crsness, for
cience has nd spiritual organism itrgent propee solution iny, you can ness, or evehe word “enot unders
to emphasihism nor wiand in parking. And therty from anta…So, theat least of d
und our reah is, or was,
8
ce explainsnt propertyy scientists,which hasrick’s book,him, is an
eliminatedvalues. Fortself. It is aerty comingn between.repeat theen of life asemergence”tand.
ze that thisth Vedantarticular life,his is at thea moleculare notion ofdiscussion.
ality with a, important
8
s y s ,
d r g e s ”
s , e r f
a t
to lookcan ask what isFinally,where properThis qumy opibiologi
2.1.: A
17. Let meconcepbasis oinformfrom tmembrwhich
k at the singk a new, im
s then the , also an autthe mutuarties of the wuestion brininion is stillcal and phil
AUTOPOIESIS
e say at thept of life comof it, meanination and kthe simplesrane whichis the first
gle componportant que
difference tomobile, ol interactiowhole. ngs us direc the best vlosophical p
S
e start that ming out frong by that, knowledge. st possible outlines thbasis of life
ents in ordeestion:
between aor a clock, on among th
ctly to the tiew for undpoint of view
the theoryom an abstrthat we obLet us take unit of lif
he internal e. You see
er to have a
an organizer a robot, ahe parts is
heory of auderstandingw.
y of autoporact thinkinbserve life a again the cfe‐for examworld fromthen that s
a key for un
ed mechanicre systems very impor
utopoiesis og the quest
oiesis is notg. On the coas it is, and cartoon of tmple a unim the envirsome chem
nderstandin
cal system,formed by rtant for th
of Maturanaion “what i
somethingontrary, phefrom this o
the cell, becicellular orgronment, a mical can cro
ng reality. B
, and a livininterdepene functioni
a and Varels life?” bot
g theoreticaenomenoloobservationcause we wrganism. Yospatial discoss the bou
9
But here we
ng system?ndent parts,ng and the
la, which inth from the
al, with theogy is at then we deriveant to startou see thecriminationundary, the
9
e
? , e
n e
e e e t e e
nutrientransforememfirst patransfoeach cehomeonormalipids aother ashown
18. And ththe cel
This of is a faprovidethere iscitationbecommakingis altognamely
nts N, and sormations, tmber the coaradox abouormations, rell you mayostasis, the l life span, dare being syare being dhere in the
e answer isl regenerat
course at tctory whiches a definitis no living ons of Matures clear thag from withgether a dify internal re
some compthousands mplexity wut cellular liremains a liy consider. Tnormal life despite theynthesized, destroyed. He slide, this i
s simple, anes from the
he expenseh re‐makesion of life, aorganism onrana and Vaat what the hin with selffferent pheenovation.
pounds are of them ev
we have seeife. The parver cell; an There is whacycle of a cfact that sudozens of How is this is the main
d profounde inside all c
es of the nuts itself fromand actuallyn our earth,arela, from cell does, if‐reproductenomenon.
expelled. Avery secondn before (sradox is the amoeba reat we call scell, or of anugars are bdifferent fa paradox ojob of the c
d at the samcompounds
trient and em within, sy such a def, which doetheir famos actually thion, by whiHere we a
And inside td in each oshow slide).e following: emains an aelf‐maintenn organism. urned insidamilies of nf the self‐mcell: to main
me time. The which are
energy thato as to remfinition, is aes not compous book, “The remakinch there is re talking a
the cell theof our billio But then ythat a livermoeba, andnance at leaEach cell ree, proteins nucleic acidsmaintenancentain itself.
e cell is alwabeing consu
comes frommain the sauniversal t
ply to this. AThe tree of g of itself. Da multiplicaabout re‐ge
ere are manons of bodyyou experier cell, despid actually tast for all themains itse are being hs are beinge possible?
ays the samumed up.
m the outsiame. (see truth, in theAnd you seeKnowledgeDo not confation of theeneration fr
10
ny chemicaly cells. Youence here ate all thesehis is so forhe period oflf during itshydrolysed,g made and? In fact, as
me, because
de. The cellslide). Thise sense thate also somee”, where itfuse this re‐e cellS. Thisrom within,
0
a e r f s , s
e
l s t e t ‐s
And whaemmornleave
19. Notice molecubeen psimply
20. A comp
for timwhat iautopoepistemcouple The fflux othe lialtho
21. At the
charactthe theIt meorgannot ncircuiact asdog worganinteraspecifdevelearthintera 2.2.: C
MatuThey
what is trumoglobin eveing, but thes in winter,
that all thiular, and thprofoundly imechanica
plete discuse limits. Firis the diffoiesis, in admology at l of conceptfirst thing toof energy aniving is a thugh in a ver
e same timterised by teory of autoans that thnism and doneed any ints. This opes triggers, wwill react onism interaaction is spficity whichoped perce warm, havactions with
COGNITION
rana and Vsay that ea
ue for a ceery few daye bird come but it will m
s is strictly ey even talnfluenced bl may appe
ssion and trrst, let me sference betdition to talarge. Unfots concernino say, is thand nutrienthermodynary selected
me, Maturathe so‐calledopoiesis, anhe “being anoes not neenformation erational clowithout modout of his dcts with thpecific, is dh is mostly eption toolve each quh the enviro
Varela speaach organis
ell, is true ys, but this es out againmake all aga
chemical. Mk about liviby Buddhismar surprisin
reatment ofay that withtween an ackling the ortunately, wng the interaat every livts from the amically opway.
na and Vad operationd for philosn ant” is coed any inforfrom the eosure does difying the idog‐ness; ahe environmdue to the due to thes which peuite differenonment.
k, in this csm is a cogn
for every is fabricaten –from witain in spring
Maturana aing machinem and by Hng.
f autopoiesh autopoiesorganised question “wwe do not action withving organis environmepen system
arela insist nal closure.sophy of sciontained in rmation froexternal wonot mean invariant syn elephantment, in foparticular e long storyermit the lifnt sensoria
case, of cognitive organ
macroscoped again frothin. And thg and summ
and Varela e. I mentionH, and the f
sis would besis we have artificial s
what is life?have the the envirosm, in ordeent. In the ‐ open to t
on he fac It is in factence in genthe autopoom the outsorld to be athat there ystem’s orgat out of itsrce of whaorganizatioy of evolutfe in the ol systems a
gnition‐ a qnism, even
ic organismom within mhe apple tremer‐from wi
insist on thn this, becafact that fo
e very long,answered tsystem, an?” has deeptime for thnment. r to live, mlanguage ofthe flux of
ct, that eac, a very impneral. What oietic internside. Likewian elephantare not extanization. Telephant‐n
at we have on structuretion. Thus, cean; the band conseq
quite broadbacteria, in
m. I lose mmy body. I see loses its ithin.
his concept,ause Francisr him, Fran
, and I musto our initiad a living p implicatiohat, but let
must be opef science, wnutrient a
ch living oportant poindoes that m
nal organizaise, the elet‐ all is in hternal stimuThus, if I kickness. Of cosaid before of the ina fish has bat, the buuently quit
and compn the sense
11
most of myshave everyapples and
, that life issco’ life hascisco, life is
t stop hereal question:one? But
ons also fort me add a
ened to thewe say thatnd energy,
organism isnt, both formean? ation of thephant doeshis internaluli‐but theyk a dog, theourse, eachre. But thisndividual‐ aa series oftterfly, thete different
plex notion.e that each
1
y y
s s s
e t r
e t ,
s r
e s y e s f e t
organfavou
22. And ab
and Buteachinnuns. Ythat resciencesimply from thtill the teachin
nism is prourably, with
bout the bacuddhism. letng in a BudYou can seeegion of thee, very intewhat modhe decondit coming oung of four h
ovided witits own spe
cteria beingt me say soddhist monae here, just e world, andnsively for ern sciencetion of the ut of the baours a day f
h a sensoecific enviro
g alive and mething abastery in Bto rest fromd here you two weeks,e was aboumother eggaby‐with crfor two wee
rial systemonment.
having no mbout a persohutan, andm my hardesee also m, not to conut. I even sg cell by therying and ceks.
m capable
mind, is an onal experie actually it er science emy studentsnvince themhown to the spermatolapping of
of recogni
important ience. A couwas a nun
expressions, the nuns. m about sciehem the birozoa, then thands for h
izing, and
issue betweuple of yearnnery, a mos, some nice I was teacence, but trth of a chithe embrio,happiness.
12
interacting
een sciencers ago I wasonastery ofe picture ofching themo tall themild, starting,the foetus,This was a
2
g
e s f f m m g
And wtheir
and a At thdevel
but thpoint scienc 2.3. LI
23. But letparticuparticuIt is nospecificinvariaclearly
we had sevanswer to m
another con
he meeting,oped into a
he most im and certaince view. We
FE FROM WI
t me go baular interactular world. Sot an exaggcity of the nt, always tthe spider
veral contromy stateme
ntroversy wa
, also cama dialogue b
mportant ponly the Vede can come
THIN
ck to the qtion with thSee here thgeration to internal, authe same, bis construc
oversies betent, that bac
as of course
e some Labetween Bu
oint was thaanta peoplback to thi
question ofhe environme examplessay that thutopoietic obut the intected interna
tween sciencteria are a
e about rein
ma and Riuddhism and
at about live would bes point late
f cognition. ment, whics of the spidhe organismorganizationernal structally in a qu
nce and Bulive, but ha
ncarnation,
mpoche ofd science, w
ve without ce on the sideer on.
And actuah takes gender, of the tm creates hn. The geneure is diffeite differen
ddhism, anve no mind
see here:
f Bhutan, awith questio
consciousnee of my nun
lly this cognerally the termites, anis own woeral mecharent from ont way than
nd here for d:
and the whons of this k
ess. It is anns and cont
gnition brinform of crnd also of hrld, thanks nism of autorganism ton the fish, b
13
example is
hole thingskind:
n importanttrary to the
gs about aeation of ahumankind.to its owntopoiesis iso organism‐but they all
3
s
s
t e
. s ‐
work wmainte
ButmathesomhumRoma ro
It is cas farinvenrate, stay o
24. And thcalled ithe orglooks anutrienshould from itintentiocognitiparticutwo clepistemdefines 3: THE
25. Let melife, as this trithree corresp
with the invenance fromt this meanny multiplee epistemic mething oumankind. Ifmeo and Juose in his lifclear then thr as the seent new wordobjectivity on shaky grohere is anotinternal cloganism he at the amoents”. This sebe specifie
ts internal conality, noon means,ular, the suose points mic mistakes intelligent
GLOBAL IMe go now toMaturana ailogy: the aentities coponds to th
variant mecm within‐be s that theree worlds inpoint of vi
utside theref I look at aliet, etc. Thfe, the very hat this viewing of the wds, I like to disappears,ound. Wherther conceposure, the ois watchingeba and sayseems to beed that thislosure, doeo mind, no that it dorface of itsdetermine
e to say tht or purpose
MPLICATIONo the last pand Varela autopoietic,omplemente 5 senses,
chanism of a fish or a be are as man parallel, aiew, this me which is a rose, me,hen the roselooking at aw from witworld is concall it co‐em, and scientre is then thptual consebserver, thg. Let me es: “The amoe a very safs is only thees not knowconscious
oes what i membranees a mechaat the amoeful.
NS OF SYSTEart of my pstate, then , organic st and integplus mind,
autopoiesisbat. ny world asa notion wemeans the dequal for , as a weste has a certa rose evokhin correspcerned. Varmergence btists who ache solid tissquence of e scientist, xplain withoeba swimsfe statemee subjective
w anything aness. But ts internal,e is such, tanical contoeba move
EMS THINKpresentatioa more systructure, egrate themour capabi
s, the princ
s many orgaell known adisappearaneverybody.tern Italian tain value. Fke a quite diponds to a vrela calls thbetween theccept this vue of sciencthis view fris not able
h a simple es and goes unt. But it ise experiencabout gradiethe amoeb, autopoietthat a differaction, a s in order
KING n. Having stemic view nvironmentmselves. Atlity of think
ciple of re‐g
anisms; herand acceptece of the c. This is sowho know
For a Tibetafferent worvery particuis “enactione organism iew often hce objectivirom within.to penetraexample thup in a sugas not reallyce of the oents, sugarsba is a cogtic organizarence of copropulsion,to do som
said that coof life shout, and cognt the leveing and ima
generation
re comes thed in Buddhconcept of o also at thws about roan who has rld. ular epistemn”, as Francand the wo
have the imity? . Given whaate inside this point. Thar gradient sy correct, observer. Ths, nutrients‐gnitive beination is maoncentratio, but it wo
mething that
ognition is euld be seen nition, wheel of man,agining.
14
of the self‐
e notion ofhism. Fromobjectivity,he level ofomanticism,never seen
mic positioncisco like toorld, at anypression to
at we havehe world ofhe biologistso as to getor better, ithe amoeba,‐she has nong, and itsade for. Inon betweenould be ant our mind
essential toin terms of
ereby these, cognition
4
‐
f , f ,
o y o
e f t t t , o s
n
o f e
26. And th
is indeof consawarenChristiacan eveform ocapabilso, whexamp
27. Capra indicatobsess
en there is ed a very csciousness. ness anan meaningen add thatf consciouslity of discry is the male what we and I devoing, as manion of prod
even a highcomplex busHowever,
nd ethicg of consciot man, of alsness, for soiminating than the onlyhave done
ote the lastn y other cucing more
her degree, siness, partlet us remacal respousness, thel the creatuomebody mhe good froy animal wfrom 1950 200 pagesconcerned ae and always
that of conticularly if wain in the mponsibility. e discriminaures of this man is the com the evil‐ho destroy(slide) s of our boauthors do,s more.
nsciousnesswe considermore comm
This ation capabplanet, is throwning of ‐is the crows his own h
ook to thes, that the m
, the knowir the subjecon meaningis in
bility betwehe one endocreation, a
wning of mahabitat, his
se problemsmain root o
ing that we ctive, experg of this te
a ween evil andowed with nd consciounkind. But ts own plane
s of the wof our prob
15
know. Thisriential siderm, that ofway thed good. Wethe highestusness‐ thethen, if it iset? See for
orld today,blem is the
5
s e f e e t e s r
, e
From this cthe corresthe increaentire popIn this weeconomist
And in facconsciousnnext few slWe still gomore come
comes the aponding prse of tempulations. e are shars, who do n
ct the perspness in favolides on thao on with thes at the co
absurd eneroduction operature, w
ring the conot see a br
pectives do our of the gat. he ideologyosts of poor
rgy consumof CO2 and hich cause
oncern of ight future
not look teglobal warm
y of “more aer people, a
mption, mosmethane, tthe existen
pope Franfor our wor
erribly promming and co
and more”,as Francesc
stly based otogether wince of the
cesco (slidrld.
mising, desorrespondin
, and the po again me
on fossils, caith other pomultination
e) and the
pite the recng thermic
roblems arentioned:
arbon and pollutants, wnal and the
e concern
cent upraisdevastatio
e when this
16
petrol, withwhich causee misery of
of several
se of globalns. See my
s more and
6
e f
l
y
d
However, salvation, direction, governmenWill we suan improve
28. We cansciencewhich, Buddhi
ADDITIONSLooking in science, m
we also prebased on aand in the nt organizatcceed? Diffement of ou
n resume the. But I likein its sweetism.
S particular eaning by t
esent in thea different book we stions whichficult to sayur consciou
his discussioe to close btness, also c
at life scienthat the the
e book the actions ansummarize h are workiny, but the dsness, as in
on here, as by showing coils some o
nces, we cae notion of
view of sevd ideas. Ththese idea
ng in these ddirection is andicated by
it is indeedyou he poeof the basic
an say that molecular o
veral econohere are ma giving alsodirections.again an imanother sp
d one main em that thec contrastin
there is stiorganization
omists, whoany peopleo addresse
mprovementiritual man,
problem bee nuns wrog questions
ll a large emn is central
o see the poe working ies of most
t of our be, Albert Eins
etween Budote to me ws between s
mphasis onl: think for
17
ossibility ofn the rightof the non
ing human,stein:
ddhism andwhen I left,science and
n molecularexample to
7
f t
,
r o
all geneticmacromoleand the achemistry‐assembliesLet us conthis 'seed' ocosmologyweb of careconstructinfinite popredetermiinteractive cannot find
From the a
As Abhinav
“As the awhich arebecome cfirst and sMount Mer
Abhinavagsuggests t
To this exthis distincconscious consciousnthat is outthings thadoes not
That is, the
To concconceptiophenome
cs, based ecules; andapplicative ‐‐‐all centres. sider now hor singularity is that it bausation. St a prior prossibility. ined plan.
substance d anything t
article sent b
vagupta tel
adage goee by naturcapable of second perru” ([2], p. 2
gupta postuhat phenom
xtent, that wction made
gives risness existst of its own
at, like bluabandon
e object as
clude theon of the enological
on the nod the entireside of s
ed on the
how all thisty as the sou
begins with cience, on rinciple of It is rathe
. Materialdualism (S
that cannot
by mauro)
ls us,
es, ‘Everythre mere oparticipatin
rsons. For 212).[14]
lates a fundmenal exper
which is “coe between se to bots in that wan form, whe, etc. are its own fo
well the sub
n, it is mind-bod
l pole, the
otion of gee field of mynthetic b chemical
s compares urce of all cfullness andthe other
order. The er a purpoism (Cārv
Sāṃkhya) cabe explaine
hing has tbject, inse
ng in the fexample,
damental trrience is a m
onscious” citself and
h of thesay, as undihich shines
said to beorm as pu
bject percei
probably dy split d
e “subject”
enes‐whichmolecular biology, agrnotion of
with old increation, and unity andhand, beg
Universe, oseful, mevāka/Lokāyaannot expla
ed in the eD
the nature entient, if tforms of s“listen O M
ransmutabilmatter of a m
contains bothe other,
se, limitedifferentiatedas only p
e insentienure consci
iving the ob
fair to erives ini
” formulati
h are largebiology, pharicultural cmolecule
nduistic thind clearly th
d proceeds fgins with c
says Aurobeaningful aata), idealain this wit
DAM (Dvi-P
of everytthey aband
subjective aMountains”
ity of the pmodal shift.
oth perceive the objec subject d, at the saure consciont, things ousness a
bject both de
acknowletially fromon of con
e, specific armacology,hemistry, and its o
nking. The Ve most impofrom there tchaos and bindo, is nnd measurism (Sankhout makin
Pakṣa Advai
thing else.don that fawareness
and “of m
hysical and.
er and object perceivedand objec
ame time oousness alothat lack c
alone shini
erive from c
edge thatm a positisciousnes
sequentialy, medicine petrol andorganization
Vedic hymortant featuto establish disorder annot a randorable unfolkara’s Advng categoryita) framew
’ Even thoform as oand of ad
mountain pe
d the pheno
ect and doed. Yet thatct. And eout of its oone; it giveconsciousnng ([6], p
consciousne
t Abhinavion that fass and ma
18
ly orderedchemistry,
d industrialn in larger
mns describeure of Vedic
an integralnd tries toom field oflding of avaita), andy mistake. I
work.
ose thingsbject, theyddress, theeaks, I am
omenal. He
esn’t havet which is
even whileown nature,es birth toess. So it. 292).[22]
ess.
vagupta’savors theatter. This
8
, r
e c l o f a d I
s y e m
e
e
t ]
s e s
perspectiunlike ouminimizelegacy, igreat deposition oan idea points tobetween neurons f
18.
Actually, leZurich, theautopoietiwithin the that we wesmilingly aspiritual. Tclear divisphenomen
18. My perof emeWhencoursemermetasinglepresea tetr
ive is oneur contem
e a maternitially pro
eal to posof a specof what C
o as the the phe
firing in th
et me recalle famous Ec units werbubble. Anere proposiaccused me This surpriseion betweenon
rsonal positergence. Letn a stack ofse to be acgent propels in top of e individualent in the sirahedron, I
he inherimporary Wrialist posoposed assible wactrum of aChalmers
subjectivenomenolohat mass o
an episodeETHZ, we dre simple mnd when weing a living to be a romed me. But en his prof
tion as scient me briefly f different ccepted, aserty indeedeach otherls, new prongle individsee that b
ts from thWestern mition, eve
a mind-boys of thin subject-ocalls the
ve, while ogical onof matter c
e with Franceveloped wmicelles, tine wrote a pasystem‐thamantic, andyou see hefound spirit
ntist is somexplain whmetal diskss you can a comes our. Likewise, operties‐theduals. In cany this opera
he wider lamodels o
en as the ody dualisnking aboobject cone phenom
managinn the onecalled the
cisco: in mywhat is knony soap bubaper togethat our miceld to keep toere the exatuality‐ and
mewhat critihy and how.s give rise always repeut from thisI see well te propertien see that dation new
andscape of materia
legacy osm. Howeout the mntinuum oenologica
ng to avoe hand ae brain.
y lab at the Fown as chebbles, whicher, Francisclles were livo a definitiomple of a sd the inter
cal about so. to electriciteat the exps operationthat, when es of the faaily. And wproperties‐
of Indian alism, tenof Sāṃkhyver, Abhi
mind-bodyoffers a waal, and whoid an esand the
Federal Instemical autoh were maco wanted tving. When on of minimscientist, Frrpretation o
ome of the
ty as a novperiment, an of puttingyou make amily‐ emehen single lsurfaces an
philosophded histoya, like Dnavagupt
y split. Hay of incohat Abhinssentialistpsycholog
titute of Tecopoiesis, in aking themsto put in thI refused t
mal life whicrancisco, whof life as a
aspects of
vel propertyand you seg the disk a family staerge, whichlines combind space‐ a
19
hy, which,orically toDescartesa adds ais monistorporatingnavaguptat dualismgical, the
chnology inwhich the
selves frome very title,o do so, hech were tooho makes aa biological
this notion
y, this is ofee that theof the twoarting fromh were notne to makere created‐
9
o s a t
a
e
e m , e o
f e o t e ‐
20
and this can also be repeated easily. Quite different is the case of mind and/or consciousness. I do not have any way of putting neurons together and show that by this operation, the thinking emerges. Thus, to talk about emergence at this level, or at the level of consciousness, is an abstraction‐an assumption. It is not the same as in the case of electricity. And I could say almost the same in regard to the definition of life as an emergent property‐as nobody has done the experiment of taking the separate elements, put them together, and see that life emerges in this way. In conclusion, I, as scientist, am critical about the application of the word “emergence” to all cases in which this is an assumption without any experimental direct demonstration.
