,*APT] #a 
,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS 

,PEOPLE 3 

,AU?OR 3 ,MURRAY ,BOOK*9 

,TEXT 3 

,T[>D A ,PHILOSOPHY ( ,NATURE3  

 ,! ,BASES = AN ,ECOLOGICAL ,E?ICS .<#f.> 

  

,FEW PHILOSOPHICAL >EAS HAVE GA9$ ! SOCIAL RELEVANCE 9 REC5T YE>S ?AT NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 ) ALL ITS E?ICAL IMPLICATIONS1 HAS ACQUIR$4 ,A CONSID]ABLE SEGM5T ( ! LIT]ATE PUBLIC IS N[ DEEPLY OCCUPI$ ) SEEK+ A PHILOSOPHICAL 9T]PRETATION ( NATURE AS A GR\ND+ = HUMAN CONDUCT & SOCIAL POLICY4 ,! LIT]ATURE ON ! SUBJECT HAS REA*$ TRULY IMPRESSIVE PROPORTIONS & HAS COLLECT$ A SIZABLE PUBLIC READ]%IP4 ,9 FACT1 IT IS FAIR TO SAY ?AT ?IS 9T]E/ 9 NATURE PHILOSOPHY IS COMP>ABLE TO ?AT :I* ,D>W9IAN EVOLUTION>Y !ORY G5]AT$ A C5TURY AGO -- & IT IS ALMO/ EQUALLY DISPUTATI\S1 ) EQUALLY IMPORTANT SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS4 

,BUT ! CURR5T 9T]E/ 9 SOCIETY'S RELATION%IP TO NATURE DIFF]S BASICALLY FROM ! CONT9U+ DISPUTE BETWE5 CREATIONISM & ! !ORY ( EVOLUTION4 ,IT EM]GES FROM A DEEP PUBLIC CONC]N OV] ! ECOLOGICAL DISLOCATIONS ?AT UNIQUELY M>K \R ]A4 ,9ITIALLY1 9 ! E>LY & MID-SEV5TIES1 ?IS CONC]N HAD A L>GELY TE*NOCRATIC & LEGALI/IC FOCUS & C5T]$ ON PROBLEMS ( POLLUTION1 RES\RCE DEPLETION1 DEMOGRAPHY1 URBAN SPRAWL1 NUCLE> P[] PLANTS1 ! 9CREAS+ 9CID5CE ( CANC] -- 9 %ORT1 ! PROBLEMS ( CONV5TIONAL 5VIRONM5TALISM4.<#g.> ,5VIRONM5TALI/S SAW !SE PROBLEMS 9 /RICTLY PRACTICAL T]MS & CONSID]$ !M RESOLVABLE BY LEGISLATIVE ACTION1 PUBLIC $UCATION1 & P]SONAL EXAMPLE4 

,! PHILOSOPHICAL LIT]ATURE ?AT HAS EM]G$ 9 REC5T YE>S /EMS FROM A SIGNIFICANT POPUL> DISSATISFACTION ) /RICTLY ISSUE-ORI5T$ APPROA*ES TO ! CURR5T 5VIRONM5TAL CRISIS & REFLECTS ! NE$ = A NEW !ORETICAL TURN4 ,IT ADDRESSES ITSELF TO A BASICALLY NEW CONC]N3 TO DEVELOP AN ECOLOGICALLY CREATIVE S5SIBILITY T[>D ! 5VIRONM5T1 ONE ?AT CAN S]VE 9 ! HI<E/ E?ICAL S5SE AS A GUIDE = HUMAN CONDUCT & PROVIDE AN AW>5ESS ( HUMANITY'S 0PLACE 9 NATURE0.<#h.> ,!SE PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS DO NOT DEAL ) NATURE M]ELY AS AN 5VIRONM5TAL PROBLEMATIC2 RA!R1 !Y ADVANCE A VISION ( ! NATURAL WORLD & RAISE IT TO ! LEVEL ( AN 9SPIRIT$ METAPHYSICAL PR9CIPLE -- )\T D5Y+ ! SIGNIFICANCE ( ! 5VIRONM5TAL ACTIVISM !Y SEEK TO TRANSC5D4 ,IF ! (T5 N>R[ ACTIVISM ( ! E>LY & MID-SEV5TIES CAN BE CALL$ ! POLITICS ( 5VIRONM5TALISM1 ! NATURE PHILOSOPHY 7:I* IS 9 NO WAY TO BE CONFUS$ ) ! PHILOSOPHY ( SCI5CE7 ?AT IS SURFAC+ SO PROM95TLY TODAY CAN BE CALL$ ITS E?ICS1 & TO SOME DEGREE ITS SOCIAL CONSCI5CE4 ,TODAY'S NATURE PHILOSOPHIES ?AT TRY TO BR+ HUMANITY & NATURE 9TO E?ICAL COMMONALITY >E MEANT TO CORRECT IMBALANCES 9 A DISEQUILIBRAT$ COSMOS OR 9 AN IRRATIONAL SOCIETY4 

,*>ACT]I/ICALLY1 ! ACADEMY LAGS BEH9D 9 ?IS 9TELLECTUALIZATION ( ECOLOGICAL PROBLEMS4 ,?IS PROBLEM IS S]I\S BECAUSE ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION C\LD GREATLY 5RI* ! PRES5T NATURE-PHILOSOPHICAL TURN2 YET ! ACADEMY HAS R5D]$ IT NE$LESSLY TE*NICAL OR WORSE1 R$UC$ IT TO ! PRODUCTION ( M]E HI/ORICAL & MONOGRAPHIC MEMORABILIA4 ,MU* ( :AT PASSES = NATURE PHILOSOPHY TODAY \TSIDE ! CAMPUS1 !RE=E1 T5DS TO LACK ROOTS 9 ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION1 & SU* ,WE/]N TRADITIONS AS ! ECOLOGICAL MOVEM5T DOES 9VOKE HAVE A /RONGLY 9TUITIONAL ?RU/4 

,NOR DOES ! ACADEMY ALWAYS ADD CL>ITY :5 IT DOES BR+ ITS 9TELLECTUAL EQUIPM5T TO 9T]V5E 9 ! DISCUSSION4 ,TODAY1 VIRTUALLY ALL NATURE PHILOSOPHY IS BURD5$ BY A MASSIVE NUMB] ( /ULTIFY+ PREJUDICES1 BUT ! WOR/ ( !SE PREJUDICES FE/] PRECISELY 9 ! ACADEMY4 ,!RE1 ANY CONJUNCTION ( ! WORDS NATURE & PHILOSOPHY AUTOMATICALLY EVOKES FE>S ( ANTISCI5TIFIC >*AISMS & PREMOD]NI/ REGRESSIONS TO A /ATIC COSMOLOGICAL METAPHYSICS4 ,TO SPEAK FRANKLY1 ! ACADEMIC M9D HAS BE5 TRA9$ TO VIEW NATURE PHILOSOPHY AS 9IMICAL TO CRITICAL & ANALYTICAL ?\<T ,NO LESS PREJUDICIAL 9 ?IS REG>D >E ! 0NEO-,M>XI/S10 0PO/-,M>XI/S10 & EMPIRICAL AN>*I/S 7= :OM ANY PHILOSOPHY %ORT ( ,B]TR& ,RUSSELL'S LOGICAL ATOMISM IS %E] !OLOGY71 :O UNEASILY REG>D ALL ORGANICI/ !ORIES AS R$OL5T ( EI!R DIALECTICAL MAT]IALISM OR NEO-FASCI/ FOLK PHILOSOPHIES4 ,UNLESS SU* PREJUDICES >E DISPELL$ -- OR AT LEA/ EXPLOR$ 9SI<T0 FULLY & CRITICALLY -- ! T]RA9 ( A S]I\S NATURE PHILOSOPHY WILL BE LEFT OP5 TO MY/ICAL T5D5CIES & 9TUITIONS ?AT MAY WELL R5D] ANY RATIONAL DISCUSSION ( ECOLOGICAL ISSUES IMPOSSIBLE4 

,9 ANY CASE1 ! PUBLIC DESIRE = NEW NATURE PHILOSOPHIES WILL NOT DISAPPE>1 & ! WORKS ?AT >E APPE>+ TO SATISFY ?IS NE$ >E NO LESS PROBLEMATIC ?AN ! ACADEMY'S CONV5TIONAL WISDOM ON ! SUBJECT4 ,IT WILL NOT DO = ,EUROPEAN & ,AM]ICAN ACADEMICS TO DISP>AGE ?IS TR5D BY SPECKL+ IT ) LE>N$ NAME-DROPP+S LIKE 0NEO-,>I/OTELIANISM0 OR BY 9VOK+ ! DISP>ATE P$IGREES ( ,S*ELL+1 ,DRIES*1 ,B]GSON1 & ,HEIDEGG]4 

,CONTEMPOR>Y EXCURSIONS 9TO NATURE PHILOSOPHY REQUIRE A BROAD] PHILOSOPHICAL GR\ND+ ?AN !Y NORMALLY RECEIVE4 ,UN=TUNATELY1 !Y TYPICALLY DRAW !IR N\RI%M5T MORE FROM SY/EMS !ORY ?AN FROM ! ,GREEKS & ! ,G]MANS1 & !IR HUES >E T9T$ BY ,ASIAN RA!R ?AN ,WE/]N COSMOGONIES4 ,IF SU* ECLECTICISM SEEMS DISCORDANT TO ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHICAL !ORI/S1 ,I W\LD >GUE ?AT !Y MU/ DO BETT]1 RA!R ?AN SIMPLY ADD A NEW SET ( PREJUDICES TO ONES ?AT ALREADY EXI/4 ,:E!R ONE *OOSES TO REG>D REC5T NATURE-PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS AS A LOSS OR B5EFIT TO ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T1 ?IS MU* IS CLE>3 IF \R S*OOL$ PHILOSOPHICAL !ORI/S TURN !IR BACKS ON ! RIS+ !ORETICAL 9T]E/ 9 ! MEAN+ ( NATURE & HUMANITY'S PLACE 9 IT1 !Y WILL M]ELY CUT !MSELVES (F FUR!R FROM SOME ( ! MO/ IMPORTANT DEVELOPM5TS 9 CONTEMPOR>Y SOCIETY4 

,BE=E WE TURN TO ! WIDELY DISP>ATE !ORI/S ( POPUL> NATURE PHILOSOPHIES1 WE MU/ DEAL ) A PROBLEM ?AT UNCEAS+LY NAGS ! ACADEMIC ACOLYTES ( MOD]N SCI5TISM4 ,LIKE A TR\BL+ & ]UPTIVE UNCONSCI\S1 IT PLAGUES ! PHILOSOPHICAL SUP]EGO ( ! ACADEMY & SOME ( ITS SELF-PR(ESS$ RADICAL !ORI/S4 ,?IS PHILOSOPHICAL UNCONSCI\S IS 0! ,TRADITION10 OR :AT IS MORE >ROGANTLY CALL$ ! 0>*AIC0 BACKGR\ND ?AT PR$ATES ,5LI<T5M5T -- 9DE$1 MOD]N -- PHILOSOPHY4 ,MOD]N SUBJECTIVI/IC & SCI5TI/IC ORI5TATIONS HAVE RAIS$ A B>RI] AGA9/ PRE-,5LI<T5M5T PHILOSOPHY ?AT P]MITS LITTLE ( IT TO FILT] ?R\<1 SO ?AT ITS [N ORIG9S HAVE BECOME A MY/]Y TO ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY1 A FRI<T5+ SPECT] LIKE ! PRIMAL NI<TM>ES ( *ILDHOOD ?AT HAUNT ! >MOR$ EGO ( ! ADULT4 ,TRUE1 9T]E/ 9 ,>I/OTLE'S ,METAPHYSICS 0REMA9S P]5NIAL10 AS WE >E TOLD1 & 0DOES NOT FLAG OR FAIL ) ! PASS+ YE>S1 NO MATT] H[ F> ! FA%ION ( ?\<T CURR5T AT ! MOM5T MAY SEEM TO W&] FROM ! CONF9ES ( ,>I/OTELIAN TRADITION40.<#i.> ,BUT AP>T FROM SU* CANONICAL WORKS1 ! C5SOR ?AT ACTS LIKE A SCRE5 ON E>LI] PHILOSOPHIES SEEMS REM>KABLY SECURE4 ,HEIDEGG] CAPITALIZ$ ON ?IS FAILURE 7REGRETTABLY1 9 MY VIEW7 & DELV$ 9TO ! ORIG9AT+ ?9K]S ( ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY1 >GU+ ?AT !Y >E WOR?Y ( S]I\S EXEGESIS 7AL?\< NOT ALL ( ,HEIDEGG]'S 0WOODPA?S0 >E TO BE FOLL[$74.<#a.> ,ONTOLOGY UND]/&ABLY BE>S A FE>SOME VISAGE :5 IT LACKS A SOCIAL & MORAL CONTEXT1 & ! CONCEPT ( ,BE+ LOSES CONTACT ) REALITY :5 IT IS SUBTLY ASSIMILAT$ TO SUBJECTIVE APPROA*ES TO REALITY LIKE ,HEIDEGG]'S4 

,LIMITATIONS ( SPACE MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE = ME TO FULLY EXPLORE ! PROBLEMS ?AT MY REM>KS ON !SE PREJUDICES D\BTLESS RAISE4 ,BUT EV5 SOME ( ! BE/-KN[N !ORI/S ( NATURE PHILOSOPHY 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T TODAY COMMIT AN ]ROR4 ,AL?\< !Y MAY BE COGNIZANT ( ! PREJUDICES & ! C5SOR+ ME*ANISMS ?AT SEP>ATE CONTEMPOR>Y PHILOSOPHY FROM ITS [N HI/ORY1 !Y HAVE DUG !IR TR5*ES POORLY BY DEF9+ !MSELVES AGA9/ ,DESC>TES RA!R ?AN ,KANT4 

,?IS IS BY NO MEANS AN ACADEMIC ISSUE1 NOR IS IT /RICTLY A PHILOSOPHICAL ONE4 ,! EMPHASIS ON ,C>TESIAN ME*ANISM AS ! ORIG9AL S9 ?AT DI/ORT$ ! MOD]N IMAGE ( NATURE HAS BE5 OV]/AT$ = REASONS ?AT >E MORE PROGRAMMATIC ?AN !ORETICAL4 ,VILLA9\S AS ,DESC>TES MAY SEEM1 IT IS A C]TA9 REALPOLITIK1 ,I SUSPECT1 ?AT DEMONIZES HIM OV] ,KANT ,= TO S+LE \T ,KANT W\LD NECESSITATE *ALL5G+ ! DUBI\S SUBJECTIVISM -- SU* AS ! SUBJECTIVISM ?AT ,GREGORY ,BATESON GIVES TO SY/EMS !ORY -- & QUASI-RELIGI\S TRANSC5D5TALISM N[ BURGEON+ 9 SO MU* CONTEMPOR>Y 0ANTIME*ANI/IC0 ?9K+4 ,AS A RESULT1 PHILOSOPHICAL !ORIES ( NATURE & ! OBJECTIVE ECOLOGICAL E?ICS D]IV$ FROM !M >E BE+ CREAT$ 9 ! FALSE LI<T ( ! 0EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN0 ?AT ,KANT ULTIMATELY GAVE TO ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,! ONTOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ PRE-,KANTIAN 9T]PRETATIONS ( NATURE REMA9 AS AMBIGU\S 9 ! ECOLOGY MOVEM5T AS 9 ! ACADEMY4 

,BUT PREMOD]N & P>TICUL>LY ,PRESOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY IS NOT ! DEAD DOG ?AT CONV5TIONAL PHILOSOPHY DEPICTS IT AS BE+4 ,I AM NOT CONC]N$1 = ! PRES5T1 ) ! SPECIFIC SPECULATIONS ?AT PRE-,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES ADVANC$ -- P>TICUL>LY ?OSE ( ! ,PRESOCRATICS4 ,RA!R1 ,I AM CONC]N$ ) !IR 9T5TIONS & ) ! K9D ( UNITIES !Y TRI$ TO FO/]4 ,:AT IS IMPORTANT1 AS ,GREGORY ,VLA/OS HAS SO ADMIRABLY EMPHASIZ$1 IS ?AT !Y AU!NTICALLY VOIC$ AN OBJECTIVITY P]MEAT$ BY E?ICS4 ,9DE$1 9 CONTRA/ TO ! NATURALISM ?AT BECAME SO FA%IONABLE 9 ,AM]ICAN ACADEMIES DUR+ ! #a#i#cS & #a#i#dS1 ! UNIFY+ FEATURE ( ! ,IONIAN1 ,ELEATIC1 ,H]ACLITEAN & ,PY?AGOREAN TR5DS IS PRECISELY !IR CONVICTION ?AT ! UNIV]SE HAD 9 SOME S5SE A MORAL *>ACT] IRRESPECTIVE ( HUMAN PURPOSES4 ,SO ALI5 IS ?IS PROPOSITION TO ! PO/-,KANTIAN ]A ?AT IT IS DISMISS$ AS 0>*AIC0 & 0TELEOLOGICAL0 ALMO/ AS A KNEE-J]K REACTION4.<#a#a.> ,YET ONE CANNOT SIMPLY DISMISS ! FACT ?AT SU* GREAT !MES AS ,BE+1 ,=M1 ,MOTION & ,CAUSALITY W]E ONCE 9FUS$ ) MORAL MEAN+4 ,9 FACT !Y P]MEATE SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY TO ?IS DAY4 ,! V>I\S WAYS 9 :I* ! ,PRESOCRATICS EXPLA9$ ! >*E ( ! WORLD FOLL[$ \T ! LOGIC ( ?IS MORAL MEAN+4 

,! V]Y ABILITY TO KN[ IMPLIES ?AT ! WORLD IS ORD]LY & 9TELLIGIBLE & ?AT IT L5DS ITSELF TO RATIONAL 9T]PRETATION BECAUSE IT IS RATIONAL4 ,FROM ,?ALES TO ,HEGEL1 PHILOSOPHY CONSI/5TLY RETA9$ ?IS ESS5TIAL ORI5TATION4 ,AS ,LAWR5CE ,J4 ,H5D]SON WROTE 9 HIS IMM5SELY 9FLU5TIAL #aiab WORK  
,! ,FITNESS ( ! ,5VIRONM5T1 ! 0IDEA ( PURPOSE & ORD] >E AMONG ! FIR/ CONCEPTS REG>D+ !IR 5VIRONM5T :I* APPE>1 A VAGUE ANTICIPATION ( PHILOSOPHY & SCI5CE1 9 ! M9DS ( M540 ,= ,H5D]SON1 TO BE SURE1 IT WAS ! 0ADV5T ( MOD]N SCI5CE0 ?AT VALIDAT$ UNIV]SAL ORD] -- 9 ! =M ( NATURAL LAW2 ,D>W9'S HYPO!SIS ( NATURAL SELECTION1 9 TURN1 VALIDAT$ NATURAL LAW 0AS ! BASIS ( PURPOSE10 SPECIFICALLY ! 0NEW SCI5TIFIC CONCEPT ( FITNESS10 & !REBY RESCU$ SPECULATIVE ?\<T FROM ! 0DOGMA ( F9AL CAUSES40.<#a#b.> ,BUT :AT IS IMPORTANT 9 ,H5D]SON'S REM>KS IS ?AT HE REG>DS ! WORLD AS 9TELLIGIBLE1 NOT ! SPECIFIC CONT5T ( ?AT 9TELLIGIBILITY4 

,HELL5IC ?\<T1 BY ! SAME TOK51 WAS PO9T$LY MORAL  
9S(> AS IT SAW ! WORLD AS RATIONAL -- ?AT IS1 ITS RATIONALITY & 9TELLIGIBILITY W]E EQUIVAL5T TO ITS MORALITY4 ,H[EV] 9TUITIVELY OR CONSCI\SLY1 ! ,HELL5IC NOTION ( N\S -- M9D -- CON/ITUT$ ! WORLD OR 9H]$ 9 IT4 ,PRECISELY BECAUSE ONE C\LD EXPLA9 ! WORLD1 ! WORLD WAS MEAN+FUL4 ,NOR DID ,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T /OP AT P>TIAL EXPLANATIONS ( ORD]2 IT TRI$ TO EXPLA9 IT TO ! FULLE/4 ,ACC\NTS ( ! >*E ( ! WORLD -- ITS ACTIVE SUB/ANCE -- >E R$OL5T ) MEAN+1 SU* AS WAT] 7:I* P]HAPS ALLUDES K9%IP7 & ! 0UNB\ND$0 OR 0A]0 7:I* HI/ORIANS ( ,GREEK PHILOSOPHY N[ REG>D AS 0S\L10 ! 0BREA? ( LIFE074 

,?IS S5SE ( REALITY AS PREGNANT1 FECUND1 & IMMAN5TLY SELF-ELABORAT+ /ILL PROVIDES DIRECTION = AN ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY1 H[EV] >GUABLE ! NATURE PHILOSOPHIES ( ! PRE-,KANTIAN PA/ MAY BE4 ,( P>TICUL> 9T]E/ H]E >E ! ,PRESOCRATICS4 ,EMPHASIS ON ! ,PRESOCRATICS' 0NAIVETE10 !IR 0ONTOLOGICAL NE$0 7TO USE ONE ( ,!ODOR ,ADORNO'S MANY UN=TUNATE PHRASES71 & !IR 0MONISM0 HAS ALL TOO *EAPLY OBSCUR$ ?IS POSSIBILITY4 ,?AT ,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T WAS RIDDL$ BY DEMON/RABLY FALSE >*AISMS IS BESIDE ! PO9T4 ,IT IS ITS ORI5TATION ?AT CONC]NS US1 NOT ITS ONTOLOGICAL M]ITS1 & ITS ANIMI/IC ASPECTS >E SU* AS MI<T BE EXPECT$ 9 A TRANSITION FROM ! MY?OPEIC WORLD TO ! WORLD ( ,PLATO & ,>I/OTLE4 ,& 9 CONTRA/ TO ,HEIDEGG]1 WE %\LD NOT VIEW ! ,PRESOCRATICS AS HAV+ AN 0AU!NTIC10 PRELAPS>IAN RELATION%IP ) ,BE+ BUT AS PO9TS ( DEP>TURE = ! RI*] PHILOSOPHICAL 9SI<TS ( ,PLATO1 ,>I/OTLE1 & ! O!R PHILOSOPH]S :O CON/ITUTE ! ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHICAL TRADITION4 ,MY HI< VALUATION ( ! ,PRESOCRATICS H]E IS PURELY HEURI/IC3 ,I DO NOT 9T5D TO >GUE = !IR NOTION ( 0COSMIC JU/ICE0 -- :I* WAS PAT5TLY AN EXTRAPOLATION ( ! DEMOCRATIC POLIS 9TO ! NATURAL WORLD -- OR = ADH]5CE TO !IR VIEW ?AT NATURE IS 0JU/0 9 ANY O!R S5SE4 ,RA!R1 ,I WI% TO EMPHASIZE ! IMPORTANCE ( SE>*+ = VALUES ?AT CAN BE GR\ND$ 9 NATURE -- MORE BASICALLY1 9 NATURAL EVOLUTION4 

,DESPITE !IR 0NAIVETE10 ! ,PY?AGOREAN >*E -- =M -- & IDEALS ( LIMIT1 KOSMOS 7ORD] COMB9$ ) BEAUTY71 & KRASIS 7EQUILIBRIUM7 HAVE A REM>KABLE1 9DE$ ALLUR+ RI*NESS4 ,! ,PY?AGOREAN NOTION ( =M1 = EXAMPLE1 IS ESS5TIAL = UND]/&+ HOLISM1 = IT ADDS ! =MAL CONCEPT ( >RANGEM5T TO ! NUM]ICAL NOTION ( SUM4 ,! NOTION ( =M AS ! EXPRESSION ( ! GOOD & ! BEAUTIFUL R5D]S VIRTUE COSMICALLY IMMAN5T4 

,MORE RADICALLY1 ! ,PRESOCRATICS AN*OR$ !IR 9T]PRETATION ( NATURE 9 ! NOTION ( ISONOMIA 7EQUALITY71 :I* 9CLUDES ! EQUALITY ( ! V]Y ELEM5TS ?AT MAKE UP ! WORLD4 ,PHILOSOPH]S FROM ,ANAXIM&] TO ,EMP$OCLES HAD A ?OR\<GO+ RESPECT = A UBIQUIT\S PR9CIPLE ( EQUALITY4 ,SO CONSCI\SLY DID !Y HOLD ! PR9CIPLE1 ?AT ,ALCMAEON US$ ! T]M  
MON>*Y ) OPPROBRIUM TO *>ACT]IZE ! 0MA/]Y0 OR 0SUPREMACY0 ( ONE COSMIC P[] OV] ANO!R4 ,KRASIS IS NOT ! ME*ANICAL EQUIPOISE ( CONTRA/+ P[]S BUT1 MORE ORGANICALLY1 !IR BL5D+ &1 9 ! SEQU5CE ( PH5OM5A 79ITIALLY1 94 ,GREEK M$ICAL !ORY71 !IR ROTATION4 0,AS 9 ! DEMOCRATIC POLIS ,! DEMOS RULES BY TURN1 SO ! HOT C\LD PREVAIL 9 SUMM] )\T 9JU/ICE TO ! COLD1 IF ! LATT] HAD ITS TURN 9 ! W9T]10 ,VLA/OS OBS]VES1 HI<LI<T+ ! P>ALLELS BETWE5 ! ,A!NIAN POLITICAL SY/EM & ?IS NOTION4 0,& IF A SIMIL> & CONCURR5T CYCLE ( SUCCESSIVE SUPREMACY C\LD BE ASSUM$ TO HOLD AMONG ! P[]S 9 ! HUMAN BODY1 !N ! KRASIS ( MAN & NATURE W\LD BE P]FECT40.<#a#c.> 

,EMP$OCLES ?OR\<LY NATURALIZ$ ?IS 0ELEGANT TISSUE ( ASSUMPTIONS10 AS ,VLA/OS CALLS !SE P>ALLELS BETWE5 SOCIETY & NATURE4 ,HIS CONCEPT ( 0ROOTS0 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM 0ELEM5TS10 UNDIFF]5TIAT$ 0,BE+10 & 0ATOMS0 VA/LY 5L>G$ ! IMPLICIT ,HELL5IC NOTION ( AN IMMAN5TLY G5]ATIVE NATURE TO A PO9T UNSURPASS$ EV5 BY ,>I/OTLE4 ,! 0ROOTS10 AS ,FRANCIS ,CORN=D OBS]VES1 >E 0EQUAL 9 /ATUS OR LOT02 !Y ROTATE !IR 0RULE0 ) !IR [N UNIQUE 0HONOR10 = 9 NO CASE IS ! UNIV]SE A 0MON>*Y0 & NONE ( ITS P[]S CAN CLAIM EV5 ! PRIMACY ?AT ,?ALES GAVE TO FLUIDITY & ,ANAXIM5ES TO S\L4.<#a#d.> 

,PRESOCRATIC ?\<T WAS CONSCI\SLY 9FUS$ BY A F>-REA*+ NOTION ( COSMIC JU/ICE1 OR DIKAISYNE4 ,?IS CONCEPT ( JU/ICE EXT5DS BEYOND SOCIAL & P]SONAL ISSUES TO NATURE ITSELF4 ,= ! ,PRESOCRATICS1 0JU/ICE IS NO LONG] 9SCRUTABLE MOIRA1 IMPOS$ BY >BITR>Y =CES ) 9CALCULABLE EFFECT4 ,NOR IS %E ! GODDESS ,DIKE1 MORAL & RATIONAL 5\<1 BUT FRAIL & UNRELIABLE40 ,UNLIKE ,HESIOD'S ,DIKE1 ?IS JU/ICE IS ONE ) NATURE ITSELF & 0C\LD NO MORE LEAVE ! E>? ?AN ! E>? C\LD LEAVE ITS PLACE 9 ! FIRMAM5T40.<#a#e.> ,ITS OPPOSITE1 ADIKAISYNE1 M>KS EV]Y TRANSGRESSION ( COSMIC JU/ICE -- ( ! LAW ( ! MEASURE & ! P]AS OR LIMIT ( ?+S & RELATION%IPS4 ,IT DEM&S REP>ATION & ! RE/ORATION ( H>MONY4 

,NATURE1 9 EFFECT1 APPE>$ AS A COMMONWEAL?1 A POLIS1 :OSE ISONOMIA EFFAC$ ! 0DI/9CTIONS BETWE5 TWO GRADES ( BE+ -- DIV9E & MORTAL1 LORDLY & SUBS]VI5T1 NOBLE & MEAN1 ( HI<] & L[] HONOR4 ,IT WAS ! 5D+ ( !SE DI/9CTIONS ?AT MADE NATURE AUTONOM\S & !RE=E COMPLETELY & UNEXCEPTIONALLY 'JU/' ,GIV5 A SOCIETY ( EQUALS1 IT WAS ASSUM$1 JU/ICE WAS SURE TO FOLL[1 = NONE W\LD HAVE ! P[] TO DOM9ATE ! RE/4 ,?IS ASSUMPTION 444 HAD A /RICTLY PHYSICAL S5SE4 ,IT WAS ACCEPT$ NOT AS A POLITICAL DOGMA BUT AS A !OREM 9 PHYSICAL 9QUIRY4 ,IT IS1 NONE ! LESS1 REM>KABLE EVID5CE ( ! CONFID5CE :I* ! GREAT AGE ( ,GREEK DEMOCRACY POSSESS$ 9 ! VALIDITY ( ! DEMOCRATIC IDEA -- A CONFID5CE SO ROBU/ ?AT IT SURVIV$ TRANSLATION 9TO ! FIR/ PR9CIPLES ( COSMOLOGY & M$ICAL !ORY4.<#a#f.> 

,NAIVE AS ! ,PRESOCRATIC VIEW MAY BE ) ALL ITS >*AISMS1 A NATURE PHILOSOPHY ?AT IS MORE ?AN ! SIMPLE CONTE/ BETWE5 ME*ANISM & ORGANICISM 5C\NT]$ TODAY W\LD S]VE TO CL>IFY ! WAYW>D =TUNES ( ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY & *ALL5GE ! LIMITS IT HAS IMPOS$ ON ECOLOGICAL E?ICS4 ,IRONICALLY1 ! F\ND]S ( MOD]N SCI5CE -- ,COP]NICUS1 ,KEPL]1 & ,TY*O ,BRAHE -- W]E RAG+ ,PY?AGOREANS4 ,:AT E>LY ,R5AISSANCE ?\<T & SCI5CE RESCU$ FROM ! ANCI5TS WAS NOT ISONOMIA BUT =M1 AS WELL AS ! %>$ PREMISE ( ALL SPECULATIVE REASON ?AT NATURE IS AN 9TELLIGIBLE KOSMOS4 ,DESC>TES NEV] *ALL5G$ ?IS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK -- HE M]ELY GAVE IT A ME*ANICAL =M1 ALLUR+ & SUBV]SIVE = ITS TIME4 

,IT WAS ,KANT -- A NE> ,JACOB9 -- :O MADE ! MO/ SIGNIFICANT TURN 9 ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY ) HIS 0,COP]NICAN REVOLUTION10 ! 0EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN40 ,KANT F9ALLY D5ATUR$ NATURE ( ITS ,PRESOCRATIC REMNANT BY REMOV+ ! MAT]IAL 0GRADE ( BE+0 ALTOGE!R4 ,?+S-9-!MSELVES CEAS$ TO BE ?+S AT ALL = COGNITIVE PURPOSES1 & ONE GRADE ( ,BE+ EFFECTIVELY CEAS$ TO EXI/4 ,KANT LEFT US ALONE ) \R [N SUBJECTIVITY4 0,KANT DOES NOT1 LIKE ALL E>LI] PHILOSOPH]S1 9VE/IGATE OBJECTS10 AS ,K>L ,JASP]S 9CISIVELY SUMM>IZ$ ! ISSUE2 0:AT HE 9QUIRES 9TO IS \R KN[L$GE ( OBJECTS4 ,HE PROVIDES NO DOCTR9E ( ! METAPHYSICAL WORLD1 BUT A CRITIQUE ( ! REASON ?AT ASPIRES TO KN[ IT4 ,HE GIVES NO DOCTR9E ( ,BE+ AS SOME?+ OBJECTIVELY KN[N1 BUT AN ELUCIDATION ( EXI/5CE AS ! SITUATION ( \R CONSCI\SNESS4 ,OR1 9 HIS [N WORDS1 HE PROVIDES NO 'DOCTR9E' BUT A 'PROPA$EUTICS4'0 ,ACCORD+LY1 ,KANTIAN CATEGORIES HAVE OBJECTIVE VALIDITY ONLY 9S(> AS !Y REMA9 )9 ! LIMITS ( POSSIBLE EXP]I5CE4 ,AFT] ,KANT1 0METAPHYSICS 9 ! S5SE ( OBJECTIVE KN[L$GE ( ! SUP]S5SIBLE OR AS ONTOLOGY1 :I* TEA*ES BE+ AS :OLE1 IS IMPOSSIBLE40.<#a#g.> 

,AS LIB]AT+ AS ?IS 9NOVATION WAS FROM ABSOLUTE EMPIRICISM1 :I* R5D]S ITS [N EXP]I5CE 9 A WORLD ( PURE ,BE+1 IT WAS NOT LIB]AT+ FROM ABSOLUTES G5]ALLY4 ,KANT HIMSELF MADE A SWEEP+ 9TELLECTUALIZATION ( OBJECTIVITY4 ,AL?\< HE ACKN[L$G$ A N\M5AL WORLD ?AT IS 0SUP]S5SIBLE0 OR 0UNKN[ABLE0 & ?AT CON/ITUTES ! ORIG9AT+ S\RCE ( ! P]CEPTIONS ?AT HIS CATEGORIES SYN!SIZE 9TO AU!NTIC KN[L$GE1 HE OP5$ ! WAY TO AN EPI/EMOLOGICAL FOCUS ON  
SY/EMS ( KN[L$GE RA!R ?AN A NATURALI/IC FOCUS ON  
SY/EMS ( FACTS4 ,FACTICITY ITSELF WAS ABSORB$ )9 SY/EMS ( KN[L$GE1 & ! ,GREEK ONTA1 ! 0REALLY EXI/+ ?+S10 W]E DISPLAC$ BY  
EPI/EME1 \R 0KN[L$GE0 ( ! N[ 0UNKN[ABLE0 ONTA4 ,HEGEL RIDICUL$ ! PAT5T CONTRADICTION ( KN[+ ?AT AN 0UNKN[ABLE0 WAS UNKN[ABLE -- BUT ,KANT HAD DUG A V]ITABLE TR5* >\ND PHILOSOPHY ?AT EXCLUD$ NATURE AS ONTOLOGY & ?AT R5D]$ ?\<T 9TO ,BE+4 ,) ,KANT'S AGNO/IC & ESS5TIALLY SKEPTICAL \TLOOK1 HIS EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN BECAME ABSOLUTIZ$ 9 PHILOSOPHY4 

,LO/ 9 ?IS DEVELOPM5T W]E ! ONTA ?AT ALONE CON/ITUTE ! UND]P9N+S ( NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 :I* N[ HAD TO BE DI/+UI%$ FROM ,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES ( ! NATURE ( KN[+4.<#a#h.> ,HEGEL HEAP$ SCORN ON ! NOTION ( ! ?+-9-ITSELF1 :OSE V]Y ?+HOOD BY DEF9ITION REQUIRES DET]M9ATIONS & 9 FACT BE>S ! IMPR9T ( ! ,KANTIAN CATEGORIES4 ,BUT EV5 ,HEGEL 5D$ 9 ! SUBJECTIVITY ( ! ,ABSOLUTE4 ,= ,HEGEL1 AFT] ALL ! TOIL ( ,SPIRIT1 OBJECT & SUBJECT F9ALLY COME TO RE/ 9 ,M9D -- 9 KN[L$GE AS SELF-KN[+ 9 ALL ITS TOTALITY -- & IT WAS NOT = S5TIM5TAL REASONS ?AT ,HEGEL'S ,5CYCLOP$IA 5D$1 ) A QUOTATION FROM ,>I/OTLE ?AT EXULTS 0?\<T .<?AT.> ?9KS ON ITSELF BECAUSE IT %>ES ! NOTION ( ! OBJECT ( ?\<T40.<#a#i.> ,A C5TURY LAT]1 ,HUSS]L'S PROCESS ( EPO*E BRACKET$ \T ! NATURAL WORLD 9 ORD] TO E/ABLI% ! LOGICAL NECESSITY ON :I* IT ULTIMATELY HANGS2 ,HEIDEGG] REG>D$ ,DASE9 AS ! HUMAN EXI/5T & ROYAL ROAD TO ,BE+4 ,BO? DI/ILL$ REALITY 9TO 9TELLECTION1 & ! =MALIZATIONS ( ! HUMAN M9D BECAME ! EXCLUSIVE PO9T ( 5TRY 9TO ,BE+4 ,ONLY 9S(> AS !SE =MALIZATIONS BECOME ,BE+ ITSELF CAN ONE CALL ,HEIDEGG]'S OR ,HUSS]L'S PHILOSOPHICAL /RATEGY ONTOLOGICAL4 

,NOR HAS ECOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY BREA*$ ! ,KANTIAN TR5*4 ,RA!R1 IT IS A CAPTIVE )9 IT )\T EV5 KN[+ IT4 ,GREGORY ,BATESON1 ! MO/ WIDELY READ ( ITS GURUS1 MAKES AN ALMO/ :OLLY SUBJECTIVE 9T]PRETATION ( ! NOTORI\S ,M9D-,NATURE RELATION%IP4 ,9 TRY+ TO 0BUILD ! BRIDGE0 BETWE5 0=M & SUB/ANCE10 ,BATESON EMPHASIZES ONLY TOO CORRECTLY ?AT ,WE/]N SCI5CE BEGAN ) ! 0WRONG HALF0 ( ! *ASM -- ATOMI/IC MAT]IALISM4 ,TODAY MANY ECOLOGICALLY ORI5T$ READ]S >E ATTRACT$ TO HIS SUPPLANTATION ( MATT] ) M9D & TO HIS CONJO9+ ( FACT 7:ATEV] ?AT MEANS = HIM7 ) VALUE4 ,BUT QUITE SY/EMATICALLY1 ,BATESON TURNS ANY 9T]RELATIONAL SY/EM AT ALL 9TO 0,M9D0 & H5CE MAKES IT SUBJECTIVE4 7,?IS NOTION ALSO FE$S 9TO QUASI-SUP] NATURALI/IC VISIONS ( REALITY -- G5]ALLY ,EA/]N 9 ORIG9 -- :I* CURI\SLY T5D TO TRANSC5D ! NATURAL WORLD RA!R ?AN EXPLA9 IT47 ,?AT 0,M9D IS EMPTY2 IT IS NO-?+10 = ,BATESON1 MEANS LIT]ALLY ?AT IT IS NO ?+ AT ALL4 ,H5CE1 ONLY 0IDEAS >E IMMAN5T1 EMBODI$ 9 !IR EXAMPLES4 ,& ! EXAMPLES .<! MAT]IAL EMBODIM5TS ( IDEAS.> >E1 AGA91 NO-?+S4 ,! CLAW1 AS AN EXAMPLE1 IS NOT ! ,D+ AN SI*2 IT IS PRECISELY NOT ! '?+ 9 ITSELF' ,RA!R1 IT IS :AT M9D MAKES ( IT1 NAMELY1 AN EXAMPLE ( SOME?+ OR O!R40.<#b.> 

,?IS IS NOT M]ELY A SUBJECTIVI/ V>IANT ( ,KANTIANISM2 IT IS A D5IAL ( ?+HOOD AS SU*4 ,A TRUE SON ( ! EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN1 ,BATESON CLAIMS ?AT 0ALL EXP]I5CE IS SUBJECTIVE 444 \R BRA9S MAKE ! IMAGES ?AT WE ?9K WE 'P]CEIVE4'0 ,9DE$1 0OCCID5TAL CULTURE0 LIVES UND] ! 0ILLUSION0 ?AT ITS [N 0VISUAL IMAGE ( ! EXT]NAL WORLD0 HAS ONTOLOGICAL REALITY4 ,EV5 AS ,BATESON DISMISSES ONTOLOGICAL PROP]TIES AS SU*1 HE SMUGGLES !M BACK 9TO HIS [N WORK AS SY/EMS4 ,AL?\< HIS >GUM5T AGA9/ 0ATOMIES0 TAKES ON ! APPE>ANCE ( AN >GUM5T AGA9/ PRESUPPOSITIONS1 ,BATESON'S [N VIEW IS ACTUALLY OV]LOAD$ ) PRESUPPOSITIONS -- HIS :OLE !SIS1 HE SAYS ELSE:]E1 IS 0BAS$ ON ! PREMISE ?AT M5TAL FUNCTION IS IMMAN5T 9 ! 9T]ACTION ( DIFF]5TIAT$ 'P>TS'40 .<#b#a.> 

,BATESONIAN M5TALISM IS N\RI%$ BY ! CYB]NETIC IDEA ?AT P]CEPTIONS >E P>TS ( A SY/EM1 NOT ISOLATES1 OR AS ,BATESON CALLS !M1 0ATOMIES40 ,HE 9T5DS ?IS TO MEAN ?AT ! DIFF]5TIAE ?AT =M AN AGGREGATE ( 9T]ACT+ P>TS >E NOT SPATIAL1 TEMPORAL1 OR SUB/ANTIAL2 !Y >E RELATIONAL4 ,! 9T]ACTION BETWE5 A SUBJECT & OBJECT =MS A K9D ( UNIT SY/EM ?AT EXI/S )9 EV]-L>G] SY/EMS1 BE !Y COMMUNITIES1 SOCIETIES1 ! PLANET1 ! SOL> SY/EM1 OR ULTIMATELY ! UNIV]SE4 ,BATESON DESIGNATES !SE SY/EMS AS 0,M9DS0 -- OR MORE PRECISELY1 AS A HI]>*Y ( ,M9DS10 MU* LIKE ,>?UR ,KOE/L]'S HOL>*Y1 ) ITS SUBLEVELS ( 0HOLONS0 ?AT EXT5D FROM SUBATOMIC P>TICLES1 ?R\< ATOMS1 MOLECULES1 ORGANELLES1 CELLS1 TISSUES1 & ORGANS1 UP TO LIV+ ORGANISMS1 :I* HAVE !IR [N SCALA NATURAE4.<#b#b.> 

,BATESON'S VIEW ?AT CONTEXT FIXES MEAN+ IS NOT V]Y NEW IF ONE KN[S ANY?+ AB\T ,:ITEHEAD4 ,BUT CYB]NETICS1 TOO1 IS UNCRITICALLY PRESUPPOS$4 ,?AT CYB]NETICS C\LD SIMPLY BE ANO!R =M ( ME*ANISM -- ELECTRONIC RA!R ?AN ME*ANICAL -- ELUDES HIM1 AS IT SEEMS TO ELUDE MO/ ( ITS ACOLYTES4 ,FE$BACK LOOPS >E AS ME*ANI/IC AS FLY:EELS1 H[EV] DIFF]5T ! PHYSICS 9VOLV$ MAY BE4 ,CYB]NETICIANS 5GAGE 9 A R$UCTIONISM SIMIL> TO ?AT :I* GUID$ ME*ANICAL ?9K+ 9 ,NEWTON'S DAY1 EXCEPT ?AT ,NEWTON'S WAS BAS$ ON MATT] RA!R ?AN 5]GY4 ,! ECOLOGICAL CYB]NETICS ( ,H[>D ,ODUM1 :OSE TUNNEL VISION P]CEIVES ONLY ! FL[ ( CALORIES ?R\< AN ECOSY/EM1 IS AS %ALL[ PHILOSOPHICALLY AS IT IS USEFUL PRACTICALLY )9 ITS [N N>R[ LIMITS4 ,= ITS MORE MY/ICAL ACOLYTES1 CYB]NETICS COMB9ES ) ,EA/]N & ,NATIVE ,AM]ICAN SPIRITUALITY TO BECOME A 0SPIRITUAL ME*ANISM0 ?AT E]ILY P>ALLELS ! FAIL+S ( MAT]IALI/ ME*ANISM1 )\T ! LATT]'S CONTACT ) REALITY4 ,A DEAD5+ VOCABUL>Y ( 9=MATION1 9PUTS1 \TPUTS1 FE$BACK1 & 5]GY -- T]M9OLOGY L>GELY BORN FROM W>TIME RESE>* ON RAD> & S]VO-ME*ANISMS = MILIT>Y GUIDANCE SY/EMS.<#b#c.> -- REPLACES SU* ONCE-VIBRANT WORDS AS  
KN[L$GE1 DIALOGUE1 EXPLANATION1 WISDOM1 & VITALITY4 

,AS CRITICS ( ,BATESON'S VIEW & ( CYB]NETICS G5]ALLY HAVE BE5 QUICK TO PO9T \T1 HI]>*IES ( 0,M9D0 HAVE AU?ORIT>IAN IMPLICATIONS4.<#b#d.> ,KOE/L] WAS ACUTELY CONSCI\S ( ?IS PROBLEM 9 HIS NOTION ( 0HOL>*Y10 ) ITS HI]>*IES ( 0HOLONS02.<#b#e.> BUT ,BATESON1 IF ANY?+1 IS GIV5 TO US+ EXAMPLES ?AT ACC5TUATE ! AU?ORIT>IAN FEATURES ( HIS \TLOOK4 ,AS ,BATESON DESCRIBES 0AN ALT]NAT+ LADD] ( CALIBRATION & FE$BACK UP TO L>G] & L>G] SPH]ES ( RELEVANCE & MORE & MORE AB/RACT 9=MATION & WID] DECISION10 HE W>NS ?AT  
  

)9 ! SY/EM ( POLICE & LAW 5=CEM5T1 & 9DE$ 9 ALL HI]>*IES1 IT IS MO/ UNDESIRABLE TO HAVE DIRECT CONTACT BETWE5 LEVELS ?AT >E NONCONSECUTIVE4 ,IT IS NOT GOOD = ! TOTAL ORGANIZATION TO HAVE A PIPEL9E ( COMMUNICATION BETWE5 ! DRIV] ( ! AUTOMOBILE .<:O IS TICKET$ = VIOLAT+ A SPE$ LIMIT.> & ! /ATE POLICE *IEF4 ,SU* COMMUNICATION IS BAD = ! MORALE ( ! POLICE =CE4 ,NOR IS IT DESIRABLE = ! POLICEMAN TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO ! LEGISLATURE1 :I* W\LD UND]M9E ! AU?ORITY ( ! POLICE *IEF4444 ,9 LEGAL & ADM9I/RATIVE SY/EMS1 SU* JUMP+ ( LOGICAL LEVELS IS CALL$ EX PO/ FACTO LEGISLATION4 ,9 FAMILIES1 ! ANALOG\S ]RORS >E CALL$ D\BLE B9DS4 ,9 G5ETICS1 ! ,WEISSMANNIAN B>RI] :I* PREV5TS ! 9H]ITANCE ( ACQUIR$ *>ACT]I/ICS SEEMS TO PREV5T DISA/]S ( ?IS NATURE4 ,TO P]MIT DIRECT 9FLU5CE FROM SOMATIC /ATE TO G5ETIC /RUCTURE MI<T DE/ROY ! HI]>*Y ( ORGANIZATION )9 ! CREATURE4.<#b#f.>  
  

,?IS IS SOCIOBIOLOGY ) A V5GEANCE4 ,NOR WAS ONE ( ! \T/&+ F\ND]S ( SY/EMS !ORY1 ,LUDWIG VON ,B]TALANFFY1 IMMUNE TO ?IS T5D5CY :5 HE OBS]V$ ?AT 0! BEHAVIOR ( ANIMALS SU* AS RATS1 CATS1 & MONKEYS PROVIDES ! NECESS>Y BASES = 9T]PRETATION & CONTROL ( HUMAN BEHAVIOR2 :AT APPE>S TO BE SPECIAL 9 MAN IS SECOND>Y & ULTIMATELY TO BE R$UC$ TO BIOLOGICAL DRIVES & PRIM>Y NE$S40.<#b#g.> 

,B]TALANFFY'S 0G5]AL SY/EM !ORY0 -- ) :I* HE SEEKS TO REPLACE ,C>TESIAN ME*ANISM1 0ONE-WAY CAUSALITY1 & 0UNORGANIZ$ COMPLEXITY0 -- H>DLY SOLVES ! PROBLEMS ?AT CYB]NETIC ME*ANISM RAISES4 ,ULTIMATELY1 ! ?9K+ 9 BO? CASES IS SIMIL>3 A G5]AL SY/EM !ORY BAS$ ON A WORLDVIEW ( 0ORGANIZ$ COMPLEXITY0 IS ESS5TIALLY A CYB]NETIC SY/EM ?AT IS 0OP50 RA!R ?AN 0CLOS$40 ,B]TALANFFY ADMITS ?AT G5]AL SY/EM !ORY IS /ILL ME*ANI/IC 9 ! S5SE ?AT IT PRESUPPOSES A 0ME*ANISM0 ?AT IS1 /RUCTURAL >RANGEM5TS4 ,AL?\< IT IS QUITE TRUE ?AT 09 BEHAVIORAL P>LANCE1 ! CYB]NETIC MODEL IS ! FAMILI> ,S-,R .</IMULUS-RESPONSE.> 444 S*EME0 & SIMPLY REPLACES 0L9E> CAUSALITY0 ) 0CIRCUL> CAUSALITY BY WAY ( ! FE$BACK LOOP10 ! CLAIMS ADVANC$ BY A G5]AL SY/EM !ORY TO 5COMPASS 0MULTIV>IABLE 9T]ACTION MA9T5ANCE ( :OLES 9 ! C\NT]ACTION ( COMPON5T P>TS1 MULTILEVEL ORGANIZATION 9TO SY/EMS ( EV] HI<] ORD]1 DIFF]5TIATION C5TRALIZATION1 PROGRESSIVE ME*ANIZATION /E]+ & TRIGG] CAUSALITY1 REGULATION EVOLUTION T[>D HI<] ORGANIZATION TELEOLOGY & GOAL-DIRECT$NESS 9 V>I\S =MS & WAYS1 ETC410 >E G5]ALLY MORE PROGRAMMATIC ?AN REAL & 9CORPORATE SOME ( ! MO/ AU?ORIT>IAN & ME*ANI/IC ATTRIBUTES ( CYB]NETICS4 ,?AT ! 0ELABORATION ( ?IS PROGRAM HAS ONLY JU/ BEGUN444 & IS BESET ) DIFFICULTIES0 IS AN UND]/ATEM5T4.<#b#h.> 

,! ISSUE ( DEVELOPM5T -- SPECIFICALLY EVOLUTION -- IS CRUCIAL TO NATURE PHILOSOPHY1 BUT A SOLUTION TO ! PROBLEM ( :Y DEVELOPM5T OCCURS1 :Y ORD] & COMPLEXITY EM]GE FROM LESS] DEGREES ( ORD] & SIMPLICITY1 REMA9S M>K$LY ABS5T FROM SY/EMS !ORY4 ,NONE ( ! SY/EMS !ORIES COME CLOSE TO AN EXPLANATION ( DEVELOPM5T & IT IS NOT AT ALL CLE> ?AT ! EXPLANATORY P[]S ( CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN 5COMPASS IT4 ,TO MY KN[L$GE1 ! ONLY 0BREAK?R\<0 9 ?IS REG>D ?AT L5DS CR$IBILITY TO ,B]TALANFFY'S SWEEP+ CLAIMS = ! EXPLANATORY POT5TIAL ( G5]AL SY/EM !ORY HAS BE5 ,ILYA ,PRIGOG9E'S MA!MATICAL ELABORATION ( ! ORGANIZ+ ROLE ( POSITIVE FE$BACK4.<#b#i.> ,PRIGOG9ES WORK ESS5TIALLY UTILIZES ! SYMMETRY-BREAK+ EFFECTS ( POSITIVE FE$BACK 7OR MORE BLUNTLY1 DISORD]7 AS A MEANS = CREAT+ 0ORD]0 AT V>I\S LEVELS ( ORGANIZATION4 

,AS VALUABLE AS ?IS APPROA* MAY BE )9 ! REALM ( SY/EMS !ORY ITSELF1 P>TICUL>LY 9 ITS APPLICATIONS TO *EMI/RY1 ! SPONTANE\S /RUCTURATION ?AT IT DESCRIBES DOES SO AS ! RESULT ( CAUSES NO LESS ME*ANI/IC ?AN ,BATESON S LADD] ( 0,M9DS0 & ,KOE/L]'S HI]>*Y ( 0HOLONS40 ,C]TA9LY1 NO SY/EMS !ORY ,I HAVE CIT$ EXPLA9S :Y ONE 0LEVEL ( ORGANIZATION0 SUP]S$ES OR 9CORPORATES ANO!R2 AT BE/1 !Y DESCRIBE ONLY  
H[1 & EV5 !SE DESCRIPTIONS >E WOEFULLY 9COMPLETE4 ,BATESON'S /O*A/IC /RATEGY = 0EXPLA9+0 SEQU5CE1 = EXAMPLE1 M]ELY CORRELATES R&OM G5ETIC MUTATIONS 7OR WORSE1 PO9T MUTATIONS1 :I* >E PIECEMEAL AS WELL AS R&OM7 ) A 0SELECTIVE PROCESS0 ?AT IS REM>KABLY PASSIVE4 ,NATURAL SELECTION M]ELY TELLS US ?AT ! 0FITTE/0 SURVIVE 5VIRONM5TAL *ANGES4 ,IF ALL WE KN[ AB\T EVOLUTION>Y DEVELOPM5T IS ?AT AMID A FLURRY ( UTT]LY R&OM MUTATIONS1 ! ORGANISMS ?AT >E CAPABLE ( SURVIV+ >E ?OSE ?AT >E ! 0FITTE/0 TO SURVIVE -- A CIRCUL> !SIS -- !N WE KN[ V]Y LITTLE AB\T EVOLUTION 9DE$4 

,IT IS NOT CLE> :E!R CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN EXT5D BEYOND M]E 9T]ACTION1 AS DI/+UI%$ FROM AU!NTIC  
DEVELOPM5T4 ,WE C]TA9LY HAVE NO 0SY/EM0 OR 0,M9D0 O!R ?AN M]E 9T]ACTION ?AT EXPLA9S IT 9 !SE !ORIES4 ,AN 09T]ACTION0 CANNOT BE CON/RU$ AS A RELATION%IP UNLESS IT IS MEAN+FUL4 ,TO CALL ! M]E PHYSICAL FACT ?AT ONE HUMAN BE+ /UMBLES OV] ANO!R 09T]SUBJECTIVITY10 = EXAMPLE1 DEGRADES ! V]Y MEAN+ ( ! WORD SUBJECTIVE4 ,! 5C\NT] ( ONE BODY ) ANO!R M]ELY PRODUCES A =M ( PHYSICAL CONTACT4 ,! 09T]ACTION0 BECOMES 09T]SUBJECTIVE0 ONLY :5 ! TWO P]SONS ADDRESS EA* O!R -- POSSIBLY ) FRI5DLY RECOGNITION1 POSSIBLY ) EXPLETIVES1 POSSIBLY EV5 ) BL[S4 ,MOREOV]1 9 VIEW ( REC5T 0=MALIZATIONS0 ( EV5 RADICAL SOCIAL !ORIES1 ,I CANNOT EMPHASIZE TOO /RONGLY ?AT ATTEMPT+ TO UND]/& ?IS 09T]ACTION0 9 ALL ITS POSSIBLE =MS & MEAN+S REQUIRES KN[+ ! SOCIAL & PSY*OLOGICAL CONTEXT 9 :I* IT OCCURR$ -- ?AT IS TO SAY1 ! HI/ORY OR DIALECTIC1 H[EV] TRIVIAL1 ?AT LIES BURI$ )9 ! 09T]SUBJECTIVITY0 ?AT RESULTS FROM ! 09T]ACTION40 

,WE CAN C]TA9LY CRITICIZE CYB]NETICS' MISUSE ( ! CONCEPT (  
HI]>*Y -- A /RICTLY SOCIAL T]M -- TO REF] TO DEGREES ( COMPLEXITY & ORGANIZATION4 ,BUT ULTIMATELY1 CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS APPROA*ES TO ECOLOGICAL ISSUES >E NOT SUBJECT TO IMMAN5T CRITIQUE4 ,LIKE ,KANTIAN & NEO-,KANTIAN PHILOSOPHIES1 !Y >E BASICALLY SELF-SUFFICI5T & SELF-5CLOS$4 ,AL?\< ,KANT'S CONCLUSIONS DO NOT FOLL[ COMPLETELY FROM HIS PREMISES1 HIS V]Y ]RORS HAVE S]V$ AS CORRECTIVES = HIS SUCCESSORS4 ,TRANSLAT$ 9TO ! LANGUAGE ( SY/EMS !ORY1 ,KANTIANISM & ITS SUBJECTIVE SEQUELAE >E SUFFICI5TLY CLOS$ ?AT !IR ]RORS BECOME ! SELF-CORRECTIVE S\RCE ( P]PETUAT+ ,KANT'S 0,COP]NICAN REVOLUTION80 

,?AT ,KANT'S EPI/EMOLOGICAL TURN GREATLY BROAD5$ PHILOSOPHICAL ?\<T IS H>DLY >GUABLE4 ,KANT'S ELABORATION ( AN EPI/EMOLOGY & ! 9TRODUCTION ( ! SUBJECT AS BO? OBS]V] & P>TICIPANT 9 COH]+ KN[L$GE & REALITY FILL$ A MAJOR LACUNA 9 ,WE/]N PHILOSOPHY4 ,DEF9ITELY >GUABLE1 H[EV]1 >E ! IMP]IAL CLAIMS ?AT ?IS SUBJECTIVISM ADVANC$1 ! TOTALIZATION ( REALITY & ! >ROGANT EXCLUSIVITY IT /AK$ \T = ITSELF4 ,HEGEL'S BRILLIANT CRITICISM ( ,KANT1 :ILE 9DUBITABLY %REWD1 DID NOT DAMAGE !SE IMP]IAL CLAIMS2 9DE$1 TO SOME DEGREE IT P]=M$ A CORRECTIVE FUNCTION = NEO-,KANTIANS ( LAT] G5]ATIONS4 

,IF SUBJECTIVI/IC APPROA*ES TO NATURE & ?OSE BAS$ ON SY/EMS !ORY MU/ BE *ALL5G$1 WE >E OBLIG$ TO =MULATE NEW PREMISES ?AT PROVIDE COH]5CE & MEAN+ TO NATURAL EVOLUTION4 ,! TRU? OR FALSITY ( A NATURE PHILOSOPHY WILL LIE 9 ! TRU? OR FALSITY ( ITS DESCRIPTION ( AN UNFOLD+ REALITY -- 9  
EVOLUTION1 AS WE >E BEG9N+ TO KN[ IT 9 NATURE TODAY1 & AS ?IS NATURAL EVOLUTION GRADES 9TO SOCIAL EVOLUTION & E?ICS4 ,WE MU/ NOT1 H[EV]1 ONCE AGA9 RE> ! HO>Y MY? ( A 0PRESUPPOSITIONLESS PHILOSOPHY0 BUT *OOSE \R PRESUPPOSITIONS C>EFULLY & ADEQUATELY SO ?AT !Y IMP>T COH]5CE & MEAN+4 

,\R FIR/ PRESUPPOSITION IS ?AT WE HAVE ! RI<T TO  
ATTRIBUTE PROP]TIES TO NATURE BAS$ ON ! BE/ ( \R KN[L$GE1 ! RI<T TO ASSUME ?AT C]TA9 ATTRIBUTES AS WELL AS CONTEXTS >E  
SELF-EVID5T 9 NATURE4 ,?IS ASSUMPTION IS IMM$IATELY PROBLEMATIC = A VA/ NUMB] ( ACADEMIC PHILOSOPH]S -- AL?\<1 IRONICALLY1 IT IS NO PROBLEM = MO/ SCI5TI/S4 ,! GREAT ,R5AISSANCE NOTION ?AT 0MATT]0 & 0MOTION0 >E BASIC ATTRIBUTES ( NATURE1 ITS MO/ UND]LY+ PROP]TIES 7JU/ AS METABOLISM IS A BASIC PROP]TY ( LIFE71 REMA9S A PREVAL5T SCI5TIFIC ASSUMPTION WELL 9TO \R [N TIME1 H[EV] MU* ! MEAN+S ( ! T]MS MATT] &  
MOTION HAVE *ANG$4 

,IT REMA9$ = ,DID]OT 9 HIS EXTRAORD9>Y ,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREAM TO PROPOSE ! CRUCIAL TRAIT ( NATURE ?AT TRANS=MS M]E MOTION 9TO DEVELOPM5T & DIRECTIV5ESS3 ! NOTION (  
S5SIBILITE1 AN 9T]NAL NISUS1 ?AT IS COMMONLY TRANSLAT$ AS 0S5SITIVITY40 .<#c.> ,?IS IMMAN5T FECUNDITY ( 0MATT]0 -- AS DI/+UI%$ FROM MOTION AS M]E *ANGE ( PLACE -- SCOR$ A M>K$ ADVANCE OV] ! PREVAL5T ME*ANISM ( ,LA ,METTRIE &1 BY COMMON ACKN[L$GM5T1 ANTICIPAT$ N9ETE5?-C5TURY !ORIES ( EVOLUTION &1 9 MY VIEW1 REC5T DEVELOPM5TS 9 BIOLOGY4 ,YET  
,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREAM'S V]Y TITLE =EW>NS READ]S ( ,DID]OT'S C&ID S5SE ( D\BT ( HIS [N 0LIKELY /ORY10 GIV5 ! LIMIT$ SCI5TIFIC KN[L$GE ( ! TIME4 

,S5SIBILITE IMPLIES AN ACTIVE CONCEPT ( MATT] ?AT YIELDS 9CREAS+ COMPLEXITY1 FROM ! ATOMIC LEVEL TO ! BRA94 ,CONT9UITY IS PRES]V$ ?R\< ?IS DEVELOPM5T )\T ANY R$UCTIONISM2 9DE$1 9 ! SCALA NATURAE DYNAMIZ$ BY ,DID]OT'S AV[$ ,H]ACLITEAN BIAS = FLUX1 !RE IS A NISUS = COMPLEXITY1 AN 5TELE*IA ?AT EM]GES FROM ! V]Y NATURE1 /RUCTURE1 & =M ( POT5TIALITY ITSELF1 GIV5 V>Y+ DEGREES ( ! ORGANIZATION ( 0MATT]40 ,FROM ?IS POT5TIALITY & ! ACTUALIZATION ( ! POT5TIALITIES ( V>I\S ORGANISMS1 S5SIBILITE 9ITIATES ITS J\RNEY ( SELF-ACTUALIZATION & EM]G5T =M4 ,DID]OT'S HOLISM1 9 TURN1 IS ONE ( ! MO/ CONSPICU\S FEATURES ( "9,D',ALEMB]T'S ,DREA"9M4 ,AN ORGANISM A*IEVES ITS UNITY & S5SE ( DIRECTION FROM ! CONTEXTUAL :OL5ESS ( :I* IT IS P>T1 A :OL5ESS ?AT IMP>TS DIRECTIV5ESS TO ! ORGANISM & RECIPROCALLY RECEIVES DIRECTIV5ESS FROM IT4 

,AP>T FROM !IR SY/EMATIC & MA!MATICAL TREATM5T ( FE$BACK1 CYB]NETICS & SY/EMS !ORY CAN ADD LITTLE TO ?IS IDEA1 ADVANC$ BY AN AU!NTIC & L>GELY UNACKN[L$G$ G5IUS :O DI$ ALMO/ TWO C5TURIES AGO4 ,NOT ONLY DID ! ACTIVE & DIRECTIVE 0MATT]0 ?AT ,DID]OT ADVANC$ ) HIS NOTION ( S5SIBILITE M>K A RADICAL BREA* ) ,R5AISSANCE & ,5LI<T5M5T ME*ANISM1 BUT ITS RELEVANCE AS 0S5SITIVITY10 H[EV] METAPHORIC ! T]M9OLOGY1 IS RADICALLY IMPORTANT = UND]/&+ CURR5T DEVELOPM5TS 9 NATURAL SCI5CE4 

,A SECOND PRESUPPOSITION IS ! ALT]NATIVE PA?WAY TO ,KANTIANISM ?AT ,HEGEL OP5$ UP ) HIS [N PH5OM5OLOGICAL /RATEGY 9 ! RI*LY DIALECTICAL APPROA* ( !  
,PH5OM5OLOGY ( ,SPIRIT "9 ,9 ,HEGEL'S [N DESCRIPTION ( ?IS /RATEGY3 9S(> AS !  
,PH5OM5OLOGY 0HAS ONLY PH5OM5AL KN[L$GE = ITS OBJECT1 ?IS EXPOSITION SEEMS NOT TO BE ,SCI5CE1 FREE & SELF-MOV+ 9 ITS [N PECULI> %APE2 YET FROM ?IS /&PO9T IT CAN BE REG>D$ AS ! PA? ( ! NATURAL CONSCI\SNESS :I* PRESSES =W>D TO TRUE KN[L$GE2 OR AS ! WAY ( ! ,S\L :I* J\RNEYS ?R\< ! S]IES ( ITS [N CONFIGURATIONS AS ?\< !Y W]E ! /ATIONS APPO9T$ = IT BY ITS [N NATURE1 SO ?AT IT MAY PURIFY ITSELF = ! LIFE ( ! ,SPIRIT1 & A*IEVE F9ALLY1 ?R\< A COMPLET$ EXP]I5CE ( ITSELF1 ! AW>5ESS ( :AT IT REALLY IS 9 ITSELF40 ,?IS 0PRESS+ =W>D0 IS IMMAN5T TO TRUE KN[L$GE1 = %ORT ( F9D+ ITS GOAL1 0NO SATISFACTION IS TO BE F\ND AT ANY ( ! /ATIONS ALONG ! WAY40.<#c#a.> 

,LIKE ,LUKACS1 & UNLIKE ! ACADEMIC FLUFF :O HAVE VITIAT$ ,HEGEL'S /RONG REALITY PR9CIPLE1 ,I %>E ,5GELS'S VIEW ?AT ! ,PH5OM5OLOGY MAY BE REG>D$ AS 0A P>ALLEL ( ! EMBRYOLOGY & ! PALEONTOLOGY ( ! M9D1 A DEVELOPM5T ( 9DIVIDUAL CONSCI\SNESS ?R\< ITS DIFF]5T /AGES1 SET 9 ! =M ( AN ABBREVIAT$ REPRODUCTION ( ! /AGES ?R\< :I* ! CONSCI\SNESS ( MAN HAS PASS$ 9 ! C\RSE ( HI/ORY40.<#c#b.> ,TO A REM>KABLE EXT5T1 AL?\< BY NO MEANS CONSI/5TLY1 ! SELF-MOVEM5T ( CONSCI\SNESS 9 ! ,PH5OM5OLOGY P>ALLELS ! SELF-MOVEM5T ( CONSCI\SNESS 9 HI/ORICAL REALITY1 AL?\< ! /RATEGY IS CAPTIVE TO RATIONAL REALITY & ! E?ICAL UNIV]SE IT OP5S = ECOLOGY4 

,TAK+ AS \R PRESUPPOSITIONS ,DID]OT'S CONCEPT (  
S5SIBILITE 9 0MATT]0 & ,HEGEL'S PH5OM5OLOGICAL /RATEGY1 WE EM]GE ) A FASC9AT+ POSSIBILITY4 ,SPEAK+ METAPHORICALLY1 IT IS NATURE ITSELF ?AT SEEMS TO 0WRITE0 NATURAL PHILOSOPHY & E?ICS1 NOT LOGICIANS1 POSITIVI/S1 NEO-,KANTIANS1 & HEIRS ( ,GALILEAN SCI5TISM4 ,ACCORD+ TO A FAIRLY REC5T REVOLUTION 9 A/ROPHYSICS 7POSSIBLY COMP>ABLE TO ! A*IEVEM5TS ( ,COP]NICUS & ,KEPL]71 ! COSMOS IS OP5+ ITSELF UP TO US 9 NEW WAYS ?AT DEM& AN EXHIL>AT+LY SPECULATIVE TURN ( M9D & A MORE QUALITATIVE APPROA* TO NATURAL PH5OM5A ?AN 9 ! PA/4 ,IT IS BECOM+ 9CREAS+LY T5ABLE TO HOLD ?AT ! 5TIRE UNIV]SE IS ! CRADLE ( LIFE -- NOT M]ELY \R [N PLANET OR POSSIBLY PLANETS LIKE IT4 ,! =MATION ( ALL ! ELEM5TS FROM HYDROG5 & HELIUM1 !IR COMB9ATION 9TO SMALL MOLECULES & LAT] 9TO SELF-=M+ MACROMOLECULES1 & F9ALLY ! ORGANIZATION ( !SE MACROMOLECULES 9TO ! CON/ITU5TS ( LIFE & POSSIBLY M9D FOLL[ A SEQU5CE ?AT *ALL5GES ,B]TR& ,RUSSELL'S IMAGE ( HUMANITY AS AN ACCID5TAL SP>K 9 A MEAN+LESS VOID4 ,! PRES5CE ( COMPLEX ORGANIC MOLECULES 9 ! VA/ REA*ES ( ! UNIV]SE IS REPLAC+ ! CLASSICAL IMAGE ( SPACE AS A VOID ) AN UND]/&+ ( SPACE AS A RE/LESSLY ACTIVE *EMOG5IC GR\ND = AN A/ONI%+ SEQU5CE ( 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX *EMICAL COMP\NDS4 ,REC5T !ORIES AB\T ! =MATION ( ,D,N,A ?AT >E MODEL$ ON ! ACTIVITY ( CRY/ALL9E REPLICATION 7A NOTION ADVANC$ AS E>LY AS #aidd BY ,]W9 ,S*ROD+]7 SUGGE/ H[ G5ETIC GUIDANCE & EVOLUTION ITSELF MI<T HAVE EM]G$ TO =M AN ,9T]FACE BETWE5 ! 9ORGANIC & ORGANIC4.<#c#c.> 

,! PO9T IS ?AT WE CAN NO LONG] BE SATISFI$ ) ! !ORY ( AN 9]T 0MATT]0 ?AT =TUIT\SLY AGGREGATES 9TO LIFE4 ,! UNIV]SE BE>S WITNESS TO A DEVELOP+ -- NOT M]ELY MOV+ -- SUB/ANCE1 :OSE MO/ DYNAMIC & CREATIVE ATTRIBUTE IS ITS UNCEAS+ CAPACITY = SELF-ORGANIZATION 9TO 9CREAS+LY COMPLEX =MS4 ,=M PLAYS A C5TRAL ROLE 9 ?IS DEVELOPM5TAL & GR[? PROCESS1 :ILE FUNCTION IS AN 9DISP5SABLE CORRELATE4 ,! ORD]LY UNIV]SE ?AT MAKES SCI5CE POSSIBLE & ITS HI<LY CONCISE LOGIC -- MA!MATICS -- MEAN+FUL PRESUPPOSES ! CORRELATION ( =M ) FUNCTION4 

,9 LIFE -- A GRAD$ DEVELOPM5T BEYOND ! *EMOG5IC CRUCIBLE ?AT WE CALL ! UNIV]SE -- METABOLISM & DEVELOPM5T E/ABLI% ANO!R ELABORATION ( S5SIBILITE3 SYMBIOSIS4 ,REC5T DATA SUPPORT ! APPLICABILITY ( ,PET] ,KROPOTK9'S MUTUALI/IC NATURALISM NOT ONLY TO RELATION%IPS BETWE5 SPECIES BUT AMONG COMPLEX CELLUL> =MS4 ,AS BIOLOGI/ ,WILLIAM ,TRAG] IRONICALLY REM>K$ A DECADE AGO AB\T ! 0/RUGGLE = EXI/5CE0 & ! 0SURVIVAL ( ! FITTE/03 0FEW PEOPLE REALIZE ?AT MUTUAL COOP]ATION BETWE5 DIFF]5T K9DS ( ORGANISMS -- SYMBIOSIS -- IS JU/ AS IMPORTANT1 & ?AT ! 'FITTE/ MAY BE ! ONE ?AT MO/ HELPS ANO!R TO SURVIVE40.<#c#d.> 

,9DE$1 ! CELLUL> /RUCTURE ( ALL MULTICELLUL> ORGANISMS IS ITSELF TE/IMONY TO A SYMBIOTIC >RANGEM5T ?AT R5D]S COMPLEX LIFE-=MS POSSIBLE4 ,! EUK>YOTIC CELL -- A CELL ?AT MAKES UP AN ORGANISM -- IS A HI<LY FUNCTIONAL SYMBIOTIC >RANGEM5T ( ! LESS COMPLEX & MORE PRIMAL PROK>YOTES1 OR S+LE-CELL$ ORGANISMS1 & EVOLV$ 9 AN ANA]OBIC WORLD LONG BE=E \R HI<LY OXYG5AT$ ATMOSPH]E WAS =M$4 ,! WORK ( ,LYNN ,M>GULIS GIVES US REASON TO BELIEVE ?AT EUK>YOTIC FLAGELLA D]IV$ FROM ANA]OBIC SPIRO*ETES2 ?AT MITO*ONDRIA D]IV$ FROM PROK>YOTIC BACT]IA ?AT W]E CAPABLE ( RESPIRATION AS WELL AS F]M5TATION2 & ?AT PLANT *LOROPLA/S D]IV$ FROM BLUE-GRE5 ALGAE 7CYANOBACT]IA74.<#c#e.> 

,IF ,MANFR$ ,EIG5 IS CORRECT ?AT EVOLUTION 0APPE>S TO BE AN 9EVITABLE EV5T1 GIV5 ! PRES5CE ( C]TA9 MATT] ) SPECIFI$ AUTOCATALYTIC PROP]TIES & UND] ! MA9T5ANCE ( ! F9ITE 7FREE7 5]GY FL[ .<SOL> 5]GY.> NECESS>Y TO COMP5SATE = ! /EADY PRODUCTION ( 5]GY10 !N \R V]Y CONCEPT ( MATT] HAS TO BE RADICALLY REVIS$4.<#c#f.> ,! PROSPECT ?AT LIFE & ALL ITS ATTRIBUTES >E LAT5T 9 MATT] AS SU*1 ?AT BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION IS DEEPLY ROOT$ 9 SYMBIOSIS OR MUTUALISM1 SUGGE/S ?AT :AT WE CALL MATT] IS ACTUALLY ACTIVE SUB/ANCE4 

,! TRADITIONAL DUALISM BETWE5 ! LIV+ & NONLIV+ WORLDS1 BETWE5 ORGANISMS & !IR ABIOTIC ECOSY/EMS1 IS BE+ REPLAC$ ) ! MORE *ALL5G+ NOTION ?AT LIFE 0MAKES MU* ( ITS [N 5VIRONM5T10 TO USE ,M>GULIS'S WORDS4 ,FROM AN ECOLOGICAL VIEWPO9T1 9 :I* LIFE IS 9 ITS 5VIRONM5T & NOT ISOLAT$ FROM1 IT1 ! ,WEISSMANNIAN B>RI] ?AT CONV5I5TLY SEP>ATES G5ETIC FROM SOMATIC *ANGES CEASES TO BE MEAN+FUL4 0,C]TA9 PROP]TIES ( ! ATMOSPH]E1 S$IM5TS1 & HYDROSPH]E >E CONTROLL$ BY & = ! BIOSPH]E02 BY COMP>+ LIFELESS PLANETS SU* AS ,M>S & ,V5US ) ! ,E>?1 ,M>GULIS NOTES ?AT ! HI< CONC5TRATION ( OXYG5 9 \R ATMOSPH]E IS ANOMAL\S 9 CONTRA/ ) ! C>BON DIOXIDE ATMOSPH]ES ( O!R PLANETS4 ,MOREOV]1 0! CONC5TRATION ( OXYG5 9 ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E REMA9S CON/ANT 9 ! PRES5CE ( NITROG51 ME?ANE1 HYDROG51 & O!R POT5TIAL REACTANTS40 ,LIFE-=MS1 9 EFFECT1 PLAY AN ACTIVE ROLE 9 MA9TA9+ A RELATIVELY CON/ANT SUPPLY ( FREE OXYG5 MOLECULES 9 ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E4 ,IF ! ANOMALIES ( ! ,E>?'S ATMOSPH]E 0>E F> FROM R&OM10 MU* ! SAME CAN BE SAID = ! TEMP]ATURE ( ! ,E>?'S SURFACE & ! SAL9ITY ( ITS OCEANS1 :OSE /ABILITY SEEMS TO BE A FUNCTION ( LIFE ON ! PLANET4 ,! 0NATURAL SELECTION0 ( ,D>W9IAN EVOLUTION MAY ITSELF BE ! PRODUCT ( LIFE-=MS1 :I* PRESUMABLY FILT] \T SOME G5ETIC *ANGES4.<#c#g.> 

,EV5 ! ,MOD]N ,SYN!SIS1 ! NEO-,D>W9IAN MODEL ( ORGANIC EVOLUTION ?AT HAS BE5 9 =CE S9CE ! E>LY #a#i#dS1 HAS BE5 *ALL5G$ AS TOO N>R[ & P]HAPS TOO ME*ANI/IC 9 ITS \TLOOK4 ,ITS !SIS ( SL[-PAC$ EVOLUTION>Y *ANGE EM]G+ FROM ! 9T]PLAY ( SMALL V>IATIONS1 :I* >E 0SELECT$0 = !IR ADAPTABILITY TO ! 5VIRONM5T1 IS NO LONG] AS T5ABLE AS IT ONCE SEEM$ BAS$ ON ! FOSSIL RECORD4 ,EVOLUTION SEEMS 9/EAD TO HAVE BE5 RA!R MORE SPORADIC1 M>K$ BY OCCASIONAL *ANGES ( CONSID]ABLE RAPIDITY1 !N LONG P]IODS ( /ASIS4 ,! 0,EFFECT ,HYPO!SIS10 ADVANC$ BY ,ELIZABE? ,VRBA1 SUGGE/S ?AT EVOLUTION 9CLUDES AN IMMAN5T /RIV+1 NOT M]ELY R&OM MUTATIONAL *ANGES FILT]$ BY EXT]NAL SELECTIVE FACTORS4 ,AS ONE OBS]V] NOTES1 0,:]EAS SPECIES SELECTION PUTS ! =CES ( *ANGE ON 5VIRONM5TAL CONDITIONS1 ! ,EFFECT ,HYPO!SIS LOOKS TO 9T]NAL P>AMET]S ?AT AFFECT ! RATES ( SPECIATION & EXT9CTION40.<#c#h.> 

,9DE$1 ! !ORY ( SMALL1 GRADUAL PO9T MUTATIONS 7A !ORY ?AT ACCORDS ) ! ,VICTORIAN NOTION ( /RICTLY =TUIT\S EVOLUTION>Y *ANGE1 MU* LIKE ! ,VICTORIAN IMAGE ( ! ECONOMIC M>KETPLACE7 CAN BE *ALL5G$ ON G5ETIC GR\NDS ALONE4 ,NOT ONLY G5ES BUT *ROMOSOMES1 TOO1 MAY BE ALT]$ *EMICALLY & ME*ANICALLY44 ,G5ETIC *ANGES MAY RANGE FROM 0SIMPLE0 PO9T MUTATIONS1 ?R\< JUMP+ G5ES & TRANSPOSABLE ELEM5TS1 TO MAJOR *ROMOSOMAL RE>RANGEM5TS4 ,MAJOR MORPHOLOGICAL *ANGES MAY ?US RESULT FROM MOSAICS ( G5ETIC *ANGE4 ,?IS DYNAMIC RAISES ! 9TRIGU+ POSSIBILITY ( A DIRECTIV5ESS TO G5ETIC *ANGE ITSELF1 NOT SIMPLY A PROMISCU\S & PURELY =TUIT\S R&OMNESS1 & AN 5VIRONM5T L>GELY CREAT$ BY LIFE ITSELF1 NOT BY =CES EXCLUSIVELY EXT]NAL TO IT4 

,NEI!R MY/ICISM NOR AN?ROPOC5TRISM IS 9VOLV$ 9 AN ECOLOGICAL VIEW ?AT ONTOLOGICALLY GRAIDES NATURAL HI/ORY 9TO SOCIAL HI/ORY )\T SACRIFIC+ ! UNITY ( EI!R4 ,NOR IS IT A SUP]NATURAL FALLACY TO ULTIMATELY D]IVE ! HUMAN BRA9 FROM AN ACTIVELY *EMOG5IC UNIV]SE ?AT IS SELF-=M+ & IMMAN5TLY 5TELE*IAL4 ,AL?\< ,HANS ,DRIES* GAVE 5TELE*Y A BAD NAME1 ! CONCEPT D]IVES FROM ,>I/OTLE1 NOT FROM ,DRIES*'S CONFUS$ NEO VITALISM4 

,! FALLACIES ( CLASSICAL ,GREEK COSMOLOGY G5]ALLY LIE LESS 9 ITS E?ICAL ORI5TATION ?AN 9 ITS DUALI/IC VIEW ( NATURE4 ,= ALL ITS EMPHASIS ON SPECULATION AT ! EXP5SE ( EXP]IM5TATION1 ANCI5T COSMOLOGY ]R$ MO/ :5 IT TRI$ TO JO9 ! SELF-ORGANIZ+1 FECUND NATURE IT HAD 9H]IT$ FROM ! ,IONIANS ) A VITALIZ+ =CE ALI5 TO ! NATURAL WORLD ITSELF4 ,! SELF-ORGANIZ+ PROP]TIES ( NATURE W]E REPLAC$ ) ,P>M5IDES' ,DIKE -- LIKE ,B]GSON'S ELAN VITAL1 A LAT5TLY DUALI/IC COSMOLOGY ?AT C\LD NOT TRU/ NATURE TO DEVELOP ON ITS [N SPONTANE\S GR\NDS1 ANY MORE ?AN RUL+ SOCIAL & POLITICAL /RATA TRU/ ! BODY POLITIC TO MANAGE ITS [N AFFAIRS4 

,!SE >*AISMS1 ) !IR !OLOGICAL NUANCES & !IR TI<TLY =MULAT$ TELEOLOGIES1 HAVE BE5 JU/LY VIEW$ AS SOCIALLY REACTION>Y TRAPS4 ,!Y TA9T$ ! WORKS ( ,>I/OTLE & ,HEGEL AS SURELY AS !Y MESM]IZ$ ! M$IEVAL ,S*OOLM54 ,CLASSICAL NATURE PHILOSOPHY ]R$ NOT 9 ITS PROJECT ( TRY+ TO ELICIT AN E?ICS FROM NATURE1 BUT 9 ! SPIRIT ( DOM9ATION ?AT POISON$ IT FROM ! />T ) AN (T5 AU?ORIT>IAN1 SUP]NATURAL >BIT] :O WEI<$ & CORRECT$ ! IMBALANCES OR 09JU/ICES0 ?AT ]UPT$ 9 NATURE4 ,! ANCI5T GODS W]E /ILL WOR%IP$ 9 ! CLASSICAL ]A1 EV5 AFT] ,H]ACLITUS2 !Y HAD TO BE EXORCIZ$ BY ! ,5LI<T5M5T BE=E AN E?ICAL CONT9UUM BETWE5 NATURE & HUMANITY C\LD BE R5D]$ MORE MEAN+FUL & 0DEMOCRATIC40 ,LATE ,R5AISSANCE ?\<T 9ITIAT$ A NEW1 MORE RATIONAL CONNECTION BETWE5 NATURE & HUMANITY4 ,BEG9N+ ) ,GALILEO & ! NEW SCI5TIFIC SOCIETIES ?AT W]E EM]G+1 ! WAY WAS OP5$ TO ! 9CREAS+LY DEMOCRATIC P>TICIPATION ( EV]YONE 9 ! DISCOV]Y ( TRU?4 ,ALL M5 -- & LAT] WOM5 -- C\LD N[ P>TICIPATE 9 UNE>?+ KN[L$GE1 & ! V]ACITY ( ! FACTS !Y DISCOV]$ C\LD BE JUDG$ FREELY BY ! M]ITS ( !IR WORK1 NOT BY !IR SOCIAL /ATUS4 

,TODAY1 WE MAY WELL BE ABLE TO P]MIT NATURE -- NOT ,DIKE1 ,GOD1 ,SPIRIT1 OR AN ELAN VITAL -- TO OP5 ITSELF UP TO US AS ! GR\ND = AN E?ICS ON ITS [N T]MS4 ,CONTEMPOR>Y SCI5CE'S GREATE/ A*IEVEM5T IS ! GR[+ EVID5CE IT PROVIDES ?AT R&OMNESS IS SUBJECT TO A DIRECTIVE ORD]+ PR9CIPLE4 ,MUTUALISM IS A GOOD BY VIRTUE ( ITS FUNCTION 9 FO/]+ ! EVOLUTION ( NATURAL V>IETY & COMPLEXITY4 ,WE REQUIRE NO ,DIKE TO AFFIRM COMMUNITY AS A DESID]ATUM 9 NATURE & SOCIETY4 ,SIMIL>LY1 ! CLAIMS ( FRE$OM >E VALIDAT$ BY :AT ,HANS ,JONAS SO P]CEPTIVELY CALL$ ! 09W>DNESS0 ( LIFE-=MS1 !IR 0ORGANIC ID5TITY0 & 0ADV5TURE ( =M40 ,! EF=T1 V5TURE1 9DE$ SELF-RECOGNITION ?AT EV]Y LIV+ BE+ EX]CISES 9 ! C\RSE ( 0ITS PREC>I\S METABOLIC CONT9UITY0 TO PRES]VE ITSELF REVEALS -- EV5 9 ! MO/ RUDIM5T>Y ( ORGANISMS -- A S5SE ( ID5TITY & SELECTIVE ACTIVITY ?AT ,JONAS APPROPRIATELY CALL$ EVID5CE ( 0G]M9AL FRE$OM40.<#c#i.> 

0,OP5 SY/EMS10 0M9DS10 & 0HOLONS0 MAY EXPLA9 ! DISEQUILIBRIA ?AT *ANGE CYB]NETIC & G5]AL SY/EMS1 BUT WE MU/ 9V>IABLY FALL BACK ON 9H]5T ATTRIBUTES ( SUB/ANCE -- NOTABLY1 ! MOTION1 =M1 & S5SIBILITE ( 0MATT]0 -- TO ACC\NT = !  
DEVELOPM5T ( NATURE T[>D COMPLEXITY1 SPECIALIZATION1 & CONSCI\SNESS4 ,?IS NECESSITY RUNS C\NT] TO EV]Y BIAS ON CURR5T PHILOSOPHY1 :I* W\LD IGNORE ! FACT ( DIRECTIV5ESS OR 5D[ IT ) HUMAN TRAITS LIKE PURPOSIV5ESS :5 IT IS SIMPLY A T5D5CY ?AT 9H]ES 9 ! ORGANIZATION ( SUB/ANCE AS POT5TIALITY4 

,! PRESUPPOSITIONS ,I HAVE MADE H]E >E NOT >BITR>Y4 ,! VALIDITY ( A PRESUPPOSITION MU/ BE TE/$ AGA9/ ! REAL DIALECTIC ( NATURAL DEVELOPM5T -- SUB/ANCE 0FREE & SELF-MOV+ 9 ITS [N PECULI> %APE0 -- & NOT AGA9/ ! 0ATOMIES0 ( DATA & /ATI/ICAL PROBABILITIES ADDUC$ BY EMPIRICAL OBS]VATION4 ,ON ?IS SCORE AT LEA/1 CONTEXTUALI/S LIKE ,:ITEHEAD & ,BATESON >E QUITE S\ND 9 !IR CLAIM ?AT FACTS DO NOT EXI/ ON !IR [N BUT >E ALWAYS RELATIONAL OR 9T]ACTIVE1 TO USE ,DID]OT'S MORE G]M9AL WORD4 

,ADMITT$LY1 ?IS APPROA* TO A NATURE PHILOSOPHY MAY SEEM AS SELF-5CLOS$ AS ! ,KANTIAN APPROA*4 ,BUT ,I HAVE NOT FAULT$ ,KANTIAN1 NEO-,KANTIAN1 OR = ?AT MATT]1 CYB]NETIC & POSITIVI/IC !ORIES = !IR 9T]NAL UNITY OR !IR IMPREGNABILITY TO IMMAN5T CRITICISM4 ,MY OBJECTION TO !M IS !IR CLAIM TO UNIV]SALITY1 S9CE !IR PRESUPPOSITIONS PROVIDE AN 9ADEQUATE FRAMEWORK = UND]/&+ NATURAL HI/ORY & APPREH5D+ ITS E?ICAL IMPLICATIONS4 

,F9ALLY1 ! /UDY ( NATURE EXHIBITS A SELF-EVOLV+ NISUS SO TO SPEAK1 ?AT IS IMPLICITLY E?ICAL4 ,MUTUALISM1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY >E NOT SOLELY HUMAN VALUES OR CONC]NS4 ,!Y APPE>1  
H[EV] G]M9ALLY1 9 L>G] COSMIC OR ORGANIC PROCESSES1 BUT !Y REQUIRE NO ,>I/OTELIAN ,GOD TO MOTIVATE !M1 NO ,HEGELIAN ,SPIRIT TO VITALIZE !M4 ,IF SOCIAL ECOLOGY CAN PROVIDE A COH]5T FOCUS ON ! UNITY ( MUTUALISM1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY AS ASPECTS ( A COOP]ATIVE SOCIETY ?AT IS FREE ( DOM9ATION & GUID$ BY REFLECTION & REASON1 IT WILL HAVE REMOV$ ! DIFFICULTIES ?AT HAVE PLAGU$ NATURALI/IC E?ICS = SO LONG4 ,NO LONG] W\LD A ,C>TESIAN & ,KANTIAN DUALISM LEAVE NATURE 9]T & M9D ISOLAT$ FROM ! WORLD >\ND IT4 ,WE W\LD SEE ?AT M9D1 F> FROM BE+ SUI G5]IS 9 A WORLD ?AT IS :OLLY EXT]NAL TO IT1 HAS A NATURAL HI/ORY ?AT SPANS ! S5SIBILITE ( ! 9ORGANIC & ! CONCEPTUAL CAPACITIES ( ! HUMAN BRA94 ,TO WEAK5 COMMUNITY1 TO >RE/ ! SPONTANEITY ( A SELF-ORGANIZ+ REALITY T[>D EV]-GREAT] COMPLEXITY & RATIONALITY AS NATURE R5D]$ SELF-CONSCI\S1 W\LD BE TO D5Y \R H]ITAGE 9 ITS EVOLUTION>Y PROCESSES & DISSOLVE \R UNIQU5ESS 9 ! WORLD ( LIFE4 

,MUTUALISM1 SELF-ORGANIZATION1 FRE$OM1 & SUBJECTIVITY1 COH]$ BY SOCIAL ECOLOGY'S PR9CIPLES ( UNITY 9 DIV]SITY1 SPONTANEITY1 & NONHI]>*ICAL RELATION%IPS1 >E CON/ITUTIVE ( EVOLUTION'S POT5TIALITIES4 ,ASIDE FROM ! ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITIES !Y CONF] ON \R SPECIES AS ! SELF-REFLEXIVE VOICE ( NATURE1 !Y LIT]ALLY DEF9E US4 ,NATURE DOES NOT 0EXI/0 = US TO USE1 BUT IT MAKES POSSIBLE \R UNIQU5ESS4 ,LIKE ! CONCEPT ( ,BE+1 !SE PR9CIPLES ( SOCIAL ECOLOGY REQUIRE NOT ANALYSIS BUT M]ELY V]IFICATION4 ,!Y >E ! ELEM5TS ( AN E?ICAL ONTOLOGY1 NOT RULES ( A GAME ?AT CAN BE *ANG$ TO SUIT P]SONAL NE$S & 9T]E/S4 

,FROM 3 ,!,AN>*I/,LIBR>Y4ORG4 

,*RONOLOGY 3 
,JANU>Y #b1 #bba 3 ,*APT] #a -- ,ADD$4 
,JANU>Y #a#f1 #bbb 3 ,*APT] #a -- ,UPDAT$4 

 FILE G5]AT$ FROM 3  
HTTP3_/_/REVOLTLIB4COM_/