Bryan, are you making the literal Gaia arguement? i.e. the Earth is
sentient? I've heard that, but it requires a definition of sentience which
boggles the mind. It has been argued that the Earth has a feed-back system
and is homeostatic. Just conjecture, no data.
Bissell
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: Is Altruism consistent with environmentalsim?
>Bryan,
>
>If you want to say that the planet is an individual as in a single
>unit thats fine with me since there is obviously not two Earths.
>However, your post was about treating the planet as an individual in
>the context of altruism. Thus, I made the assumption that you were
>assigning some sort of human characteristics to the planet. Otherwise
>we could just as easily be talking about a big rock out in the middle
>of the desert. Now I suppose we could treat the rock altruistically
>(how exactly this would be done is not clear to me), but as Steven
>Bissel asked, why?
>
>Also, my main criticism still stands with some simple rewording.
>
>Humans are covered with countless micro-organisms.
>The Earth is covered with countless micro-organisms, therefore the
>planet has some form of human characteristics.
>
>It is still a false analogy.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>---Bryan Hyden <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> steve,
>>
>> if you are going to criticize something that i wrote, the least you
>could do
>> would be to not totally change what i said into something
>different....
>>
>> >Humans are comprised of billions of individual cells.
>> >The planet is comprised of billions of humans, therefore the planet
>is
>> >a human.
>> >
>> >Not quite.
>>
>> this is beyond a horrible summary of what i wrote... bissell said
>that the
>> planet is convered with individual organisms and that therefore it
>could not
>> itself be an individual... i was alluding to the fact that humans
>are
>> covered with countless micro-organisms (and micro is a relative
>> measurement), something which does not stop us from being
>individuals....
>> i never said that earth was a human..... as you say, that would be
>> preposerous... as is your version of what i wrote....
>>
>> bryan
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Steve <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 2:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: Is Altruism consistent with environmentalsim?
>>
>>
>> >Bryan,
>> >
>> >I do believe this is a good example of a false analogy.
>> >
>> >Humans are comprised of billions of individual cells.
>> >The planet is comprised of billions of humans, therefore the planet
>is
>> >a human.
>> >
>> >Not quite.
>> >
>> >Steve
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >---Bryan Hyden wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Not that open,
>> >> >Because it's kinda dumb to suggest that a planet covered with
>> >googols of
>> >> >individual organisms is an individual.
>> >>
>> >> sorry steven, but you did it again... :)
>> >>
>> >> why, just look at us humans.... we are, as you say, "covered with
>> >googols
>> >> of individual organisms" and are still considered individuals,
>> >> individually....
>> >>
>> >> bryan
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Steven Bissell <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 11:24 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: Is Altruism consistent with environmentalsim?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: Bryan Hyden <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> >To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> >Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 8:22 PM
>> >> >Subject: Re: Is Altruism consistent with environmentalsim?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>>Why would you do that?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>steven, you leave yourself wide open! :)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>why not?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>bryan
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Not that open,
>> >> >Because it's kinda dumb to suggest that a planet covered with
>> >googols of
>> >> >individual organisms is an individual.
>> >> >
>> >> >Steven
>> >> >
>> >> >>>>>Almost by definition, "no." There is no way I can think of to
>> >extend
>> >> >>>>>altruism to the planet, that's an individual to individual
>> >action as
>> >> >near
>> >> >>>>as
>> >> >>>>>I can see
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>perhaps i was not clear... i was suggesting that the planet
>may
>> >be
>> >> >viewed
>> >> >>>>as 'an individual'....
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>bryan
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Why would you do that?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Bissell
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >_________________________________________________________
>> >DO YOU YAHOO!?
>> >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|