'The earth as a living organism' is the title of an essay by James E.
Lovelock. There is a brief history of the idea in this essay. "The idea that
the Earth is alive may be as old as humankind." James Hutton, before the
Royal Society of Edinburgh [considered the father of modern geology] said
the Earth is a superorganism and that its proper study would be physiology.
In later times the author William Golding in a personal communication with
Lovelock (1970) suggested using the name Gaia to name the hypothesis that
supposed the Earth to be alive."

The hypotheis is based on organismic and ecological processes that appear to
be able to regulate atmospheric concentrations of moisture and gases,
keeping temperatures even and mild and humidity high. A model called the
Daisy model was constructed to predict if the hypothesis could be
substantiated using dark and light plants on an imaginary planet. The model
does show that plants can keep a planet warm and comfortable and therefore
provides predictive abilities as to the homeostatic atmospheric and
hydrospheric properties of "Mother Earth". Indeed the atmospheric
concentrations of C02 are highly regulated by plants.

On a final important point. James Lovelock agrees that altruism can be
extended to the earth, or more accurately the earths' altruism is extended
to her individual organisms.

"A geophysical system always begins with the action of an individual
organism. If the this action happens to be locally beneficial to the
environement, then it can spread until eventually a global altruism results.
Gaia always operates like this to achieve her altruism. There is no
foresight and planning involved." James Lovelock In_Biodiveristy. Edited by
E.O. Wilson, National Academy of Science.

Jon




At 08:41 AM 12/4/1998 -0800, you wrote:
>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
>
>
>
        



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%