>However, there has never been any evidence for the theory and tons against.
i was hoping not to get the former discussion about the earth confused with
this discussion about Gaia.... since i'm largely ignorant of the Gaia
hypothesis, i cannot argue reasonably either way.... however i can make a
case for my vastly simplified version.... presently, my main assertion is
that there is no way to prove one way or another if the earth is a sentient
individual... how can you say that there have been tons of evidence against
it (if indeed that is what you were saying; again, i think the arguments
were getting mixed)?
bryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Bissell <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Saturday, December 05, 1998 10:41 AM
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: Friday, December 04, 1998 11:20 PM
>Subject: Re: Is Altruism consistent with environmentalsim?
>
>
>>>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
>>
>>hi SB, i'm only vaguely familiar with the concept of Gaia, so i couldn't
>>presume to be making a 'literal' argument for the concept... if you have
>>any web links in regards to Gaia, i'd be interested in reading more about
>>it... and btw, i LOVE things that boggle the mind.... they are the best
>>kinds of things... :)
>>
>>bryan
>>
>
>
>Most of the Gaia stuff is crap, IMO. I heard Dr. Lynn Margulis talk about
>the biological basis for the theory in Chicago a few years ago and I
believe
>she and her son, Julian Sagan (son of Carl) have a book on it, but haven't
>read it.
>
>The New Age Movement has jumped on this big time and so have some
feminists.
>If it weren't for Margulis and a couple of other writers, I'd be tempted to
>ignore the idea. The concept of a "super-organism" was popular among early
>ecologists, that was the original idea behind the concept of "communities."
>However, there has never been any evidence for the theory and tons against.
>Based on Popper's falsification principle, very few ecologists take it
>seriously anymore.
>
>I've read Lovelock's book and it is interesting speculation, but it's just
>that.
>
>If you can find a copy of Eugene Marais' "Soul of the White Ant," it is
>worth reading about the concept of "super-organism." I'm sure others on the
>list know more about Gaia than I, and I remain very skeptical.
>
>Bissell
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|