From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!chx400!bernina!neptune!santas Tue Apr  7 23:22:16 EDT 1992
Article 4719 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:4719 sci.philosophy.tech:2427
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!chx400!bernina!neptune!santas
>From: santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Causes and Goals
Message-ID: <1992Mar25.162011.26274@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>
Date: 25 Mar 92 16:20:11 GMT
References: <1992Mar22.212839.5347@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Mar24.150412.11325@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> <1992Mar25.063222.12590@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Sender: news@neptune.inf.ethz.ch (Mr News)
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)
Lines: 77
Nntp-Posting-Host: spica.inf.ethz.ch


In article <1992Mar25.063222.12590@a.cs.okstate.edu> onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>In article <1992Mar24.150412.11325@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas) writes:

OC:
>For the time being, I believe you have shown that there are NO reasons
>for this discrimination.

Of course not. But if I remember correct you agreed on
Zeleny's statement that living entities like viruses
(I still wait for answers why is the virus defined as something alive)
can be agents, while inorganic elements (like HCl or clouds) are not.

On the other hand, I am given no answer on why are the viruses
the only responsibe for a desease and not, say, the blood cells too.

PS:
>>Are the electrons going after protons?

OC:
>  This is a good question.  I think that this sort of question brings
>about the ultimate distruction of the systems model.  One might be tempted
>to say, "Yes, but you need to think of this in terms of complexity.  Ignore
>the underlying constituents."  The problem is, of course, this simply
>can not be ignored.  Even utilizing a, to borrow Searles term, "sophisticated
>causation" we still must pay strict attention to the constituents.  Ultimately,
>either the systems argument grants some sort of liscence of difference
>between a system of protons-moving to chemicals-moving to cells-moving to
>brains-moving to minds-moving and the constituents themselves, or, they

This sounds like the 

system of molecules-moving to gases-moving to pressure

which is apparently wrong; not all the meanings of HAS-A are the same.
In the one case you mean 'composed of' and on the other
'has the attribute'. A mind is not composed of brains,
but on the other hand I am not sure if the mind (is there any acceptable 
definition for this?) is a brain's attribute.

OC:
>have completely removed meaning from the question itself.  I think that
>the systems argumentation can self-destruct easily particularly whenever
>it looks into a notion of meaning.  HOwever, I have not done a proper
>study of the systems argumentation to further this advance.  Some day,
>as we philosophers say, "some day."  As for now, it
>seems that the systems argument works it self into a dilemma, either
>accept the liscence of difference, accept meaning, and provide  a
>theory impotent of explanatory power, or, deny the difference, rely
>on the constituents, provide explanatory power, and deny meaning.

Instead of 'denying meaning' what about 'redefining meaning'
or simply 'defining meaning' at last?

PS:
>>Since you and M Zeleny agree on this model, I guess, you can explain why.

OC:
>  I think that I have borrowed some of my stuff from Zeleny.  I am not
>sure if this is what Zeleny has in mind.  Further, I am not sure that I
>can explain why.  Further,this may lead to lack of any explanatory power
>when thinking of these things in these terms.

Although Mikhail simply draws a dividing line between agency and its lack (sic)
I have not seen any argumentation from his side on why should one accept 
this division the way it is done.

Philip Santas

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: santas@inf.ethz.ch				 Philip Santas
Mail: Dept. Informatik				Department of Computer Science
      ETH-Zentrum			  Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
      CH-8092 Zurich				       Zurich, Switzerland
      Switzerland
Phone: +41-1-2547391
      


