> Terry:
> >They also speak about the "wisdom" of nature
Damien:
>(Nature) = Run time + computational space.
snip(criticism of the ability/adequacy of humans to sufficiently model their
world in order to predict the outcomes of potential actions.)
snip(advice to intervening, manipulating humans to heed the 'wisdom of
nature' as man takes over the tiller.)
>I was trying to explicate what it *is* about`nature' that distinguishes its
processes and products from human `designed culture'.
I think that you are looking for something that doesn't exist on the meta
level. Humanity as a subset of nature is learning the ropes of directed
evolution. Attempts to improve upon natural-selection-after-the-fact by
incorporating man's simulation/mimc capabilities will, hopefully, minimize
or reduce the number of unsuccessful (resource-depleting) 'adaptive'
attempts. The compression in TAT (turn-around-time) from implementation
until outcome will result in more drastic risk-reward gradients.
>...it often makes a lot of sense to give priority to the former (nature)
snip(nature has a proven track record running the entire earth ecosystem.
man has only a few paltry simulations.)
>...I'm asserting that some such implicit analysis underlies
many people's preference for `nature' over `human constructions', ..
(however) most people are only too eager to intervene in the world without
having a clue what they're doing...
the dichotomous impact/influence of time? Nature's relative time frame
seeming rather slow and plodding. Therefore the result of natural selection
has little averaged relevance to any singular being. However, when the time
lapse
between cause-and-effect is dramatically compressed, the impact on the
individual (whose lifespan is limited) is considerable.
and then there is that all-important bugaboo: Responsibility. Nature-caused
disasters are the result of unavoidable fate. Man-caused disasters are
'obviously' due to failure on the part of the organism or out-and-out evil
intentionality.
I don't know. Try to use game theory to forecast the alternate payoffs.
Would you rather go head-to-head in a PD matrix with nature or humanity?
Wouldn't you prefer an antagonist that utilizes memory?
ct
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:37 MDT