Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T21:00:43.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - The Emergence of Biological Value

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

James Barham
Affiliation:
Trained in classics and history of science, University of Texas at Austin and Harvard University
William A. Dembski
Affiliation:
Baylor University, Texas
Michael Ruse
Affiliation:
Florida State University
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

All the things we think of as paradigmatic cases of design – novels, paintings, symphonies, clothes, houses, automobiles, computers – are the work of human hands guided by human minds. Thus, design might be defined as matter arranged by a mind for a purpose that it values. But this raises the question, what are minds? Presumably, the activity of brains. The problem with this answer, however, is that brains themselves give every appearance of being designed. Most contemporary thinkers view brains as neurons arranged for the purpose of thinking in much the same way that, say, mousetraps are springs and levers arranged for the purpose of killing mice. But if that is so, then who arranged the neurons? Who or what values thinking, and whose purpose does it serve?

It is generally supposed that there are only two ways to answer these questions. One way has come to be known as Intelligent Design. On this view, our brains were designed by other minds existing elsewhere – say, in another galaxy or on another plane of being. But if these other minds are also instantiated in matter, then we have the same problem all over again. If not, then we have an even more difficult problem than the one we started with. To invoke immaterial minds to explain the design of material ones is surely a case of obscurum per obscurius.

Type
Chapter
Information
Debating Design
From Darwin to DNA
, pp. 210 - 226
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albrecht-Buehler, G. 1990. In defense of “nonmolecular” cell biology. International Review of Cytology 120: 191–241CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alon, U., Surette, M. G., Barkai, N., and Leibler, S.. (1999). Robustness in bacterial chemotaxis. Nature 397: 168–171CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alt, W. 1994. Cell motion and orientation: Theories of elementary behavior between environmental stimulation and autopoietic regulation. In Frontiers in Mathematical Biology, ed. S. A. Levin. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 79–101
Anderson, P. W. (1994). More is different. In P. W. Anderson, A Career in Theoretical Physics, pp. 1–4. Singapore: World Scientific. (Originally published in Science 177 (1972): 393–6.)CrossRef
Auyang, S. Y. 1998. Foundations of Complex-System Theories in Economics, Evolutionary Biology, and Statistical Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Barham, J. 1996. A dynamical model of the meaning of information. BioSystems 38: 235–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barham, J. 2000. Biofunctional realism and the problem of teleology. Evolution and Cognition 6: 2–34Google Scholar
Barham, J. 2002. Theses on Darwin. Rivista di Biologia/Biology Forum 95: 115–47Google ScholarPubMed
Barkai, N., and Leibler, S.. 1997. Robustness in simple biochemical networks. Nature 387: 913–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Batterman, R. W. 2002. The Devil in the Details: Asymptotic Reasoning in Explanation, Reduction, and Emergence. New York: Oxford University Press
Cao, T. Y. 1997. Conceptual Developments of 20th Century Field Theories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Cao, T. Y. 1998. Monism, but not through reductionism. In Philosophies of Nature: The Human Dimension, ed. R. S. Cohen and A. I. Tauber, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 39–51
Dembski, W. A. 1998. The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Denbigh, K. G. 1975. An Inventive Universe. New York: Braziller
Depew, D. J., and Weber, B. H.. 1998. What does natural selection have to be like in order to work with self-organization?Cybernetics and Human Knowing 5: 18–31Google Scholar
Eden, M. 1967. Inadequacies of neo-Darwinian evolution as a scientific theory. In Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution, ed. P. S. Moorhead and M. M. Kaplan. Philadelphia: Wistar Institute Press, pp. 5–19
Elsasser, W. M. 1998. Reflections on a Theory of Organisms. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Originally published in 1987.)
Flyvbjerg, H., P. Bak, M. H. Jensen, and K. Sneppen. 1995. A self-organized critical model for evolution. In Modelling the Dynamics of Biological Systems, ed. E. Mosekilde and O. G. Mouritsen. Berlin: Springer, pp. 269–88
Frauenfelder, H., Wolynes, P. G., and Austin, R. H.. 1999. Biological physics. Reviews of Modern Physics 71: S419–S430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fröhlich, F., and G. J. Hyland. 1995. Fröhlich coherence at the mind-brain interface. In Scale in Conscious Experience, ed. J. King and K. H. Pribram. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 407–38
Georgi, H. 1989. Effective quantum field theories. In The New Physics, ed. P. Davies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 446–57
Gordon, R. 1999. The Hierarchical Genome and Differentiation Waves. 2 vols. Singapore: World Scientific
Ho, M.-W. 1997. Towards a theory of the organism. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science 32: 343–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, M.-W. 1998. The Rainbow and the Worm: The Physics of Organisms, 2nd ed. Singapore: World Scientific. (Originally published in 1993.)
Ho, M.-W., Haffegee, J., Newton, R., Zhou, Y.-M., Bolton, J. S., and Ross, S.. 1996. Organisms as polyphasic liquid crystals. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics 41: 81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochachka, P. W. 1999. The metabolic implications of intracellular circulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 96: 12233–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Icke, V. 1995. The Force of Symmetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Jackson, R. C. 1993. The kinetic properties of switch antimetabolites. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 85: 539–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jain, S., and Krishna, S.. 2001. A model for the emergence of cooperation, interdependence, and structure in evolving networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (USA) 98: 543–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeong, H., Tombor, B., Albert, R., Oltvai, Z. N., and Barabási, A.-L.. 2000. The large-scale organization of metabolic networks. Nature 407: 651–4Google ScholarPubMed
Jonas, H. 1982. The Phenomenon of Life: Toward a Philosophical Biology. Chicago: Phoenix Books/University of Chicago Press. (Originally published in 1966.)
Jonker, C. M., Snoep, J. L., Treur, J., Westerhoff, H. V., and Wijngaards, W. C. A.. 2002 Putting intentions into cell biochemistry: An artificial intelligence perspective. Journal of Theoretical Biology 214: 105–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, S. A. 1993. The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press
Kirschner, M., Gerhart, J., and Mitchison, T.. 2000. Molecular “vitalism.”Cell 100: 17–88CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lauffenburger, D. A., and Horwitz, A. F.. 1996. Cell migration: a physically integrated molecular process. Cell 84: 359–69CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laughlin, R. B., Lonzarich, G. G., Monthoux, P., and Pines, D.. 2001. The quantum criticality conundrum. Advances in Physics 50: 361–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laughlin, R. B., and Pines, D.. 2000. The theory of everything. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97: 28–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laughlin, R. B., Pines, D., Schmalian, J., Stojkovic, B. P., and Wolynes, P.. 2000. The middle way. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97: 32–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Layzer, D. 1990. Cosmogenesis: The Growth of Order in the Universe. New York: Oxford University Press
Lecomte du Noüy, P. 1948. The Road to Reason. New York: Longmans, Green. (Originally published as L'homme devant la science. Paris: Flammarion, 1939.)
Li, K.-H. 1992. Coherence in physics and biology. In Recent Advances in Biophoton Research and Its Applications, ed. F.-A. Popp, K.-H. Li, and Q. Gu. Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 113–55
Loewenstein, W. R. 1999. The Touchstone of Life: Molecular Information, Cell Communication, and the Foundations of Life. New York: Oxford University Press
Mayr, E. 1982. The Growth of Biological Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Millikan, R. G. 1998. In defense of proper functions. In Nature's Purposes: Analyses of Function and Design in Biology, ed. C. Allen, M. Bekoff, and G. Lauder. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press, pp. 295–312. (Originally published in Philosophy of Science, 56 (1989): 288–302.)
Monod, J. 1972. Chance and Necessity. New York: Vintage. (Originally published as Le hasard et la nécessité. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1970.)
Moreno Bergareche, A., and Ruiz-Mirazo, K.. 1999. Metabolism and the problem of its universalization. BioSystems 49: 45–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, E. 1998. Teleology revisited. In Nature's Purposes: Analyses of Function and Design in Biology, ed. C. Allen, M. Bekoff, and G. Lauder. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press, pp. 197–240. (Originally published in Journal of Philosophy 76 (1977): 261–301.)
New, M. H., and Pohorille, A.. 2000. An inherited efficiencies model of non-genomic evolution. Simulation Practice and Theory 8: 99–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattee, H. H. 1982. Cell psychology: An evolutionary approach to the symbol-matter problem. Cognition and Brain Theory 5: 325–41Google Scholar
Pattee, H. H. 2001. The physics of symbols: bridging the epistemic cut. BioSystems 60: 5–21CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petty, H. R., and Kindzelskii, A. L.. 2001. Dissipative metabolic patterns respond during neutrophil transmembrane signaling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 98: 3145–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polanyi, M. 1969. Life's irreducible structure. In his Knowing and Being. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 225–39. (Originally published in Science 160 (1968): 1308–12.)
Pollack, G. H. 2001. Cells, Gels and the Engines of Life. Seattle, WA: Ebner and Sons
Ravasz, E., Somera, A. L., Mongru, D. A., Oltvai, Z. N., and Barabási, A.-L.. 2002 Hierarchical organization of modularity in metabolic networks. Science 297: 1551–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, R. 1991. Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life. New York: Columbia University Press
Schoffeniels, E. 1976. Anti-Chance. Oxford: Pergamon. (Originally published as L'anti-hasard, 2nd ed. Paris: Gauthier-Villars, 1975.)
Schrödinger, E. 1992. What is life? In his What Is Life? with Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–90. (Originally published in 1944.)
Schweber, S. S. 1997. The metaphysics of science at the end of a heroic age. In Experimental Metaphysics, ed. R. S. Cohen, M. Horne, and J. Stachel. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, pp. 171–98
Segré, D., Ben-Eli, D., and Lancet, D.. 2000. Compositional genomes: Prebiotic information transfer in mutually catalytic noncovalent assemblies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97: 4112–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Srere, P. A. 1994. Complexities of metabolic regulation. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 19: 519–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Srere, P. A. 2000. Macromolecular interactions: Tracing the roots. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 25: 150–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Surrey, T., Nédélec, F., Liebler, S., and Karsenti, E.. 2001. Physical properties determining self-organization of motors and microtubules. Science 292: 1167–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thirring, W. 1995. Do the laws of nature evolve? In What Is Life? The Next Fifty Years, ed. M. P. Murphy and L. A. J. O'Neill. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 131–6
Unger, P. 2002. Free will and scientiphicalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65: 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitiello, G. 2001. My Double Unveiled: The Dissipative Quantum Model of Brain. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Walleczek, J. (ed.) 2000. Self-Organized Biological Dynamics and Nonlinear Control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Watterson, J. G. 1997. The pressure pixel – unit of life?BioSystems 41: 141–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitesides, G. M., and Grzybowski, B.. 2002. Self-assembly at all scales. Science 295: 2418–21CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, L. 1998. Functions. In Nature's Purposes: Analyses of Function and Design in Biology, ed. C. Allen, M. Bekoff, and G. Lauder, Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press, pp. 51–78. (Originally published in Philosophical Review 82 (1973): 139–68.)
Wu, T.-M. 1994. Fröhlich's theory of coherent excitation – a retrospective. In Bioelectrodynamics and Biocommunication, ed. M.-W. Ho, F.-A. Popp, and U. Warnke. Singapore: World Scientific, pp. 387–409
Yates, F. E. 1994. Order and complexity in dynamical systems: Homeodynamics as a generalized mechanics for biology. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 19: 49–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, T.-M., Huang, Y., Simon, M. I., and Doyle, J.. 2000. Robust perfect adaptation in bacterial chemotaxis through integral feedback control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97: 4649–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yockey, H. P. 1992. Information Theory and Molecular Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Zhou, T., Carlson, J. M., and Doyle, J.. 2002. Mutation, specialization, and hypersensitivity in highly optimized tolerance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 99: 2049–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×