2 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Is-Ought Problem responses
Selecting 'organization' is itself a choice of aesthetic preference.
It's really not. It's an attempt at a rationally justified account of what makes something alive. You can take issue with the justification, but pretending this is just about feelings is missing the point entirely.
This seems to be an instance of the authors choosing to allow vertebrates to participate in their 'autopoietic unit' malarkey.
They do not allow that multicellular life constitutes a 2nd order autopoeitic unity because they think it doesn't meet the criteria for being an autopoietic unity. I have no idea why you think it all boils down to aesthetic preference.
Am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the fact that they do not try to define life in terms of metabolism. Autopoiesis is what they think is the defining quality of life.
Comment by Quidfacis_ at 26/07/2016 at 04:32 UTC
1 upvotes, 2 direct replies
It's really not. It's an attempt at a rationally justified account of what makes something alive.
What we elect to think of as a rational justification is aesthetic. We choose X to be rational, rather than Y, because of the other data inputs we have chosen to constitute rationality. Rationality is about relations; rationality is logic. The things we elect to put in those relations is aesthetic.
because they think it doesn't meet the criteria for being an autopoietic unity. I have no idea why you think it all boils down to aesthetic preference.
It's an aesthetic preference because "they think it doesn't meet the criteria" is a subjective aesthetic assessment. They elect to decide upon criteria. The criteria are not self-justifying, we choose what criteria count.