"It manifests itself in the infinite creativity of the Universe."
"It's a new paradigm of knowledge that exceeds the spell of Galileo"
02/24/2010 - LASTAMPA.it - \u200b\u200bSCIENCE .
Four hundred and one years after the first observation of the Moon performed by Galileo, it's time to "break his spell." It is not a neo-inquisitor to explain, but the opposite is Stuart Kauffman, a biologist and complexity theory, a perfect example of celebrities made in the USA. She wrote "Reinventing the Sacred 'and colleagues propose a conceptual earthquake, based on the theorem of a scientific pantheist god, identified with the impetuous metamorphosis of everything from microbes to galaxies. Professor, because science "classic" is not enough and would need a change of perspective?
"Why me, inspired my near-namesake Gordon Kaufman, a theologian at Harvard now has the only idea that theological sense - already claimed a decade ago - is giving up the concept of a supernatural god and replace with what the Universe is naturally creative. I came to the same conclusion, but through science. "
. From religion to the laboratory: how is it possible?
"With a battle against the standard view that has emerged from Newton onwards, reductionism: given a set of laws, such as those of celestial mechanics, everything is in relation to those laws. And 'the dominant view, which did not fail even with the advent of quantum mechanics and, therefore, with Bohr and Schroedinger, up to great minds like Steven Weinberg. If they are correct, the universe can not be creative. My essay, however, supports a theory radically different, breaking, precisely, the Galilean spell is not true that everything that happens to be describable by natural laws. "
. Many scientists disagree: it can give an example?
"I will do with a question: you can imagine in advance all the pre-Darwinian adaptations of humans? ".
.
His answer is "no" dry, right? "Indeed. Think of the heart. Its obvious function is to pump blood, but you can add that also emits sounds regular beats. So Darwin, however, argue that it is not a function. The heart was chosen to circulate the blood and it is this ability to have conferred a selective advantage to organisms with a heart. Here's my point, which stems from Darwin himself: the thumping sound could be a "step further" but in a different environment from what we know and, therefore, we are talking about a pre-adaptation, a transformation which can not yet predict the outcome of evolution. And 'what in the twentieth century has been termed "exaptation". "
.
This refers to the alleged inability of the selection of "governing" the incipient stages of complex structures? 'E' as well. Another example is the swim bladder of fish. Palentologi I argue that began as a pre-adaptation to fish with lungs and, therefore, the organ developed in a later stage, when water and air are mixed. And therefore my questions are two. First, we are witnessing the emergence of a function that did not exist? Yes, the stabilization in water. Second: it has helped change the ways in which the biosphere has evolved? Yes, certainly. They were created many new fish species. And consegenza has also changed the history of the universe and that is where we return to the crucial question, as I mentioned before: it was possible to foresee all the pre-Darwinian adaptations of all organizations that exist today? The answer is no! You can not predict the emergence of the bladder from the physical, let alone one can simulate the evolution of the biosphere: not only do not know what will happen, nor what may happen. And this is where I come to the conclusion. "
. The explain: think so to re-establish contact between science and faith that now seems hopelessly broken?
"If we define" natural law "the description of due process, may exist to explain the emergence of the swim bladder? No. His show does not violate any law, yet at the same time goes beyond it. That's the point of my essay: the unfolding of the universe is not completely describable by the laws "Standard" and is why reductionism is inadequate. It does not explain the innate creativity that animates nature that surrounds us and this applies not only to biology, but also, for example, history or the economy. "
.
The reaction of his colleagues who seem to these provocations? "Science is not able to know everything and this inability to deduct breaks the barriers between science and art, and any other manifestation of thought. Science is only one of the tools of knowledge in a world of which we ignore the results. The result is profound: there is need a second Enlightenment which takes into account the different aspects of our humanity and contribute to a global civilization different from today, able to oppose fundamentalism. And I'm not referring to a single homogeneous reality, but an ecology of civilization that coevolve together and share a sense of sacredness that goes beyond the adoration of a limited rationality. God is the creativity of the universe, in which we are immersed and to which we belong. "
. GABRIELE BECCARIA
.
Who is Stuart Kauffman Biologist
ROLE: You PROFESSOR TO TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT
0 comments:
Post a Comment