Agreement with John Holgate

Hi John:

Yes, I think it sounds like we do kinda agree.

The main reason I introduced the point about enzymes being "fooled" by
pharmaceutical molecules (and, of course, by many natural ones, as
well), though, was to emphasize a point that is stressed in the
philosophical literature on biological functions. That is, that
normativity is of the essence. That is, for something to count as a
function in the proper (biological) sense of the word, there is
something that it is supposed to do, something that it can get either
right or wrong. In short, the concept of function entails that of
malfunction (as well as success, or correct function, of course).

I wanted to make this point about function entailing malfunction because
I believe this is where the roots of "purpose" lie in biology (which you
were questioning). And insofar as information, properly speaking, must
be recognized as having a semantic component, and insofar as meaning is
likewise a normative and teleological concept, then I believe that the
roots of information lie in this same knot of problems, as well. In
sum, as I see it, all of our aporiae in theoretical biology revolve
around the ontological status of purpose and value.

Best,

James
Received on Mon Jul 1 15:03:42 2002