Archive for setembro 21st, 2011

Richard Dawkins no New York Times e o Parecer da Matrix/DNA

quarta-feira, setembro 21st, 2011

A Knack for Bashing Orthodoxy

(Uma Habilidade para Atacar Ortodoxia)

The New York Times

(Observação dêste autor: Apesar de ser curioso intelectualmente à discussão entre mentes mais letradas, não tenho tempo e não é minha prioridade a questão entre religiosos e ateístas porque considero ambos no reino da metafisica quando estou mais necessitado de informações sôbre fatos reais naturais. A cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA sugere que nosso corpo e o Universo material perceptível são produções naturais, não detecto nada super-natural nos modêlos, portanto, a metafisica fica para alguma possivel futura ocasião de ócio. Quanto à abstrata dimensão dos nossos pensamentos, reunidos num conjunto que denominamos “mente”, existe uma porta aberta para a possibilidade de alguma fenomenologia metafisica, porem, como disse, essa dimensão perde em prioridade agora para a dimensão da matéria aqui e agora. Portanto, celebridades intelectuais como Richard Dawkins que trazem à tona a palavra “Ciência”, mas que impregnam estes toques com grande cobertura metafisica atrapalham meu estudo, por isso ignoro-os e aos seus livros na maior parte das vêzes. O post a seguir confirma o que penso e reforça o que deve ser minha atitude:

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/science/20dawkins.html?sort=newest
399. Mario Latendresse
menlo park, ca
September 21st, 2011
12:27 am
Dawkins’ books are quite boring and I have never learned any science from them. He has an ax to grind and that gets very annoying. Which new ideas has he brought forward in the field of science? I do not see any. )

Comentário pela Matrix/DNA postado no NYT, nos comentários que seguem o artigo:

Dawkins iniciou sua militância intelectual quando descobriu que poderia opor a idéia da competição egoísta contra a estabelecida preferência pela idéia da cooperação altruísta. A seguir expomos a resposta da nova Teoria da Matrix/DNA:

O que é verdade? Qual é a real caracteristica dos seres vivos que fomenta a evolução?
O altruísmo individual projetando-se como cooperação no grupo, ou o egoísmo individual projetando-se na competição dentro e fora do grupo?

Vejamos o que sugere a experiência da História Natural Universal:

1) A macroevolução universal se apresentou composta de micro-ciclos: … ciclo do sistema atômico, ciclo do sistema astronomico, ciclo do sistema biológico, ciclo do sistema consciente.
2) O micro-ciclo evolucionario do sistema biológico foi composto de outros micro-ciclos: … ciclo dos micro-organismos, ciclo dos répteis, dos mamiferos.
3) Cada micro-ciclo de espécies do sistema biológico apresentou o seguinte enrêdo:

1) Existe uma espécie no tôpo da evolução dentre todas as espécies;
2) Existe um individuo ou um sub-grupo no topo da evolução dentro da espécie que está no tôpo da evolução dentre tôdas espécies; Ex: As familias Rotchild, Rockfeller, na espécie humana.
3) Quem está no tôpo da evolução conserva e se acomoda (super-especialismo: fecha as portas à evolução); Ex: dinossauros, leões, baleias, águias. Republicanos?
4) A entropia ataca o que se acomoda; Ex: Rei Luis XV e familia na França, Elite do Império Romano, Egipcio. LUCA
5) A entropia elimina a forma acomodada no tôpo e a fôrça da evolução retorna buscando a forma mais evoluida a seguir que se mantem na necessidade aberta à evolução; Ex: descarta o dinossauro e retorna ao lagarto para transforma-lo no mamifero.
6) A entropia causa o caos para todos sobreviventes. EX: era glacial, etc.
7) O caos produz a competição e faz expressar o egoísmo individual, e mesmo do grupo sôbre outros grupos;
8) A competição se soma ao caos contra todos. O ponto maximo do caos&competição na espécie humana foi a Segunda Guerra Mundial; Tem inicio o despertar pelo desejo da ordem;
9) A cooperação substitui a competição. O estado de ordem cresce enquanto o de caos diminui;
10) O estado de ordem é estabelecido. No tôpo da evolução os vencedores se acomodam e conservam; fecham as portas à evolução;
11) A entropia ataca; recomeça o estado de caos.

Portanto cada ciclo é dividido em três fases: caos, equilibrio transitivo, ordem.

Resultado: Eu não entendo porque essa controvérsia entre um grupo que elege Cooperação e Altruísmo contra outro que elege Competição e Egoísmo, se ambas as coisas são relativas às fases da evolução e existem e em doses iguais.

xxxxxx

Tradução para postar no NYT:

Dawkins began his intellectual fight when discovered that could oppose selfish competition against the stablished preference for altruistic cooperation. The following is the response from the new Theory of Matrix/DNA:

What is truth? What is the real characteristic of living things that promotes evolution?
Individual altruism projecting itself as group cooperation, or individual egoism projecting into the competition within and outside the group?

Let’s see what suggests the experience of the Universal Natural History:

1) The universal macroevolution is presented composed of micro-cycles: … cycle of atomic system, astronomical system cycle, cycle of the biological system, cycle of the conscious system;
2) The micro-evolutionary cycle of the biological system was composed of other micro-cycle: … cycle of micro-organisms, the cycle of reptiles, mammals;
3) Each micro-cycle of species of the biological system presented the following scenario:

1) There is an evolution of the species at the top among all species;
2) There is an individual or a sub-group at the top of evolution within species that is on top of evolution among all species; Ex: The Rotchild and Rockefeller families in human specie .
3) Who is at the top of the evolution preserves and settles (super-specialism: closes the door to evolution); Ex: dinosaurs, lions, whales, eagles. Republicans?
4) The entropy attacks what sits; Ex: King Louis XV and family in France, Elite of the Roman, Egyptian Empire.
5) Entropy eliminates the form staying on top of the evolution and returns seeking below the specie less evolved and in need that keeps itself open to changes; EX: Evolution drops from dinosaur and returns to lizard to transform it in the mammal;
6) Entropy causes chaos for all survivors. EX: ice age, etc..
7) The chaos produces competition and does express the individual egoism, and even the group egoism over other groups;
8) The competition adds to the chaos against all. The peak of the chaos & competition in humans was the Second World War; Begins awakening the desire for order;
9) Cooperation replaces competition. The state of order grows as the chaos decreases;
10) The state of order is established. At the top the winners will accommodate being conservative and safe; They closes the door to evolution;
11) The entropy attacks, resumes order to the state of chaos.

Thus each cycle is divided into three stages: chaos, transitive equillibrium, order.

Result: I do not understand why this dispute between a group that elects Cooperation and Altruism against another who elects Competition and selfishness, if both are related to the phases of evolution and exists in equal doses.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Segundo Comentário Postado pela Matrix/DNA:

NYT: Genes, he says, try to maximize theur chance for survival”

Nope. Dawkins has brilliant insights but he did a desservice to evolution of human moral code. Genes does not knows about death, their future death, so, they do nothing for survival. As primitive molécules, they search food and the best physical acomodation. That’s all they do. The production of proteins are a sub-product from their alimentation. About genes, there is no selfhness neither altruism, there is determinism. Human beings are councious about death, they adds the search for survival. The less intellectually evolved search its individual survival, applying competition andbeing selfish against its specie and everything else. The most intellectually advanced discovers that survival is better reached if join in society. Selfish competition begans being changed for altruistic cooperation.

The BBC documentaries of that time were better for the evolution of human kind than the book “The Selfish Gene”.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Resposta a meu comentário:

426. Sereno
413. Louis Charles Morelli.

I would tell you that Dawkins uses “genes try to maximize their chances of survival” as a figure of speech. He makes this clarification in “The Selfish Gene” quite carefully. I also take issue with your jump from “selfish gene” to “thus selfish individuals.” The selfish gene is just about whether the unit of selection is truly the organism or if it could be the genes. Then starts showing how focusing on genes helps explain a lot of stuff. However, the figure of speech allowed a lot of phrases that have been mistaken by both the scientific community and the general public for no bad reason. They sound preposterous if we forget that it is figure of speech. Some have taken the figure quite literally as true though, and talk very seriously about evil “selfish machines” or other “selfish memes” trying to take over the world. Thus worsening this misunderstanding.

Anyway, the idea is that even altruism is something that can be explained if it maximizes the probabilities for reproduction/copying/whatever of the genes behind this behaviour, which it does. It also explains a lot of behaviours and phenotypes that would remain perplexing otherwise. The idea behind the selfish gene, once understood, is very helpful, and has indeed influenced the thoughts of evolutionary biologists.

Read the book. read also “Genome, the autobiography of a species in 23 chapters” (not by Dawkins, but shows a few examples of the power of the selfish gene paradigm to explain some interesting phenotypes, and it is a beauty of a book).

See ya.

xxxxxxx

Minha resposta à resposta acima:
Your Submitted Comment
Louis Charles Morelli

Location

New York, NY

Comment

426. Sereno

“I would tell you that Dawkins uses \”genes try to maximize their chances of survival\” as a figure of speech… I also take issue with your jump from \”selfish gene\” to \”thus selfish individuals.\”

But… it was what really happened!

NYT: “The moral implications proved deeply troubling, suggesting that altruism disguised selfish, gene-driven behavior. “Many readers experienced the book as a psychic trauma,”…

So, are we selfish and due our genes?

The Matrix/DNA Theory: “Universal Macro-Evolution is a whole composed by cycles which are composed by micro-cycles and so on. Each cycle has the same scenario: a) begins with the state of chaos due the entropy attacking the last evolved system that accommodated into super-specialism (like Earth’s biosphere is the chaos state from the decaying astronomic ordered state); In this chaos there is domination of competition and individual selfishness. b) The suffering under chaos leads the individuals to wish the ordered state (equilibrium transition). c) A specie in internal ordered state is allocated at the top of evolution, (altruism and cooperation) and begins the accommodation into super-specialism which triggers entropy again and new cycle.

Thus, selfishness/competition and altruism/cooperation exists at equal doses.

I think that Dawkins made a good service debunking the supremacy of altruism/cooperation over the human moral code, but he did a disservice bringing on the supremacy of selfishness/competition. We have the domination and war from corporations today due this kind of world vision.

By the way, as a researcher myself, I thanks the informations about the evidences of selfish gene over natural phenomena. Any links? Thanks.

See ya.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Inicio da análise do Artigo:

1) Cooperation x Competition:

NYT: ” … the predominant popular view of evolution was that animals and insects worked together, albeit uncounciously, and thatnatural selection acted on undividuals to do what was good for their species. Cooperation, again unconscious, seemed woven (tecida, interpenetrada) in nature.

Examples of cooperation cited by BBC in those times:

1)The dung beetle…
2) The male deer fight…

Dawkins says: ” That sort of thinking was pretty dominant in the culture. And it’s plain wrong. I wanted to correct that ubiquitous ( estando ou parecendo estar presente em todos os lugares o tempo todo)misanderstanding”.

O que êle pensou estar errado? O que êle tinha em mente como certo? A resposta vem…

“Genes try to maximize their chance of survival. The succesful ones crawl down ( rastejam por baixo) through the generations. The losers, and their hosts, die off. A gene for helping the group could not persist if it endangered the survival of the individual.”

2) Altruísmo x Egoísmo

E assim ele chegou ao “selfish gene”, e descobriu que esta metafora era uma grande frase de efeito no publico. E explorou a reação publica.

Ele trouxe a idéia de que o altruismo na cooperação é aparente, apenas disfarça o egoísmo.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Obs.: No quadro dos comentários não coube o texto devido excesso de palavras. Abaixo está como foi dividido o texto para o caso de ter que postar novamente:

Post 2: Primeira parte:

Dawkins began his intellectual fight when discovered that could oppose selfish competition against the stablished preference for altruistic cooperation. The following is the response from the new Theory of Matrix/DNA:

What is truth? What is the real characteristic of living things that promotes evolution?

Individual altruism projecting itself as group cooperation, or individual egoism projecting into the competition within and outside the group?

Let’s see what suggests the experience of the Universal Natural History:

1) The universal macroevolution is presented composed of micro-cycles: … cycle of atomic system, astronomical system cycle, cycle of the biological system, cycle of the conscious system;
2) The micro-evolutionary cycle of the biological system was composed of other micro-cycle: … cycle of micro-organisms, the cycle of reptiles, mammals;
3) Each micro-cycle of species of the biological system presented the following scenario:

1) There is an evolution of the species at the top among all species;
2) There is an individual or a sub-group at the top of evolution within species that is on top of evolution among all species; Ex: The Rotchild and Rockefeller families in human specie .
3) Who is at the top of the evolution preserves and settles (super-specialism: closes the door to evolution); Ex: dinosaurs, lions, whales, eagles. Republicans?
4) The entropy attacks what sits; Ex: King Louis XV and family in France, Elite of the Roman, Egyptian Empire.
5) Entropy eliminates the form staying on top of the evolution and returns seeking below the specie less evolved and in need that keeps itself open to changes; EX: Evolution drops from dinosaur and returns to lizard to transform it in the mammal;
6) Entropy causes chaos for all survivors. EX: ice age, etc..
7) The chaos produces competition and does express the individual egoism, and even the group egoism over other groups;
8) The competition adds to the chaos against all. The (following)

Post 1 – segunda parte:

(…) peak of the chaos & competition in humans was the Second World War; Begins awakening the desire for order;
9) Cooperation replaces competition. The state of order grows as the chaos decreases;
10) The state of order is established. At the top the winners will accommodate being conservative and safe; They closes the door to evolution;
11) The entropy attacks, resumes order to the state of chaos.

Thus each cycle is divided into three stages: chaos, transitive equillibrium, order.

Result: I do not understand why this dispute between a group that elects Cooperation and Altruism against another who elects Competition and selfishness, if both are related to the phases of evolution and exists in equal doses.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx