X-Message-Number: 5163
From:  (David Stodolsky)
Subject: Re: This and that...
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 95 15:41:21 +0100

Mike Darwin <> writes:
>Before you can define 
> collectivism you first have to define property.  My definition of property 
> is a person's life and all nonprocreative derivatives of that life that are 
> obtained without the use of force or fraud.

Does this distinguish between human and non-human material, 
as a first principle?


Everything offered so far seem to place too heavy a load on the "self"
as a concept. In eastern philosophy, the "self" is considered a concept
of doubtful validity, and one to be avoided, if happiness is to be
achieved. 

Probably a clearer analysis can be based upon a more physically
oriented body system. The immune system has most of the capabilities
of the CNS, such as perception, learning, etc., in fact, it seems  
even to use many of the same neurotransmitters in the same way.
The "self" has had very troublesome history as a concept in immunology.
Some feel it has caused more trouble than its worth.
See:
Prof. Alfred I. Tauber, MD, PhD. (Boston Univ)
The Immune Self: Theory or Metaphor?

This recent book has received quite a big reception, and some reviews
and popular articles have come out recently. They might be a good
place to start. The author gave a few lectures in Copenhagen on his way to
a semiotics conference he was invited to. (Semiotics integrates communication
theory, sociology, social psychology, etc.)

dss


David S. Stodolsky      Euromath Center     University of Copenhagen
   Tel.: +45 38 33 03 30   Fax: +45 38 33 88 80 (C)


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5163