Conversation
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
A Conversation on Ecologic Logic
Participants:
YM Sarma — proposing the ecological/emotional paradigm
Gregory Bateson — systems thinker and anthropologist
Maurice Merleau-Ponty — philosopher of embodied perception
Jakob von Uexküll — biologist and pioneer of Umwelt theory
Humberto Maturana — biologist and co-founder of autopoiesis
Francisco Varela — biologist, cognitive scientist and co-founder of autopoiesis
Lynn Margulis — evolutionary biologist and champion of symbiosis
Donna Haraway — philosopher of science and theorist of relational “making-with”
Opening
Sarma:
I have been saying that we are suffering from a Cartesian disease. You continue to ask me whether my propositions are scientifically established facts. But I am asking a prior question: Who established that Cartesian verification is the only legitimate way of knowing Nature?
Nature does not operate according to our laboratories. Nature operates ecologically. I call this ecologic logic, or emotional logic.
Bateson:
I understand your challenge. My own work repeatedly questioned the separation between the organism and its environment. The unit of survival is not necessarily the isolated organism. It may be the organism-in-environment.
You are therefore asking us to change the unit of thought.
Sarma:
Exactly. If I isolate the tiger from the forest, I can study the tiger mechanically. But I have removed the very relationships through which the tiger exists.
Uexküll:
And this is close to my idea of the Umwelt. Every organism inhabits a meaningful perceptual world. A tick does not inhabit the same world as a human being. What matters is not merely the physical environment but the environment as experienced and acted upon by the organism.
Sarma:
Then Nature is already communicating with every organism.
Uexküll:
Yes—but I would be careful with the word “communicating.” It is not necessarily human language or conscious intention. It is a structured relationship between organism and surroundings.
Sarma:
That qualification is acceptable to me. I call that relationship emotional communication because I am using emotion in the wider sense of feeling, sensing and responding.
The Cartesian Observer
Merleau-Ponty:
Your criticism of Cartesianism interests me. The Cartesian picture tends to establish a subject here and an object there. But perception is embodied. We do not first become detached observers and then enter the world.
Sarma:
That is precisely my point. I am not looking at Nature. I am Nature looking through me.
Merleau-Ponty:
That is a provocative formulation. The body is indeed not simply an object possessed by consciousness. We experience the world through our bodily participation in it.
Bateson:
And once you understand that, the distinction between “inside” and “outside” becomes less absolute. Information circulates through relationships.
Sarma:
Then my emotional logic is not opposed to rationality. It is a larger rationality in which relationship itself becomes evidence.
Bateson:
I would say that carefully. Relationship can provide knowledge, but it can also deceive us. Yet your larger point is sound: detached analysis can miss patterns that become visible only when relationships are considered.
The Zygote and Nature's Policy
Sarma:
Let us come to my central metaphor. I say that the policy of life begins with the zygote. DNA carries inherited developmental information, mitochondria participate in cellular energy metabolism, and the developing organism continuously regulates itself.
I call this Nature's audit.
Maturana:
The word “audit” is yours, not mine, but I see what you are attempting to express.
A living system continually maintains its organization. This was central to our concept of autopoiesis.
Varela:
But autopoiesis should not be interpreted as a conscious inspection in which some internal administrator checks a list.
Sarma:
I don't mean an administrator. I mean that the living system continuously responds to its own condition and its environment.
Varela:
Then your “audit” is a philosophical name for a family of processes involving regulation, interaction and maintenance.
Sarma:
Exactly. I am giving the process a language that ordinary people can feel.
Maturana:
That is an important distinction. Scientific terminology can describe mechanisms. Philosophy can ask what those mechanisms mean when understood as a whole.
Is Nature One Organism?
Sarma:
I repeatedly say that the Biosphere is one organism.
Margulis:
I would understand why you say that. Symbiosis is fundamental to evolutionary history. Cells themselves carry the history of ancient symbiotic relationships.
The origin of mitochondria is one of the great examples: organisms that were once independent became permanent partners within eukaryotic cells.
Sarma:
So the individual itself is already a community.
Margulis:
Precisely. The supposedly independent individual is much less independent than conventional thinking suggests.
Sarma:
Then my idea that the Biosphere is a single organism is not simply fantasy.
Margulis:
It is a philosophical extrapolation from biological interdependence. But it should not automatically be treated as identical to the scientific claim that Earth is literally one organism.
Sarma:
Again you are drawing the Cartesian boundary between fact and philosophy.
Margulis:
I am drawing a boundary between different kinds of claims. But I agree that the biological evidence for deep interdependence gives your philosophical proposition fertile ground.
Haraway:
And I would push it even further. Perhaps instead of asking whether everything forms one organism, we should ask how beings are continually making-with one another.
The individual is never entirely alone.
Sarma:
That fits beautifully with my concept of the Biosphere as emotional communication.
Ecologic Logic
Sarma:
I propose that there are two logics.
Cartesian logic isolates, measures, separates and controls.
Ecologic logic senses, participates, connects and reciprocates.
Bateson:
I would not condemn measurement. Measurement can reveal relationships.
Sarma:
I am not rejecting measurement. I am rejecting its elevation into the only form of legitimate knowledge.
Bateson:
That distinction I can strongly support.
The danger begins when the map is mistaken for the territory, or when one explanatory framework becomes so dominant that it cannot see what falls outside its categories.
Merleau-Ponty:
And perception itself is not merely a collection of measurements. We inhabit a meaningful world before we turn it into an object of scientific description.
Uexküll:
Different organisms perceive different meaningful worlds.
Sarma:
Then the universe is not merely a collection of objects. It is a network of lived relationships.
Varela:
That is close to an embodied and enactive understanding of cognition.
Economics Enters Nature
Sarma:
Now we come to my strongest criticism.
Nature operates ecologically. Economics increasingly operates extractively.
A forest becomes timber.
A mountain becomes ore.
A river becomes a water resource.
A living animal becomes meat.
A person becomes labour.
The economic system converts relationships into commodities.
Haraway:
That is a serious philosophical problem. Modern systems frequently turn beings and relationships into resources.
Margulis:
And ecological consequences eventually return to us because we remain embedded in the systems we disrupt.
Bateson:
This is what I would call a pattern problem. An intervention that appears profitable when viewed narrowly may become destructive when the larger circuit is considered.
Sarma:
Exactly. Economics sees the immediate transaction. Ecology sees the entire circuit.
Bateson:
And therefore your criticism is not simply “economics is bad.” It is that economic reasoning becomes pathological when it ignores the larger system of relationships.
Sarma:
Yes. Economics must become a participant in ecology, not its master.
The Tiger and the Factory
Sarma:
I gave the example of the tiger.
A tiger kills another animal because it must eat. But the tiger does not establish a gigantic meat factory and destroy the ecological balance for profit.
Margulis:
The tiger participates in an ecological network.
Sarma:
Human beings have acquired the ability to magnify one biological act into an industrial system.
Haraway:
And industrial systems can transform relationships far beyond the original activity.
Bateson:
The important question becomes: What happens to the entire circuit?
A system can optimize one part while destroying the whole.
Sarma:
That is precisely my meaning by politics fighting policy.
Nature's policy is ecological continuity.
Human politics increasingly implements economic objectives even when they contradict that ecological continuity.
The University
Sarma:
I therefore criticize the university.
When the university becomes governed primarily by economics, Nature ceases to be the teacher. Students are taught about Nature but are not necessarily allowed to learn from Nature.
Merleau-Ponty:
That distinction is important. There is knowledge about the world and knowledge gained through embodied engagement with the world.
Uexküll:
And different organisms teach us different things if we learn to perceive their worlds.
Sarma:
Therefore every university should establish a Free Nature Park.
No tampering.
No conversion of Nature into a laboratory object.
No attempt to make Nature obey the university.
Let Nature teach.
Bateson:
That could become a genuine educational experiment.
Varela:
Provided that “no tampering” does not mean refusing observation. Observation itself can be participatory.
Sarma:
Agreed. The essential point is that the student should not begin with the assumption:
“I am the master and Nature is my object.”
The student should begin:
“I am a limb of Nature, and Nature is my teacher.”
Haraway:
That is perhaps the most distinctive sentence in your philosophy.
The Indigenous Challenge
Sarma:
And this is why I want to recognize Indigenous peoples who resist economic takeover.
Consider the Dongria Kondh and their resistance to mining in the Niyamgiri Hills.
They are not merely defending a piece of property. Their relationship with the hills is part of their social, cultural and ecological existence.
Margulis:
That is another challenge to the idea of isolated individuals and isolated resources.
Haraway:
Yes. A territory can be understood as a network of relationships rather than simply a commodity.
Sarma:
So perhaps some Indigenous communities have preserved an aspect of ecological logic that industrial civilization has forgotten.
Bateson:
That may be so, but we should avoid romanticizing all Indigenous societies. They too are historically diverse and changing.
Sarma:
Agreed. I am not saying they are perfect. I am saying that their struggles can teach modern civilization something it has forgotten.
Uexküll:
That is consistent with your educational principle: learn from living systems rather than assuming that the university already possesses all knowledge.
Is Emotional Logic Scientific?
Varela:
I want to return to your phrase “emotional logic.”
What exactly do you mean?
Sarma:
I mean the logic of a living being that feels its relationship with its surroundings and responds accordingly.
Varela:
Then it might be useful to distinguish three things: subjective emotion, embodied cognition and ecological relationship.
Sarma:
I accept the distinction, but I want to reunite them at the level of life.
The human tendency is to dissect them.
Nature does not dissect them.
Merleau-Ponty:
That is a powerful philosophical point.
Bateson:
Perhaps what you call emotional logic is a form of relational intelligence.
Sarma:
Yes!
That is closer to what I mean.
Nature's intelligence is relational.
The Final Challenge
Sarma:
Then I ask all of you one question.
If Cartesian science says:
“Show me the measurable evidence.”
and ecological thinking says:
“Show me the living relationship,”
which one should humanity choose?
Bateson:
I would refuse the either/or. Measurement should become subordinate to understanding the larger pattern.
Merleau-Ponty:
And embodied participation should not be excluded from knowledge.
Uexküll:
We must learn that every organism inhabits a meaningful world.
Maturana:
Living systems must be understood as living systems, not merely as collections of components.
Varela:
Cognition is embodied and enacted. The observer is not as separate from the observed as classical objectivism often assumes.
Margulis:
Symbiosis must be given its rightful place in our understanding of evolution.
Haraway:
And we must learn to live by making-with, rather than imagining ourselves as masters standing outside the web of life.
Sarma:
Then perhaps we have reached my conclusion.
Humanity does not need to abandon science.
It needs to decentralize the Cartesian observer.
It needs to put the observer back inside Nature.
It needs to recognize that the living world is not merely something to be known, measured and exploited.
It is something of which we are already a part.
And therefore:
The deepest education is not learning how to control Nature.
The deepest education is learning how to participate in Nature.
Bateson:
That is a proposition worth investigating.
Maturana:
And worth living.
Margulis:
And worth remembering.
Haraway:
And worth making-with others.
Sarma:
Then the university has its first lesson.
All:
Let Nature teach.
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
ECOLOGIC LOGIC
YMji Measurement should become subordinate to understanding the larger pattern.
Living systems must be understood as living systems, not merely as collections of components.
And we must learn to live by making-with, rather than imagining ourselves as masters standing outside the web of life
The deepest education is not learning how to control Nature.
The deepest education is learning how to participate in Nature.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALL ARE UTOPIAN THEORY IN THE SENSE EDUCATION OR LEARNING FROM THE E ARTH MUST MAKE ANYONE THINK IN RIGHT TRACK; HOWEVER, THE SO-CALLED RIGHT TRACK, DOES NOT YIELD ESSENCE FOR THE PRAGMATIC LIVING. HONEY BY THOSE TRIBES ARE TAKEN ONLY FOR THEIR FOOD AND MEDICINE AND WITH THAT AS INTENTION PRESERVE THEM TIGHT LEST IT SHALL NOT LEAVE THE MOUNTAIN IN THE HANDS OF THE OUTSIDERS. HOWEVER, SUPPOSE THE VILLAINS THAMASA GUNA URBN FELLOW (THAT IS ALSO NATURE) BLACK MAIL THE TRIBE TO PART WITH, EMOTIONAL FAMILY TIE ALONE WPOULD WIN AND HENCE HONEY GOES OUT IN EXCHANGE, AND THE HONEY IS COMMERCIALISED, FOR MONEY IN EXCHANE. CARTESIAN THOUGHTS AND THE NATURE THOUGHTS ARE SIMILAR. HOW NATURE CAN BE LOOKED AT WITH THE EYES OF BEAUTY? THERE IS A TIRUKKURAL “SOLVADHU YAVARKKUM ELIYAVAAAM; AVVANNAME SOLLIYA VANNAM SEYAL [ARIDHU”] IT MEANS THAT: IT’S EASY TO TELL BUT HARD OR TOUGH TO EXECUTE, SINCE LIFE IS CHASING AROUND THE MIRAGE.
THE DEEPEST EDUCATION IS NOT LEARNING HOW TO CONTROL NATURE; THE DEEPEST EDUCATION IS LEARNING TO PARTICIPATE IN NATURE. ---IS A RIGHT OBSERVATION. BUT FOR WHOM? THE MAN WHO IS SATISFIED IN LIFE WHO NEED NOT WORRY FOR THE EVENING FOOD, WOULD FIND THE SUN SET BEHIND THE WOODS AS LOVELY; BUT WILL IT BE AN EDUCATION FOR HUNGRY SOTOMACS? THEY MAY CALL U A CARTECIAN.
THAT IS WHERE THE SANATANA DHARMA IS TO BE LEARNT; LEARN INDIVIDUALLY AS SLOW AS POSSIBLE IN DIFFERENT STYLE AND STATUS. NATURE TWINKLES, KNOWING ITS FUTURE; SOME TIMES ANGRY; SOME TIMES POUNCING WITH THE CRUELTY; SOME TIMES BLOSSOMING AND SOME TIMES LAUGHING IN THE SUN SHINE; THUS, MIDDLE PORTION OF THE BODY ALONE RULES THE ROAST. EDUCATION IS IMMATERIAL AS IT IS SANATANA LIFE BREWING SYSTEM; EDUCATION EVEN WITHOUT IT IS AVAILABLE IN THE NATURE; AND LEARNING IN THE HARD WAY BY EPERIENCES IS ALSO AN EDUCATION, BUT NO CARTECIAN WOULD RESPECT IT ALL; SO CARTECIANISM IS INEVITABLE; NATURE IS COMPREHENSIVE LIFE DEFIANCE. UNLESS THE FOLDED HANDS ARE RELEASED WITH THE FREEDOM, ACCEPTABLE TO THE VICINITY AND ALL AROUND, WHICH IS UNLIKELY, SINCE EPICS AROSE ONLY UNDER THE CARTECIANAMOSPHERE EXISTED EVEN THEN ONLY, SO A POET IS ALSO A HUMAN. SUBRAMANYA BHARATHI SANG ON FREEDON QUITE A LOT; BUT WHEN CHELLAMMAL HOWED THE EMPTY RICE TINS, SANG ALSO IN DESPAIR. ENDRU THANIYUM IN THE SUDANTHIRA THAGAM=WHEN THE DESIRE FOR ASPIRATIONS FOR FREEDOM SHALL SUBSIDE ALSO WROTE,” நல்லதோர் வீணைசெய்தே அதை நலங்கெடப் புழுதியில் எறிவதுண்டோ?
சொல்லடி சிவசக்தி! எனைச் சுடர்மிகும் அறிவுடன் படைத்தது விட்டாய்.
வல்லமை தாராயோ இந்த மாநிலம் பயனுற வாழ்வதற்கே
சொல்லடி சிவசக்தி! நிலச் சுமையென வாழ்ந்திடப் புரிகுவையோ
விசை உறு பந்தினைப் போல் – உள்ளம் வேண்டிய படி செல்லும் உடல் கேட்டேன்
நசையறு மனங்கேட்டேன்; நித்தம் நவமெனச் சுடர்தரும் உயிர்கேட்டேன்
தசையினை தீ சுடினும் சிவசக்தியை பாடும்நல் அகம் கேட்டேன்
அசைவறு மதிகேட்டேன்; இவை அருள்வதில் உனக்கெதும் தடையுளதோ?
nallathOr veenai seithE adhai nalam keda puzhudhiyil erivadundO?
solladi sivasakthi! enai sudarmigum aRivudan padaithuvittAi
vallamai thArAyO, indha maanilam payanuRa vaazhvadharkE
solladi sivasakthi! nila sumai ena vaazhndhida puriguvayO
visai uru pandhinai pOl – uLLam vEndiya padi sellum udal kEttEn
nasai aRu manam kEttEn; nitham navam ena sudar tharum uyir kEttEn
thasayinai thee sudinum sivasakthiyai paadum nal agam kEttEn
asaivaRu madhi kEttEn; ivan aruLvadhil unakkedhum thadai uLadho?
Goddess of Life and Energy:
Tell me – does anyone take the effort to make a beautiful and well-tuned veena only to throw it in the dust?
You have created me with sharp and unbridled intellect.
Won’t you give me the strength to live a life that is of use to this world?
Or will you just let me live a life that is just a burden to this world (and is of no use)?
Like a mechanical ball that speeds away when keyed up, I asked for a body that will support my mind’s wishes
I asked for a mind that is not poisoned by bad thoughts
And for energy that renews me everyday
Even if this body gets consumed in flames, I asked for a soul that sings your praise
I asked for an unwavering intellect
Do you have any issues in granting these to me?
AS TAGORE SAID IF THE MIND IS FREE THE NATURE IS BEAUTIFUL
K RAJARAM IRS 18826
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "societyforservingseniors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to society4servingse...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CACDCHCJwV%2ByzeCQa2k0qV8JcW0d_GaBrHYVaxVgWTn%3DXu5P%2BUw%40mail.gmail.com.