--WebTV-Mail-740225156-15559 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
As to "evolution vs. innovation"... Where do you think *innovation* comes from if it is not a specific example of what it is that *evolution* does (innovate)?: They are one and the same except some who would say that evolution is of a different nature at a dividing point (consciousness). I would think that making such an arbitrary distinction would be difficult to support (as in the question "Where do you think 'innovation' comes from..."?).
Brett Lane Robertson
MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay ...........
Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to view great deals!:
--WebTV-Mail-740225156-15559 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from mailsorter-102-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (18.104.22.168) by postoffice-131.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Mon, 31 May 1999 15:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
mailsorter-102-1.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97) with ESMTP id PAA24499; Mon, 31 May 1999 15:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by maxwell.kumo.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA13978 for virus-outgoing; Mon, 31 May 1999 16:35:19 -0600Message-Id: <199905312220.SAA07584@mail4.lig.bellsouth.net> From: "Joe E. Dees" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
13:30:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b) Sender: email@example.com
From: BrettMan35@webtv.net (Brett Robertson) Date sent: Mon, 31 May 1999 17:13:40 -0500 (EST) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: virus: Technology (was manifest science) Send reply to: email@example.com
> Backtracking somewhat I might agree (that eyes are tools and thus
> represent the same, or similar, "technology" which produces other
> tools... wrenches, hammers, etc.). Except, the nature of technology
> changes AFTER the point at which technology produces such institutions
> (schools, homes, churches... eyes, immune systems, etc.).
Eyes are organs, as are our ears, noses, tongues, and skins. We use our bodies, but they are not tools. Tools extend the natural capacities for perception, calculation and action already possessed by us by means of our embodiment.
> The nature of technology ultimately becomes defined as the process of
> creating the IMPLEMENTS of a SOCIETY (by which such prior systems--
> biological and otherwise-- are augmented). And so, to the extent that
> technology might be defined BY these products, such technology is
> further distinguished by its relationship TO these systems.
Technology, to be of any use whatsoever, must be useable by us, must work for us, must be manipulable by our bodies. So?
> Thus, "technology" as it is popularly used (to refer to the mechanical
> argumentations of one's body and the way these might be viewed as things
> which are separate from the people who produce them)-- that is,
> *technology* which relates to the artifacts of a SOCIETY-- takes on a
> different meaning AT A CERTAIN POINT... beyond which, looking backward,
> we may be hardpressed to define the process as being one and the same.
Muscles and organs are not technology; they are the conditions of our being-in-the-world's being-to-the-world, of our incarnation into the midst of it. The dividing line is easy; evolution vs. innovation.
> Brett Lane Robertson
> Indiana, USA
> MindRecreation Metaphysical Assn.
> BIO: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
> Put your item up for auction! Bid on hot opportunities! Click HERE to
> view great deals!: