1 files changed, 151 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/subnaturefn.otx b/subnaturefn.otx
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..590baa5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/subnaturefn.otx
@@ -0,0 +1,151 @@
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+10 Ilya Prigogine, \et{Unity of Physical Laws and Levels of Description} in
+M. Grene (editor) \jt{Interpretations of Life and Mind} (N.Y., Humanities
+Press, 1971) and Ilya Prigogine and others \et{Thermodynamics of Evolution} in \jt{Physics Today} Vol. 25 #1, 1972,
+
+11 See John and Nancy Jack Todd, \bt{Tomorrow Is Our Permanent Address} (N.Y., Harper \& Row, 1980), p. 48.
+
+12 See Magoran Maruyama, \et{The Cybernetics: Deviation-Amplifying
+Mutual Causal Processes} in \jt{American Scientist} \#51, 1963, and G.
+Nicolis and I. Prigogine., \bt{Self-Organization in Non-Equilibrium Systems}
+ N.Y., Wiley Interscience, 1977).
+
+13 Lancelot L. Whyte, \et{Towards a Science of Form} in \jt{Hudson Review}
+Vol 23 \#4, Winter 1970--71, reminds us of the sense in which the
+natural world is a perceptually present world of spatial units from
+molecules, crystals, organisms to solar systems and spiral nebul\ae.
+How thesee spatial forms are generated---how these units and hierarchies
+of units arise in nature---is the project of a morphic science.
+
+14 H.H. Pattee, \et{Complementarity vs. Reduction as Explanation of
+Biological Complexity} in \jt{American Journal of Physiology} Vol. 236
+\#5, May 1979 where he argues:
+
+\Q{As a consequence of this property of information none of the rules
+or constraints of information-processing systems can be reduced to
+rate-dependent equations (to the structural laws of nature T.S.), and
+therefore their descriptions cannot be integrated in time, as are rate
+equations, to give the trajectory or behavior of the system. Such
+informational constraints that have rate-independent alternative
+structures are called nonintegrable\ld\ constraints. I would define
+biological function as activity that is controlled or measured by
+nonintegrable constraints.}
+\Qs{(p. R244)}
+
+Both the explanatory laws of physics and the cybernetics of nonintegrable
+constraints are essential for an account of biological organization.
+
+15 Bateson, \e{op. cit.}, p. 460.
+
+16 Ilya Prigogine, \bt{From Being to Becomuing: Time and Complexity in the
+Phystcal Sciences} (San Francisco, WH. Freeman \& Co., 1980).
+
+17 G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine, \bt{Self-Organization inn Nonequilibrium
+Systems: From Dissipative Structures to Order Through Fluctuations}
+(N.Y., John Wiley \& Sons, 1977).
+
+18 See Marjorie Grene's \bt{Approaches to a Philosophical Biology} (N.Y.,
+Basic Books, 1965) for a discussion of Portmann's thinking in contrast
+to other biological theorists who reject the Galileian primary qualities
+as fundamental for organic life. For a brief introduction to Portmann
+in English, see \et{Beyond Darwinism}in \jt{Commentary} XL (1965), pp.
+31--41.
+
+19 This argument is developed below in Section 1V.
+
+20 J E. Lovelock, \bt{Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth} (N.Y., Oxford
+University Press, 1980)
+
+21 As indeed it has: See W. Ford Doolittle's review of Lovelock's book in
+\jt{Co-Evolution Quarterly} \#29, Spring 1981, pp. 58ff. where the charge
+that the feedback loops of Gaia are either created by natural selection
+or, more likely to Doolittle, occur by chance. In response, we can return
+to Prigogine's theory of dissipative structures:
+\Q{We here propose an alternative description of prebiotic evolution.
+The main idea is the possibility that a prebiological system may
+evolve through a whole succession of transitions leading to a hierarchy
+of more and more complex and organized states\ld\ As a
+result, if the system is to be able to evolve through successive
+instabilities, a mechanism must be developed whereby each new
+transition favors further evolution by increasing the nonlinearity
+and the distance from equilibrium. One obvious mechanism is that
+each transition enables the system to increase the entropy production\ld}
+\Qs{in \et{Thermodynamics of Evolution.} op. cit.}
+However other reviewers of the book find the hypothesis tenable: See
+K. Mellanby, \ht{New Scientist}, Oct 4, 1979; René Dubos, \jt{Nature}, Nov. 8,
+1979; P Morrison, \jt{Scientific American}, March 1980.
+
+22 Erns Mayr, \et{Teleological and Teleonomic: A New Analysis} in \jt{Boston
+Studies in the Philosophy of Science} 14 (1974), pp. 91--117.
+
+23 See EM. Lappe and J. Collins, \bt{Food First: The Myth of Scarcity}
+(Ballantine Press, 1978). Also see \bt{The New International Division of
+Labor} by F. Frobel, J. Heinrichs, D. Kreye (Cambridge University Press,
+1980).
+
+24 See Gerald O. Barney, \bt{The Global 2000 Report to the President of
+the U.S.: Vol. I The Summary Report} (NY., Pergamon Press, 1980).
+
+25 See Klaus Myer-Abich, \e{op. cit.}
+
+26 See Nicholas Georgesev-Roegen, \et{Inequality, Limits and Growth
+from a Bio-Economic Viewpoint} in \jt{Review of Social Economy} V. 35,
+Dec. 1977.
+
+26 See Serge Moscovici, \et{The Re-Enchantment of the World} in Norman
+Birnbaum, \bt{Beyond the Crisis} (N.Y., Oxford University Press,
+1977) for an analysis to which this paper is indebted.
+
+28 Raymond Dasmann, \et{Eco-Development} in the \jt{Planet Drum Review}
+Vol. 1 \#2, Winter 1981.
+
+29 The term \dq{re-inhabitation} is taken from one of many local journals
+which are now advocating the watershed as the natural eco-development
+unit. The strategy is the use of a combination of oral history and local
+ecological research as a place identification approach. See Paul Ryan's
+\bt{Talking Wood: Living in the Passaic Watershed}, 1980 (Talking Wood,
+PO.Box 364, Pompton Lakes, N.J. 07442). (But the original use of the
+term was by Peter Berg in an article on \et{Re-Inhabitation of California}
+in \jt{The Ecologist} in the early 1970's.)
+
+30 See Ivan Illich, \bt{Shadow Work} (Boston, Marion Boyers, 1981).
+
+31 For the notion of communicative rationalization, see Jurgen Habermas'
+\et{Science and Technology as Ideology} in \bt{Toward a Rational Society}
+(Boston, Beacon, 1970). However, this paper represents a critique of
+Habermas' instrumental concept of natural science as well as his
+orientation toward core nation-states of the West. For an account of
+his notion of critical theory, see my \bt{The Critique of Domination}
+(Boston, Beacon, 1974).
+
+32 Yet there is a sense in which the anarchist position's notion that theory
+and practice is ultimately unified art the level of action which changes
+reality cannot be faulted. Especially in the American context, there is
+an affinity of anarcho-libertarianism and the historical symbols of
+independence, self-determination, and self-reliance which are, at least
+in origin, not reducible to possessive individualist idealizations of
+self-interested production for gain. These American practices were
+socially and ethically mediated by the ever-present American quest for
+\dq{community.} An anarchist practice still permeates the American
+movements for decentralization, ecology and approprate technology,
+feminism, etc. There is also a unique amalgam of Old World utopian
+surplus and contemporary anarchist, neo-primitivist, and nativist symbols
+ that simply mystifies Marxists---especially theoreticans who expect
+social relations to dance according to their notion of reason.
+
+33 Russell Means, \et{For the World to Live, \sq{Europe} Must Die} in
+\jr{Mother Jones}, Dec. 1980.
+
+34 Wendell Berry, \bt{The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture}
+(San Francisco, Sierra Club Books, 1977).
+