Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘science’ Category

DSCN4475

 

DSCN4476

Have you ever come across a little book entitled “Li: Dynamic Form in Nature” by David Wade?

It’s tiny, but it’s a total treat.

He takes and old Chinese philosophical concept “li” and translates it in a particular way which throws an amazing light on what we see around us.

Simply put, he describes li as the invisible forces, or energies which produce the different shapes and forms of the natural world – you know the kind of things – the branching forms of a tree or root system, the wave forms in water and sand, the feathery patterns of clouds and, ah, well, feathers!

I love encountering these kinds of echoes and symmetries, especially when we can see a similar form in two or more completely different contexts – like the sky I look up at, then the feather I find on the grass at my feet.

 

Read Full Post »

IMG_3256

Many scientists now take a similar view, seeing reality as a vast force field in which every part influences every other part, with unpredictable consequences.
Long  before physicists split the atom only to discover there wasn’t anything solid inside, Bergson wrote –
So matter resolves itself into countless vibrations, all linked together in uninterrupted continuity, all influencing each other, and travelling in every direction like shivers through an immense body. (Matière et mémoire) 
Michael Foley points out that one of the most important consequences of seeing how connected everything is –
If organisms are mutually dependent then it is wiser to cooperate than to dominate, and if life requires constant adaptation then nimble ingenuity is more effective than brute strength. (Life Lessons from Bergson)
For a long time the capitalist lesson drawn from Darwin’s insight into evolution was that competition, “survival of the fittest”, was the driving force behind the evolution of Life on Earth. Richard Dawkins even claimed in his “Selfish Gene” that self-interest (and hence, selfishness) lies at the root of all evolution.
However, many other authors are now highlighting the importance of co-operation, collaboration and the evolutionary advantages of togetherness. (See Howard Bloom’s Global Brain, Thomas Berry’s The Great Work,  Lynne McTaggart’s The Bond, and Barabasi’s Linked just for starters!)
As Michael Foley notes, the reality of intense, complex connectedness, is not just that everything influences other things, it’s that, due to the two way nature of many of the connections, the initiator of an action or event, often ends up being changed by it.
If everything is connected to everything else then every action propagates its effects for ever, and if feedback loops are the method of propagation then every action also modifies the character of the actor.
So, karma turns out to be real after all?!
Who was it who said we reap what we sow?

Read Full Post »

DSCN4452

Michael Foley, in his Life Lessons from Bergson, gives an excellent, concise description of the complex adaptive system model (even though he doesn’t actually use that term)

There is also the intellectual problem that, in a complex organism, the whole is never merely the sum of the parts and the parts are never entirely independent of the whole.
A whole person can never be understood from even the most comprehensive set of measurements from a laboratory and an imaging centre (where X-Rays and scans are carried out).
The whole person has to be encountered as the unique individual that they are.
As Mary Midgely, the philosopher, put it –
One cannot claim to know somebody merely because one has collected a pile of printed information about them
In complex systems, simple arithmetic doesn’t work, not least because the bonds between parts are so often integral parts of feedback loops, so a small change in one part can induce much greater change in another, and together the changes within the whole organism are way beyond what can be understood from analyses of single parts.
Also, there isn’t a single organ within us which acts by itself. In fact, there isn’t a single cell which acts in isolation. At all levels, from the molecular within the cell, to the whole person within a physical, social and cultural environment, nothing is “entirely independent of the whole”
An organism is a hectic, almost frenetic, process, operating far from equilibrium in a ceaseless metabolism that seeks out and draws in nutrients, converts them to energy, expels waste, and uses the energy to reproduce, and to regulate and renew its parts, so that its make-up is constantly changing though its structure is relatively stable.
We have such a sense of solidity, don’t we? We have such a clear sense of a unified identity which exists throughout the whole of a life. But our physical make up is really not so solid. As a living organism we are dynamic, always in motion, always processing energy, molecules and information from the environment and within us. We make ourselves anew every single day, our cells in a constant process of creation and destruction. I found that idea quite startling and exciting when I first encountered it. It means that life is a process of constant change and unceasing creation.
But there’s something else in that paragraph which I first read when studying the concept of complex adaptive systems – “operating far from equilibrium” – when I first studied biology I was taught about “homeostasis” – the processes which maintain the inner environment of the body is a state of equilibrium. I learned about many feedback mechanisms which sought to maintain a number of balances – blood pressure, muscle tension, the levels of various salts in the blood and so on. So learning that complex adaptive systems function “far from equilibrium” was a bit surprising. But then that’s how we change. That’s how we grow. It’s only by operating at the edge of the balance that we meet what is termed “bifurcation points” and undergo “phase changes” and “emergence”. I didn’t learn about those phenomena when I first studies biology or Medicine, but they are fundamental characteristics of all living organisms.
Shifting from a focus on checks and balances, to living complexity, can move us from seeing homeostasis as an end in itself, to seeing that it is only one element in the over all process of creativity and development.
As long as we live, we are never finished with these creative, developmental processes. As Michael Foley says –
there are no independent, isolated, finished organisms.

Read Full Post »

image

Reality no longer appears essentially static, but affirms itself dynamically, as continuity and variation. What was immobile and frozen in our perception is warmed and set in motion.

Those are the words of Henri Bergson, quoted in Michael Foley’s excellent “Life lessons from Bergson”.

I love that. The experience of life as dynamic, “warmed and set in motion”.

Life isn’t “frozen and immobile” to me, and that’s why I am wary of categories and labels. I’ve always resisted being put into a box, defined by one or two of my characteristics. When I think of that I recall the adage of the General Semanticists – “judgement stops thought”. So often fixing someone or something into a category or type stops us from really seeing, really understanding.

Reducing an individual to a type diminishes them in all senses of the word.

Every patient I ever encountered was unique, presenting experiences and stories unique to them. To reduce them to diagnostic categories, or to types of any sort, blocked my understanding of them. Everyone always has more to reveal, more to share, more to experience and be understood.

Michael Foley says he came back to Bergson’s work after dismissing it decades earlier. His way back is interesting. It’s not the same as mine. My first encounter with Bergson came when I was reading Deleuze but I didn’t find him easy. I later stumbled into complexity theory and, in particular, the idea of complex adaptive systems. At that point I remembered some of Bergson’s ideas and went back to explore his writings further. Michael Foley’s path was through his encounter with “process philosophy” and with particle physics –

I learned from twentieth century philosophy of mind that memory and the self are processes rather than fixed entities – and suddenly this connected with the theories of particle physics, which claim that at the heart of matter there are in fact no particles but only processes…….everything is process…and everything is connected to everything else.

In the process view nothing is fixed, nothing is final and no circumstances ever repeat in the same way.

This strikes me as very true. Dan Seigel, one of the founders of Interpersonal Neurobiology, worked with colleagues to come up with a definition of the mind. What they concluded was that ” the mind is a process of regulation of energy and information flow. ”

The mind is not an entity or a thing, it’s a process.

The body is not a fixed entity or thing either – it’s a dynamic ever changing network or community of cells.

Disease is not a thing either. That really startled me when I read that once I was a practising doctor. As a medical student I picked up the view that disease was pathology and pathology was the changed organs or cells. Once I became a GP I encountered dynamic, hard to pin down illnesses that certainly couldn’t be reduced to pathological entities. Hearing that disease was a process not an entity was liberating for me.

I will return to some of the issues raised by this thinking in other posts but let me finish this one by returning to the title, because once we gain the insight which shifts our attention from entities to processes we discover diversity – we find out that variation is a key characteristic of Nature and of Life. But I think we find out something else too – that the universe, the world, and our lives are not completely random, chance, accidental phenomena. Instead there is continuity. We are in a process of continuous creation and emergence. We are who we are in our networks of family, nature, society and the world. We emerge from the past, as the past encounters and interacts with the present. Our future doesn’t contain just anything you could ever imagine. It emerges from here and now, from that flowing river of life and connections.

Continuity and variation. Just like the flow of a river. Just like the natural history of a plant, an animal, or any other living organism.

Read Full Post »

image

Out walking in the vineyards the other day I noticed this plant with its strikingly unusual flowers and its little red berries.

It’s “dulcamara”, which is a plant I know from my homeopathic studies. Its fuller name is “solanum dulcamara” which helps us to realise it is from the same plant family which other “solan…” plants belong to. That family is the Solonacaeae family.

The Solonacaeae family is a fascinating one to explore if you want to look at the relationships between the plant and human worlds. Some of them are staple foods – potatoes and tomatoes for example. But others are hallucinogenics – belladonna, hyoscyamus and stramonium being striking examples. Witches were said to make up a paste which included some of these hallucinogens and applied it to their skin with a stick – the origin of the “flying sick” perhaps?

In fact a lot of these plants can be poisonous to humans and I often wonder how human beings first got the knowledge to enable them to distinguish between the nutritious and the poisonous – trial and error? Sickness and health? Life and death?

If you are at all interested in looking into “ethnobotany” this is a good family to start with!

Read Full Post »

DSCN4180

The thing that’s always bothered me about reductionist science is how quickly it becomes so abstracted from the world that it no longer usefully models the world.

Human beings, as living organisms, are complex adaptive systems. We are inextricably embedded in multiple contexts, physical, social, and cultural. You can’t truly understand a human being when you consider them isolated from the air they breathe, the food and water they eat and drink, the extensive web of relationships they live in, from family, friends and colleagues, to the networks of production of goods and services.

We are dynamic, open systems. That is, change is the constant of our nature, and there is a permanent flow of energy, information and substances between ourselves and the world in which we live.

A team of researchers in Montpellier has just published an interesting study beginning to try to examine and understand how chemicals in our environment bring about changes in our bodies.

They examined forty common chemicals which are found in the environment and in human bodies. Each of these chemicals has been tested on its own as part of state regulatory processes. Each one on its own has effects on the body, but not large effects (according to the studies). But of course, in the real world they don’t exist in isolation, so what happens when more than one of them is present at the same time?

As the researchers said, one and one normally make two, but when they studied the effects of the different pairs of these forty chemicals (780 variations of pairs in total) they found that sometimes one and one made fifty, or even a hundred. What they mean by that is that as they work together two chemicals don’t have a simple additive effect. Instead their combined effect can be many, many times greater than simple addition would suggest.

There’s an obvious reason for this. As complex adaptive systems, the cells in a human body are connected in a non-linear way, not a simple, linear one.

This study examines the effects of these particular chemicals on a particular receptor in a cell, (“pregnane X” receptor). They looked at this because chemicals have been shown to affect hormone systems within the human body causing widespread changes in the immune and inflammatory systems by interacting with such receptors, potentially setting off chronic metabolic and physiological disturbances in a person.

There study showed that one particular pairing of chemicals worked together as a kind of double key i.e. neither chemical could fit the receptor site, but when the two types of molecule combined they made the shape of a key which resulted in a much better fit to the receptor. So, singly, they produced little activity in the cell, but together their effect was multiplied 50 to a hundred fold. (The two they highlight are a pesticide and chemical from the contraceptive pill)

This is a small study only looking at the effects of pairs of chemicals in a set of forty, and only looking at the effect on a single receptor site. They point out that there are over 150,000 man made chemicals in our environment.

I’ll say that again.

There are over 150,000 chemicals in our environment.

Not just 40.

How many combinations can there be? How many combination effects might there be? Besides this particular one they have demonstrated. And the receptor site they studied is only one of many such sites in human cells.

A bit scary, huh?

They say they would now like to study the effects of pairs of 1600 prescribed drugs.

Are you a little surprised that we know so little about the real world effects of the presence of combinations of chemicals and medicines in the human body?

Well, thank goodness, we are beginning at least to explore real life complexity and stop pretending that single agents can be sufficiently studies in isolation.

Read Full Post »

circle of seeds//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js

There is something very beautiful about seeds, maybe especially the ones which disperse in the wind.

There’s something so delicate, light and insubstantial about them. Maybe that’s why children often think these are fairies when they float past in the wind.

Yet, they are bursting with potential. Full of promise and possibility, just waiting for a helping hand from a passing breeze to leap into the unknown, and hopefully find fertile ground somewhere.

This particular seed head seems even more delicate than most. And doesn’t that delicacy, that fragile impermanence make it all the more beautiful?

It does for me.

Read Full Post »

Creation

I saw this fresco on the ceiling in l’Abbaye de Saint-Savin. This is God creating night and day. What completely fascinates me is the plant – what is it? Do you know? Do tell me if you think you do.

If you look carefully it seems there is the faded remnant of another one just to the left. I’m assuming that the fact there are three heads to the flower is significant, but does this flower usually grow in such a manner?

Can anyone shed any light on this?

Read Full Post »

lanterns

What do you call this plant? Japanese lantern? Chinese lantern? Physalis? Whatever name you know it by, isn’t it extraordinary?

I mean, what is this? Is it a fruit? Are these petals? Or leaves? Or what?

Well, turns out these are sepals forming a calyx – the sepals of a flower are a form of protection, but whilst they are usually green, and you probably don’t normally really notice them, in this particular flower they form this papery orange lantern.

Sometimes protection is just so beautiful!

By the way, I’m no botanist, so in Montaigne’s famous words “Que sais-je?” (“What do I know?”) – if you know more about this please share in the comments…..

Read Full Post »

single hollyhock seed

Let’s start here. This is a single seed. It looks like a little shell, or a fossil. Look closely and you’ll see a wee notch which makes it look almost as if it has a mouth, or a beak. Where did this come from?   Hollyhock seed head

It came from here. When you peel back the covers of this seed head, the little seeds spill out very easily.

Look carefully at the middle. Can you see that ring of little hooks? Well each hook holds a single seed – right where that little notch was that we saw in the previous photo. Isn’t that incredible? How delicate, and how exact!

Would you like to see what it looks like before all the seeds spill out?
full hollyhock seed head

There you are. Wow! It’s like a bracelet, or a necklace. Densely packed seeds just bursting with life. What will they be when they grow up?

  tall hollyhock

A flower as big as a house!

These hollyhocks, or “rose trémière” as they are called around here (I think I prefer the sound of the French name) are everywhere in this part of the world. And look how high they grow! They are really stunning.

We’ve gathered a few of the seeds this week and we’ll see if we can have even more flowers next year.
Hollyhock seed harvest

Could you have imagined such a tall, beautiful flower could grow from one of these tiny seeds?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »