30
个编辑
更改
跳到导航
跳到搜索
第183行：
第183行： − − There are multiple criticisms of the use of the term in both its original context, as an attempt to define and explain the living, and its various expanded usages, such as applying it to self-organizing systems in general or social systems in particular. Critics have argued that the concept and its theory fail to define or explain living systems and that, because of the extreme language of self-referentiality it uses without any external reference, it is really an attempt to give substantiation to Maturana's radical constructivist or solipsistic epistemology, or what Danilo Zolo has called instead a "desolate theology". An example is the assertion by Maturana and Varela that "We do not see what we do not see and what we do not see does not exist". The autopoietic model, said Rod Swenson, is "miraculously decoupled from the physical world by its progenitors ... (and thus) grounded on a solipsistic foundation that flies in the face of both common sense and scientific knowledge". − − 对于该术语的应用，无论是在其最初的语境中（即试图定义和解释生命体），还是在其各种扩展的使用中（如将其应用到一半的自组织系统，特别是社会系统），都有多种批评意见[37]。批评者认为，该概念及其理论未能定义或解释神明系统。而且，由于其使用的极端的自我指涉语言没有任何外部参照，它实际上是在为Maturana的激进建构主义constructivist或唯我论solipsistic的认识论epistemology[38]（又被Danilo Zolo称为“荒凉神学”[39][40]）提供证据。自我指涉的一个例子是Maturana和Varela的断言：“我们看不到我们没有看到的东西，我们没有看到的东西也不存在。”Rod Swenson说，自创生模型“奇迹般地与物质世界分离... ... (因此)建立在唯我论的基础上，与常识和科学知识背道而驰。”
→Relation to consciousness
自创生（如果有必要的话，特指生命系统的自创生）与认知的关系，是一种可以通过观察生命系统来确定的客观评估。
自创生（如果有必要的话，特指生命系统的自创生）与认知的关系，是一种可以通过观察生命系统来确定的客观评估。