It’s the thing. The collective. The assembly. All of the parts working together in some fashion, even if imperfectly.

Oh, my point is that I don’t think there _is_ anything special about biological hands, or about the brain even.

I think the model of “input –> output” is of limited value when speaking of complex systems that are integrated such as the human nervous system and the societies humans finds themselves in.

Systems thinking is a way to escape the cause-effect dilemma.

I’ll give an example:

What is the cause and effect of a car?

Where does a car start?
Where does a car end?

If a car is sitting there not moving, is it a car?

Is the root of the car in the engine? Is it in the intention of the driver?

All seems complicated until you consider: What does a car do? A car is a thing (etymologically a “thing” is an assembly, a collection, a meeting of minds – it’s the root of “think” in English) – that moves from point A to point B.

Likewise, what is the cause of self? The brain? The hand?

It’s the thing. The collective. The assembly. All of the parts working together in some fashion, even if imperfectly.

An imperfect hand grafted onto the human nervous system that functions like a hand, is a hand.

If the brain is replaced by a computer, if it is a part of a similar system as a human that functions similarly to a human, it is a human, systemically speaking.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


3 + three =

Leave a Reply