Namste. Often the concept of the center of the functional unity of the living cell is presumed to be understood by the unsuspecting modern educated man as something mechanical, chemical or emergent whole.
However a sincere student of science must inquire about the fundamentals and not be satisfied merely by utilitarian ends of such assumptions in biology. In this regard we can refer to the Socratic method, the essence of which has been to apply its techniques to discover what we do not know about what we have assumed to be already known.
The cell is considered the smallest functional unit of life. From a reductionist viewpoint, the cell is made up of atoms and molecules which are actively producing all the necessary requirements for the cell to act functionally. Thus we have so many chemical cycles such as the Krebs cycle, photosynthesis, ATP process etc. But is it sufficient for us to conclude from these that the cell is reducible to molecules.
Traditionally there are three logical concepts dealing with reality. (1) Mechanical logic dealing with machines, (2) Chemical logic dealing with chemical activity and (3) The logic of the organic whole, which is to deal with objects with internal teleology, such as living organisms. Organic wholes are not a result of addition of parts. They are produced from already existing wholes and are irreducible to mechanical or chemical logic. In this way natural processes have been described in philosophy.
But the biological studies in modern science have yet to let go of the mechanical bias in their ontological thinking. Socratic Methodology gives us a precise methodology to settle the question. We can focus on the question: Where is the center of the functional unity of the cell.
The subjects of Socrates' conversations often revolved around search for a definition focused on the true nature of the subject under question and not just on how the word is used correctly in a sentence. Hence our focus should be what is the true concept of the cell, rather than what we think nature should be, or what merely a mechanism should be. We must let go of our different biases and allow nature to reveal to us. Further even though we may be professors, or scientists or coreligionists or whatever, we must take up the position of a student, and allow ourselves to be taught through these questions. We should desist the tendency to declare opinion of an individual, or of the majority as truth. This cannot be the criteria of truth of any subject in hand.
We must recognize ideas such as Mechanical Whole, Chemical Whole and Organic Whole etc are ideas. Where as the subject here is the Functional Unity of the Cell. There are according Prof. R.W. Paul, from University of Michigan six types of Socratic questions that can help us gain valid knowledge:
1. Questions for clarification: E.g. we may ask why do we think that the cell follows merely mechanical and chemical concept of Whole. How does it relate to the question of the unity of cell functioning etc.
2. Questions that probe assumptions: Why have we moved away from the logic of organic whole which was understood by philosophers like Kant, Hegel, Aristotle and Plato. Kant had even said that there will never be a Newton for the Blade of Grass. Then all of a sudden why the current shift of ontological thinking about the unity of the functional cell to a mechanical logic.
3. Questions that probe reasons and evidence: What would be an example of a cell that follows logic of mechanical and chemical whole in natural processes. Why there is no result after more than 150 years attempts to manufacture even a single bacterium from de novo processes in our advanced chemical labs even after spending billions of dollars worth of time and manpower. What is the Causal principle behind the cellular function. Why is it still irreducible to linear simplicity. Cell continues to display circular complexity in its causal flow. So how can we accept the mechanical reduction of the organism.
4. Questions about Viewpoints and Perspectives: Then what will be the alternative for us. How many things and properties have we explained in these different logical concepts. Which one comes out as the most relevant of all. Why there is no agreement among scientists. Why different schools such as semiosis, which focuses on living organisms, even at the level of DNA code, being interpreted by the organisms etc as sign systems gaining popularity. Should we not go back to what the erudite philosophers have always said. That is life comes from life. The concept of Unity of the functional cell is afterall the teleological concept of the Organic Whole discussed by Kant and Hegel.
5. Questions that probe implications and consequences: What are the general feature of cellular function. For example we may say, irreducibility of complexity, that intelligent and smart, novel features come out more easily in which picture. What do these imply for the concept.
6. Questions about the question: What was the point of mechanistic approach and spending so much valuable time and energy over the past 200 years, without any positive result. What does this effort of scientist mean to us. How does this apply to the deeper question of life. etc
Socrates is well known for his questioning style. He would disarm anyone who had a presumption of being knowledgeable and bring them to the point of thinking the very contradictory result. from their own presumptions. Thus he would prove that they knew nothing. Even Socrates said that he himself knew nothing. But he acknowledged at least he knew that he knew nothing. But generally everyone is thinking that they know, when they knew nothing. This is called Socratic Irony. Isn't that again applicable today. We try to explain the organisms as chemicals or objects. But they turn out to be subjects, intelligent, purposive etc. Then what kind of basis we should have for biological thought. This must be focus of education for all of us.
Thanking you,
Bhakti Vijnana Muni
