Sentences with phrase «complexity of our organism»

This is to say, not just up into the complexities of organisms where, in Whitehead's terms, we seek life lurking in the interstices [PR 105 - 6], nor down into the magical realm of quarks with charm, but focused on chemistry.

While it is true that very suggestive metaphysical arguments can be drawn from the reality of form, the intelligibility of the universe, consciousness, the laws of physics, or (most importantly) ontological contingency, the mere biological complexity of this or that organism can never amount to an irrefutable proof of anything other than the incalculable complexity of that organism's phylogenic antecedents.

Speaking to this same point a bit later, he notes that «the increasing complexity of the organism is... due theoretically... to the necessity of complexity in the nervous system» (CE 274).

While one can not read evolution into the first chapter of Genesis, the gradually increasing complexity of the organisms reflected in each day of creation shows at least a dim awareness of growth, development, complexification.

Where does complexity of our organism and behaviour come from?

Transgenic and gene knockout / knockin technologies have become important experimental tools for assigning functions to genes at the level of whole complexity of organism, creating models of genetic disorders, evaluating effects drugs and toxins, thus helping to answer fundamental issues in basic and applied research.

Stand back and appreciate the infinite complexity of your organism.

Not exact matches

The «irreducible complexity» or if one part of the organism is removed, then it would not work properly, like an eye or a wing.

Structures found in nature are too complex to have evolved step - by - step through natural selection [the concept of «irreducible complexity «1]: Natural selection does not require that all structures have the same function or even need to be functional at each step in the development of an organism.

This was not to be one further elucidation of Whitehead's «philosophy of organism,» but Leclerc's own detailed recounting of how we must recover a few basic presuppositions if we are ever to elucidate a philosophy of nature worthy of our post-Whiteheadian era — an era unhappily determined to grapple with the complexities of contemporary science by leaving Whitehead aside.

In various experiments with various conditions, scientists have been able to create a wide range of cell - like structures of increasing complexity on the road toward a simple self - replicating organism.

Highly evolved organisms of a social species who have outdone their already remarkably intelligent primate relatives in intelligence and complexity of social structure.

The range of possible activity is determined by the complexity of the nervous system, both on a sensory as well as a motor level (MM 41)-- sensory in that with a system of low complexity, an organism is simply not aware of the vast variety of movements in the material field, motor in that the variety of responses necessary for free activity are not materially accessible (MM 19, 43).

The fourth distinctive characteristic is a biological organism that can not survive unless sustained by the resources of a complex culture, therefore an organism that has evolved not like other organisms by eliminating the unfit in the struggle with the physical environment, but by eliminating those organisms unfit to absorb and sustain the complexities of a culture progressively accumulated through the sequence of many generations.

The development of an organism fit to embody a culture of growing complexity seems to have been completed about 50,000 years ago.

With Leibniz, Hartshorne maintains that some organisms are governed by a «dominant entelechy» that serves as a center of perception and activity (Monadology # 70); other organisms, and all inorganic wholes (e.g. chemical compounds and minerals), have insufficient organizational complexity to act or feel «as one.

We anticipate some sort of growth toward increased complexity: increasingly larger organic macromolecules, then the convergence of many macromolecules to constitute a simple living system, either as a cell with its protective wall and vital nucleus or as some functional analogue, then the convergence of many cells to form larger organisms.

The process of transcendence went on, evolving multicelled organisms of greater and greater complexity, from the plant organism to the animal one.

It is unfortunately true that, contrary to his intention, that newspaper article has been understood by many in the US to be directly supportive of the so - called «intelligent design» hypothesis, which invokes divine design through the detection of instances of supposedly irreducible complexity (i.e. un-evolvable organisms).

Developments in the «new biology,» which deals with wholes of increasing complexity in the organization of interrelated parts rather than with discrete and isolated segments, especially in molecular biology and the growing field of ecology, with its discoveries about the basic interdependence of living organisms with other living organisms and with its larger environmental context, have further undermined these traditions assumptions.

With the increase in complexity new entities emerge — the classical world out of the quantum world, molecules and chemical processes out of atomic structures, simple living organisms out of complex molecular structures.

Thus, complexity in types and relations between acts of minding may have grown exponentially with the evolution of «higher» organisms as the imaginative element in the construction of reality became more socially diffused; i.e. as the construction of reality became more participatory - negotiary in character.

The progression from each stage to the next involves a process «of increasing differentiation and complexity of organization that endows the organism, social system, or whatever the unit in question may be with greater capacity to adapt to its environment than... its less complex ancestors.

On such a theory, therefore, composites of various grades of complexity would have the status of being actual physical existents in their own right, and not as such «reducible» to their ultimate constituents — as in the theory of material atomism, molecules and biological organisms are reducible to the ultimate constituents.

Evolution is how all of the existing complexity of living organisms arrived at their current state via completely random mutations and entirely naturalistic processes.

The higher up we go on the evolutionary ladder, the greater the complexity of the physical organism, the more conceptual autonomy we find.

This of course allows things to have properties that are nonphysical, perhaps, certain physical aggregates with a high degree of systemic unity and organizational complexity, such as biological organisms and computing machines, may exhibit nonphysical properties.

In this sense every step in the evolution of a new organism (be it an increase or decrease in complexity) is in Whitehead's terminology «a creative advance into novelty» (PR 222).

His reason for saying this is that if you look at organisms, not just at the beginning, when life had its minimal complexity, but at any subsequent time in evolutionary history, there is no evidence that these organisms in the course of time led to more complex creatures.

In other cases, different concentrations of morphogen elicit different responses, and it is this type of gradient that is most important for providing an increase in the complexity of the developing organism.

In the face of such complexity, «we started to have the idea to collaborate with the organisms» instead of starting from scratch, says Bozkurt.

As the research team noted in its report in the journal Science, the enormous complexity of the Mimivirus's genetic complement «challenges the established frontier between viruses and parasitic cellular organisms.»

The complexity of mammals led Kandel to try to find a simpler organism to use in his studies.

The study, published in Nature, highlights the real complexity of the genetic interactions that lead to adult organisms» phenotypes (physical forms), helps to explain how natural selection influences body form and leads towards much more realistic virtual experiments on evolution.

Yet much of the document in fact focused on the debatable desirability of the goals of synthetic biology, and on the need to acknowledge the complexities and uncertainties involved in designing novel living organisms — issues which concern many of those working in synthetic biology and which can and should be the subject of open debate.

«The most significant pattern in the history of life is the progressive net increase in complexity of structure and dynamics that has occurred in organisms and the ecosystems in which -LSB-...]

In mutation - driven evolutionary theory, evolution is a process of increasing or decreasing an organism's complexity.

«Cyberspace is the only place I could imagine that could hold the complexity of gene interaction that really describes an organism,» says Brody, who poured 6 months of 17 - hour days into the project.

The idea that the simplest organism may not have come first upends the popular notion of an evolutionary march toward complexity.

«The complexity of higher organisms doesn't appear to be due to a higher number of genes, but in the more complex ways that those higher organisms use those genes,» says James Galagan of the Whitehead Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, who led the research team.

The phrase is a fine combination of old - fashioned sexism and convenient biology - speak which, by reducing human individuals to a biological organism, «man», sweeps away social complexities and confines debate to the simplicities of what we often call «nature».

This significantly increases the number of proteins a single gene codes for, and is thought to explain much of the complexity in higher - order organisms.

Adding some complexity to the seemingly simple life of a single - celled organism, researchers have found that a green alga uses snippets of RNA to control its genes.

Research is funded at all levels of biological complexity from biomolecules to the interactions between organisms.

The mission of the HFSP is to promote, through international cooperation, basic research focused on the elucidation of the sophisticated and complex mechanisms of living organisms at all levels of complexity: from individual biomolecules up to interactions between organisms.

The use of bacteriophage also provided an opportunity for experiments with a primitive living organism that could be studied without anatomic complexities.

Many researchers assumed the organism was too simple to serve as a good model when studying the complexities of neurodegenerative diseases.

Recent advances in sequencing cnidarian transcriptomes have revealed the unexpected genetic complexity of these morphologically simple basal organisms.

That is why it works with an interdisciplinary scientific team focused on understanding the complexity of life, starting with the genome and the cell, and working up to complex organisms and their interactions with the environment, while also providing a comprehensive vision of genetic diseases.

Today, in the post-genomic era, we need to study and understand biological phenomena and systems in their full complexity, in terms of the sequence and functions of the genomes of organisms.