Ethics, Integrity and Family Values

February 6, 1994

Host: Barbara Thompson ..................................... Invited Guest: Karl Puechl

Barbara: Good Morning! I'm glad you're going to be with us for this next half hour. I'm sure you're going to find it interesting and stimulating. And a very different approach to our series topic than most wwe have heard during the past few months. As those of you know who listen regularly we've been discussing "Ethics, Integrity and Family Values." many of my guest have indicated that a source for learning our ethics is tradition since it usually is based on ways of doing thingws which have been found to be workable, acceptable and approved by the majority of people. These traditional ethics, most of my guest agree, are being weakened and gragmented in our society today to an alarming degree. Many have indicated they believe there to be a strong need for returning to the Bible to give usour rules and guidelines for our ethics. Our ethics being our sense of right and wrong. The Bible being the, you might say, witness or testimony about the developing relationship of man with the higher authority know as God in the context of the Judeo-Christian society coveering the period of approximately 2,000 B.C. to the 4th. This morning, as I understand it, my guest plans to approach this topic from the viewpoint of the total scientist. so keep the coffee pot warm as I welcome back my guest for this morning, Karl Puechl who will be, as he has a number of times before, representing the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship here in our San Jacinto Valley. Karl, it's good to have you back on the Forum again. It's been awhile.

Karl: Thank you., Barbara. It's always a pleasure to be here and to field your provocative questions.

Barbara: Now, Karl, before we delve into our topic, I wonder if you might give us a summary of the beliefs of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship and what it is that binds you all together. The background, beginnings and beliefs --- or "The Three B's" as I like to call them.

Karl: Barbara, I'd really like to answer your question about Unitarian Universalism directly, but I think that I can provide a better, more comprehensive answer by simply diving right into our topic for today. Suffice it to say that UU's, or their close cousins, have been around ever since an individual felt competent and free to contemplate his or her place in the universe without feeling it necessary to rely on higher authority. The way in which I'll address the topic will give the listener a much better feel for what Unitarianism is all about than simply answering your question. Besides, this topic of Ethics, Integrity and Family Values is so broad that it will be impossible to do it justice in half an hour. Rather than trying to cover the subject to any great depth, I'd like to steer our listeners towards pertinent information and, thereby, to education and knowledge, which are two of the key ingredients of Unitarianism.

Barbara: And that's what we're here for --- to learn, to develop a better understanding of one another's beliefs. so if that's the format that suits you best in telling us about the UU's so be it.

Karl: In one of my previous appearances on The Seeker's Forum I mentioned the zoologist, Richard Dawkins, and commented on his book, THE SELFISH GENE. In this book he coined the word "meme", which he considered to be the cultural counterpart of our basic biological entity or replicator, the gene. Within cultures, the memes (the mores, the symbols, the religions, the institutions, etc.) attempt to remain inviolate and to strive for reproduction or replication without modification from one generation to the next, as do the genes. I think it is fairly obvious that a gene has a high probability for generational survival if its environment does not alter appreciably from generation to generation. When the environment in which it thrives is relatively stable, not only do the individual genes tend to survive without modification, but so does the entire genome, and its derivative the phenome, our bodies which house the genes and which are built to their specifications. To make this point, it is to be noted that human beings have not changed physiologically in any significant manner over the past 100,000 years, a time in which the earth's environment has also not changed drastically. (I should note that the last ice age occurred about 10,000 years ago, but by that time man was capable of keeping his environment relatively unchanged simply by moving south, away from the cold.) Now this is not the situation relative to the memes; mankind's culture has evolved dramatically over the past 100,000 years and it is changing at an ever increasing rate. The reason for this is that the nurturing environment for a meme has little to do with the chemical constituents on earth; rather, it has to do with the information available to it. A meme thrives not on food and oxygen; it thrives, within our minds, on information. Since the knowledge of humankind is increasing at an exponential rate, we can say that the environment that controls the memes or cultural evolution is also changing at an exponential rate; and I think that we must ask the obvious question: Can any entity long endure when its environment changes so rapidly that it becomes almost unrecognizable from one generation to the next.? Can our culture endure? Can the human race endure?

Barbara: Let's see if I'm following you here, Karl. As you're describing it, the "memes" are what we would usually refer to as our traditions --- the mores, symbols, religions, institutions, and so on? And you're saying that the changes we're observing is nothing new since change in this area of our life, has been a constant for thousands of years?

Karl: To illustrate how fast we are undergoing cultural change, consider a related topic: the human population which has been affected by this cultural change. Recent estimates show that during the roughly 1-million-year span of hunter-gatherer life there was an increase in population to about 5 million. The agricultural revolution that began 10,000 years ago impelled population growth upwards to around 100 million, whereupon there followed a slow and often erratic growth over 5000 years to about 500 million. The dawn of the Industrial Revolution 300 years ago coincided with another spurt to about 1 billion by about 1850, and then rising rapidly to about 4 billion in 1978 and approaching 6 billion today. The total number of human beings who have ever lived is about 70 billion, and almost all of these experienced life within the past 1000 years.

Barbara: These are certainly interesting numbers.

Karl: Let me give a more specific example of cultural change that doesn't involve numbers. Consider the word "mother". I daresay that as we were growing up, we knew full-well what "mother" meant. However, within the past 5 years, things have changed. "Mother"" has lost its all-encompassing meaning. A woman who carries a fertilized egg to term in her womb is the "birthing mother". A woman who originally supplied the egg is the "biological mother"; but if the egg, before birth, had been genetically modified through genetic engineering, is she really the biological mother or is society as a whole; the society that allowed this genetic modification to take place? Then there is the "nurturing mother", the one who eventually takes care of the born child and provides sustenance until adulthood. However, if the supposed "nurturing mother" does not provide this nurturing but leaves this, at least financially, to society or to government, who is the true nurturing mother; an individual or society as a whole? What do these new inter-relationships do to the definition of the "family"? And if society gets involved so early in the procreation process and in a continuing manner, what are the responsibilities of society relative to that of the individuals involved? For the benefit of society as a whole, if some individuals take little responsibility, wouldn't it be reasonable to curtail their freedom relative to procreation? These are only a few of the questions that come to mind. They will eventually be answered. How will they be answered? No one can predict this. Will they be answered correctly so that the human race will continue to survive? No one can answer this either. Based on past experience, one has hope that mankind will "muddle through" as it has in the past; but there is no assurance that this will be the case in our novel, rapidly-changing cultural environment.

I believe that the only thing that will tilt the scales in our favor is education and derived wisdom, not just information. In many ways we must change our way of thinking about certain things somewhat like what Jacques Monod, the Nobel laureate molecular biologist, proposed in his book CHANCE AND NECESSITY. "Modern societies accepted the treasures and the power that science laid in their laps. But they have not accepted --- they have scarcely even heard --- its profounder message: the defining of a new and unique source of truth, and the demand for a thorough revision of ethical premises, for a total break with the animist tradition, the definitive abandonment of the 'old covenant', the necessity of forging a new one. Armed with all the powers, enjoying all the riches they owe to science, our societies are still trying to live by and to teach systems of values already blasted at the root by science itself. --- The ethic of knowledge does not obtrude itself upon man; on the contrary, it is he who prescribes it to himself, making of it the axiomatic condition of authenticity for all discourse and all action."

Barbara: That was quite a mouthful; I presume that the language was somewhat stilted because of translation from the original French.

Karl: Let me give two examples to show how we can look at things differently, and thereby, possibly, arrive at different conclusions. These examples are not meant to be earth-shaking; rather, I chose them because they are cute as well as thought-provoking.

Probably within 5 to 10 years some group of surgeons will perform a brain transplant. In actuality, should we call this a "brain transplant" or a "body transplant"? Who will be the survivor: the person who donated the brain or the one who donated the body? What consequences result from the answer: To close friends and relatives? To legal matters?

My second example requires some introductory discourse. Most of us have from time-to-time pondered the definition of the word "God" and have asked ourselves questions relative to God. If there is a God, why did He create the universe and then us? If He did this, why did He wait so long before doing it? What was He doing before He did this? What was His purpose in doing it? Well, I recently came across a definition of God that might answer some of these questions for some of us. "Perhaps man created God, or I should say Gods, and we now call these Gods, 'libraries'". Let me explain: Consider man's development of sounds to communicate with his fellow men; then his developing written language to allow information transfer to future generations; i.e., replication of a meme. This allowed for the eventual writing of books, which led to the need for houses, libraries to store the books in. Now we can turn this topsy-turvy and say that the primary entity, or instigator or God, is the Library. Perhaps the Library has created men and women with the capability to read and write books, so that they will keep writing more and more books, which will require more and more Libraries; a neat logical sequence that gives purpose to the whole affair. Hence it is the libraries that have taken control of evolution, not mankind that started it all. Something similar can obviously happen with our developing computers and robots. Will we have the guts to turn them off even if we retain the power to do so, or will they be the ones that will ultimately control man's destiny? In both the library example and in the coming age of sophisticated computers and robots, who will be in charge --- we or our non-human progeny?

As I said in the beginning, I don't think that mankind will be able to survive this onslaught of his rapidly-changing cultural environment without education and knowledge. Therefore, now in the short time that we have left, let me suggest some pertinent reading material to our listeners, so that those who are interested can get a better feel as to where humanity is heading. But first let me suggest some books that can tell our listeners what is already known to the experts in various professions.

Barbara: I suspect that it will difficult for our listeners to make note of the book titles and authors that you may mention, I therefore remind our listeners that they are invited to call in. If any of you listeners would like a list of the books that Karl is about to mention, I'll gladly send you a copy.

Karl: Philosophers and theologians used to debate as to what set man apart from other animals. Theologians started out by providing man with a "soul" but that concept grew out of favor when scientists began to ask the theologians what they meant by the soul and what were its characteristics so that it could be observed and then described by consensus. Philosophers, on the other hand, were enraptured with the concept of "consciousness"; and many of today's philosophers still grapple with this ill-defined word. However, today, the discussion of this concept is more technical, being primarily put into clear focus by biologists, neurophysiologists and physicists. I can cite a few recent books on the subject: CONSCIOUSNESS EXPLAINED by Daniel Dennett who is Distinguished Professor of Arts and Sciences at Tufts University; MIND FROM MATTER which was compiled by Cal Tech students based on lectures by the late Nobel laureate Max Delbrück; THE EVOLUTION OF HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS by John Hurrell Crook; THE CEREBRAL SYMPHONY by William Calvin. who is a neurobiologist at the University of Washington, CHANCE AND NECESSITY by Jacques Monod, the Nobel laureate in molecular biology, and THE REMEMBERED PRESENT by Gerald Edelman who is also a Nobel laureate. Leaving aside the questions of how man evolved to have consciousness or what neurophysiological characteristics make consciousness possible, I think that most specialists will agree that the thing that sets man apart from other animals is his ability to think ahead, to day-dream, to consider varying scenarios and thereby to judge possible consequences of his actions; not just immediate consequences, which can be visualized by most mammals, but also long-range implications. Because of this capability to foresee the possible consequences of his actions, man can ethically be held responsible for his actions. Society has long recognized this and therefore has evolved a legal system that holds man responsible and provides punishment or retribution for illegal acts. Also on an individual basis, each of us recognizes goodness, evil, meanness or simply lack of integrity in his fellow man. However, I believe that we all can appreciate that there might be extenuating circumstances to some actions that we might consider to be socially undesirable or even unacceptable. For example, I can appreciate the gang culture; wherein joining a gang and participating in actions that are considered outside of the socially-accepted norms may be the only way of breaking out of the cycle of poverty (or getting the girl); also I can appreciate a teenage girl wanting to get pregnant so that she has, what she considers to be, a better chance of breaking out of an intolerably constrained family situation. To reduce the frequency of behavior such as this, I believe that society, since it has some responsibility, must, at least, try to eliminate the underlying causes. However, what I consider to be unethical, and thereby strictly the individual's responsibility, is so-called "nice" girls having children just because they want to feel grownup, or want to have something livelier than a doll to play with, or just being careless when they know better; believing "what the heck, somebody will take care of me and my child". I've been using the girl in this description simply because it is more conventional; however, now through DNA testing, we can trace the father, therefore it is not only the girl who can be identified and held responsible for sexual actions that are detrimental or costly to society as a whole.

To obtain a good understanding of our present state of knowledge about the universe requires reading the works of only a few very prolific authors. These are: John D. Barrow of the University of Sussex in England; Paul Davies who is Professor of Theoretical Physics at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, also in England; Roger Penrose who is Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford in England; Heinz Pagels who was Executive Director of the New York Academy of Sciences; and Steven Weinberg who is a Nobel laureate. Some of the intriguing titles of books written by these scientists are: Theories of Everything; Superforce; The Emperor's New Mind; Pi in the Sky; The Cosmic Code; The Mind of God; Dreams of a Final Theory.

To keep this reading list to a minimum, I can say that a good feel for the present state of affairs in the field of biology and genetics can also be derived from reading only a few authors: Richard Dawkins who is a zoologist at Oxford University; Gerald Feinberg who until his recent death was professor of physics at Columbia University; Robert Shapiro who is professor of chemistry at NYU; and Stephen Jay Gould who teaches biology, geology, and the history of science at Harvard. And I should add that related newspaper articles on recent scientific advances appear almost daily.

These two fields, physics and biology, are being intertwined or, perhaps, even married by a rapidly growing field called "complexity". A few comprehensive books on this subject are: COMPLEXITY or Life at the Edge of Chaos by Roger Lewin who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry and is currently considered to be one of the best science writers in the U.S; DREAMS OF REASON or The Computer and the Rise of the Sciences of Complexity by Heniz Pagels whom I mentioned previously; COMPLEXITY or The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos by Waldrop Mitchell who has a PhD in physics but is primarily a science writer; THE ORIGINS OF ORDER or Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution by Stuart Kauffman who teaches at the University of Pennsylvania and is a MacArthur Foundation prize recipient; CHAOS by James Gleick, another science writer of some note.

And finally, on a more futuristic note there are the following books written for the general audience: VIRTUAL REALITY by Howard Rheingold, a professional writer; TECHNOPOLY or The Surrender of Culture to Technology by Neil Postman who is chairman of the Department of Communication Arts at NYU; ARTIFICIAL LIFE or The Quest for a New Creation by Steven Levy, a science writer; ARTIFICIAL LIFE I & ARTIFICIAL LIFE II by Chris Langton and colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute; THE GOD PARTICLE: IF THE UNIVERSE IS THE ANSWER, WHAT IS THE QUESTION by Leon Lederman & Dick Teresi; THE SOCIETY OF MIND by Marvin Minsky of MIT.

Barbara: And that's going to have to do it for today. Karl, as always, you do give us a lot of good information and thoughts for our gray cells to be working on. Thanks so much for sharing so much with us. We'll be looking forward to your next visit.

FOLLOWING IS A MORE COMPREHENSIVE TABULATION IF ANYONE SHOULD PHONE IN FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THESE REFERENCES

ON CONSCIOUSNESS

THE REMEMBERED PRESENT, A Biological Theory of Consciousness, by Gerald M. Edelman, Basic Books, Inc., N. Y.,1989. Edelman is a Nobel laureate and Vincent Astor Professor at The Rockefeller University and Director of The Neurosciences Institute.

MIND FROM MATTER?, An Essay on Evolutionary Epistemology, by Max Delbrück; Blackwell Scientific Publications, Inc., Palo Alto, Ca. 1986

Calvin, William H.; THE CEREBRAL SYMPHONY, Seashore Reflections on the Structure of Consciousness; Bantum Books, New York (1990). Calvin is a neurobiologist at the University of Washington who has spent some summers at Woods Hole on Cape Cod.

Crook, John Hurrell; THE EVOLUTION OF HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS; Clarendon Press, Oxford; (1980)

Dennett, Daniel C., CONSCIOUSNESS EXPLAINED; Boston; Little, Brown and Company (1991). Dennett is Director, Center for Cognitive Studies, and Distinguished Arts and Sciences Professor At Tufts University.

ON PHYSICS AND COSMOLOGY

THE COSMIC BLUEPRINT, New Discoveries in Nature's Creative Ability to Order the Universe, by Paul Davies, A Touchstone Book, Simon & Schuster, Inc. New York, 1989. Davies is Professor of Theoretical physics at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

PERFECT SYMMETRY, The Search for the Beginning of time, by Heinz R. Pagels, author of THE COSMIC CODE. Executive Director of the New York Academy of Sciences, Simon and Schuster, N.Y., 1985.

THE LEFT HAND OF CREATION, "The Origin and Evolution of the Expanding Universe", Basic Books, Inc. New York, 1983 by John D. Barrow and Joseph Silk. Barrow is University Lecturer in Astrnomy at the University of Sussex, England. Silk is Professor of Astronomy at UC, Berkeley.

THE MOMENT OF CREATION, Big Bang Physics, From Before the First Millisecond to the Present Universe. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1983. By James S Trefil, Professor of Physics at the University of Virginia. he also wrote: FROM ATOMS TO QUARKS; LIVING IN SPACE; THE UNEXPECTED VISTA; and with Robert T. Rood ARE WE ALONE?

THE EMPEROR'S NEW MIND, Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics; Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press; 1989, then reprinted with corrections in 1990. By Roger Penrose who is Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford. (I should buy this book; the range of knowledge and depth of consideration, is tremendous.) THEORIES OF EVERYTHING, The Quest for Ultimate Explanation, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991; By John D. Barrow, Professor of Astronomy at the University of Sussex, England.

SUPERFORCE, The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1984; by Paul Davies, Professor of Theoretical Physics of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. He also wrote: OTHER WORLDS, THE RUNAWAY UNIVERSE, THE EDGE OF INFINITY and GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS.

Barrow, John D., PI IN THE SKY, Counting, Thinking, and Being. Clarendon Press, Oxford, (1992). He is at the Astronomy Centre, University of Sussex.

Barrow, John D.; THE WORLD WITHIN THE WORLD; Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1988.

Pagels, Heinz R., THE COSMIC CODE, Quantum Physics as the Language of Nature, Simon and Schuster, New York, (1982). Pagels is an associate professor of theoretical physics at Rockefeller University, and was the president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences for 1981.

Peat, F. David, SUPERSTRINGS and the Search for The Theory of Everything; Contemporary Books, New York (1988). Peat is a science writer. Wrote, SCIENCE, ORDER AND CREATIVITY with David Bohm.

Barrow, John D. & Tipler, Frank J.; THE ANTHROPIC COSMOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE; Oxford University Press, New York; 1986. Barrow is Lecturer, Astronomy Centre, University of Sussex; Tipler is Professor of Mathematics and Physics, Tulane University, New Orleans.

Davies, Paul; THE MIND OF GOD, The Scientific Basis for a Rational World, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1992.

Weinberg, Steven; DREAMS OF A FINAL THEORY, Pantheon Books, New York, 1992. Weinberg received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979.

Davies, P.C.W. & Brown, Julian; SUPERSTRINGS, A Theory of Everything?; Cambridge University Press, New York (1988). This is based on a BBC radio program. Also as was THE GHOST IN THE ATOM, Cambridge University Press (1986). I will buy this book.

Weinberg, Stephen: THE FIRST THREE MINUTES: A MODERN VIEW OF THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE.

ON BIOLOGY, BIOCHEMISTRY AND GENETICS

DISCOVERING DNA, MEDITATIONS ON GENETICS AND A HISTORY OF THE SCIENCE, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, N.Y.,1983, by N.A.Tiley. A technical writer who spent a number of years studying the subject of genetics.

Dawkins, Richard; THE BLIND WATCHMAKER, Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design; W.W.Norton & Company; N.Y. 1986.

THE SELFISH GENE by Richard Dawkins, Oxford University Press, 1976. Dawkins is a zoologist at Oxford; also taught at Berkeley for 2 years; he was born in 1941.

Feinberg, Gerald & Shapiro, Robert; LIFE BEYOND EARTH, The Intelligent Earthling's Guide to Life in the Universe; William Morrow and Company, Inc., New York, 1980. Feinberg is Professor of Physics at Columbia, and Shapiro is Professor of Chemistry at NYU.

Shapiro, Robert; THE HUMAN BLUEPRINT, The Race to Unlock the Secrets of our Genetic Script; St. Martin's Press, New York (1991). Shapiro is Professor of chemistry at NYU.

Gould, Stephen Jay; WONDERFUL LIFE, The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History; W. W. Norton & Company, New York (1989). Gould was one of the first recipients of the MacArthur Fellowship and now teaches biology, geology, and the history of science at Harvard University.

Stephen Jay Gould; TIME'S ARROW TIME'S CYCLE, Myth and Metaphor in the Discovery of Geological Time; Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)

ON COMPLEXITY AND CHAOS

Lewin, Roger; COMPLEXITY, Life at the Edge of Chaos; Macmillan Publishing Company, New York (1992). Lewin has a Ph.D. in biochemistry and is currently considered to be one of the best science writers in the U.S.

Pagels, Heinz R.; DREAMS OF REASON, The Computer and the Rise of the Sciences of Complexity; Bantam Books, New York, 1988-89

Waldrop, M. Mitchell; COMPLEXITY, The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos; New York, Simon & Schuster, (1992). Waldrop has a PhD in physics but is primarily a science writer.

THE ORIGINS OF ORDER , Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution by Stuart Kauffman; Oxford University Press (1993). Kauffman is Professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a Fellow at the Santa Fe Institute.

FUTURISTIC THEMES

VIRTUAL REALITY, Summit Books, New York,1991, by Howard Rheingold, a professional writer.

Postman, Neil; TECHNOPOLY; The surrender of culture to technology; Alfred A. Knopf, New York, (1992). He is the chair of the Department of Communication Arts at NYU. Basically, he is a writer.

Levy, Steven; ARTIFICIAL LIFE, The Quest for a New Creation: Pantheon Books, New York (1992). Levy writes books.

ARTIFICIAL LIFE I & ARTIFICIAL LIFE II by Chris Langton and colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute.

THE GOD PARTICLE: IF THE UNIVERSE IS THE ANSWER, WHAT IS THE QUESTION by Leon Lederman & Dick Teresi.

THE SOCIETY OF MIND by Marvin Minsky