I'll try freedumb2003. It seems to me the basic points that Mikulecky (after Rosen) raises in this excerpt come down to:
(1) A complex system falls outside the formalism called the Newtonian Paradigm. Yet increasingly we are aware that biological organisms are preeminently complex systems.Another way to put this into perspective is to recognize that Rosen requires that formal and final causes be restored to modern science. It seems to me that Sir Francis Bacon became the father, if not of modern science, then of the modern scientific method, by abolishing formal and final causes from the purview of science, retaining only the other two Aristotelian causes, the material and efficient, as the proper business of the natural sciences exclusively. Evidently he did so because of what we might call the "anthropometric" bias implicit in formal and final causes. This can be illustrated in the case of final causes by Aristotle's remark, that "...no one would try to do anything if he were not likely to reach some limit (peras) [i.e., purpose or goal]; nor would there be reason in the world (nous), for the reasonable man always acts for the sake of an end — which is a limit." In short, just because a reasonable man acts for a purpose, this doesn't necessarily mean that Nature does.(2) "...complex systems contain semantic aspects which cannot be reduced to syntax." By semantic or semiotic aspects, he means meaningful (for the order of the organism) information presumably of an "inversely-causal metainformation" type as detailed Here. By syntax, generally he means the capability of a living system to "speak the language" of the ordering principle — the "language" of the semiotic meaning, which is the formal cause of the living system's own order (final cause). In other words, the whole (i.e., the living system) can never be merely the sum of its "material" parts.
(3) For any biologically functional component is itself "totally dependent on the context of the whole system and has no meaning outside that context (thus has no efficacy outside of that context). This is why reducing the system to its material parts loses information irreversibly." I.e., why the Newtonian Paradigm (the materialist, mechanistic conception) cannot comprehensively describe Nature. Its very choice of method eliminates the very possibility of comprehensive description because it effaces vital information on which the comprehensive description depends for its truth.
Indeed, the neo-Darwinists love to tell us that Nature is "'blind"; i.e., has no purpose at all. Everything just works out by happenstance, by a "random" (i.e., unguided, uninformed) process.
And yet it seems to me that the very idea of a natural biological function logically involves the idea of the purpose or goal for which the function exists. However, it seems Bacon felt that, since such causes seem to pertain "only" to human action, he took it for granted that it could not be supposed that they had any extension in the "objective" universe. And in any case would not be "direct observables" or amenable to direct experimental tests, from whence all our "certainty" about natural facts can arise.
And here we are today, on the threshold of a potential paradigm shift in the sciences in which formal and final causes are considered "legitimate" again.
Well, that would be my "take," FWIW.
Thank you so much for writing, freedumb2003!
p.s.: Anyone needing a refresher on Aristotle's four causes, I hope this will help:
The formal cause (eidos) is the pattern or design according to which materials are selected and assembled for the execution of a particular goal or purpose. For example, in the case of a Boeing 747, the blueprint (or schematic) would be its formal cause. This is the key “explanation” for the jet; for its construction materials and subcomponents would be only a pile of rubble (or a different jet) if they were not put together in the particular way its blueprint specified.The material cause is the basic stuff out of which something is made. The material cause of a Boeing 747, for example, would include the metals, plastics, glass, and other component materials used in its construction. All of these things belong in an explanation of the 747 because it could not exist unless they were present in its composition.
The efficient cause is the agent or force immediately responsible for bringing that material and that form together in the production of the Boeing 747. Thus, the efficient cause of the jet would include the efforts of engineers, materials fabricators, hydraulics specialists, and other workers who use the designated materials and components to build the jet in accordance with its specifying blueprint. Clearly the Boeing 747 could not be what it is without their contribution: It would remain unbuilt.
Lastly, the final cause (telos) is the end or purpose for which the Boeing 747 exists. The final cause of the jet would be to provide safe, reliable, comfortable air transportation for human beings. This is part of the explanation of the 747’s existence, because it never would have been built in the first place unless people needed a means of air transportation.
While I'm typing this response, I am not aware of my breathing rate or heart rate or digestive motility. Going even deeper, I do not command my cells to function in the particular organ system such as diaphragm muscles, or cardiac rhythm or intestinal constrictions. It's not just that there is an automatic functionality going on, it is that there are levels of functionality built up from quantum events straight through to a gasp or an infarction! The 'brane' of physical reality is very real. But it is not the ultimate or greatest brane of functionality.
I and many others of like mind would say that even my consciousness reaches from quantum events, to cellular functions, to organ functions and into some holographic function which is as yet undecipherd. We know we think, we know we choose, but we have yet to directly confront the source of these functions because they are not sourced in the electromagnetic activities of the brain, though there are certain functionalities which can be purposely triggered by electromagnetic stimuli.
When a person is confronted with making a choice of perhaps steak or fish, a range of memories activate, but the final choice is a completely non-electromagnetic function which then manifests with a range of electromagnetic events resulting in a waiter delivering the anticipated meat. How is this relevant? ... wait for it ...
Well, the soul makes the choice, then uses the body with it's complex layers of events to relate the choice. The soul is not the electromagnetic events. The electromagnetic events occur in linear time. The soul, on the other hand, is suspended from linear time but somehow uses that which is stuck in linear time to express the choice.
I happen to believe the soul is--in ascending order of complexity--will, emotion, and mind. I see these three in varying complex expression with higher mammals, but not with other animals to as such a degree. Plants, for example, might lack emotion or mind, but definitely have will.
The calves born on the farm around here exhibit differing levels of comprehension and curiosity for their environment. While there is a standard level of functionality--the calves share behavior traits making them cattle--there is occasionally born a seemingly smarter more inquisitive calf. I had the joy of observing just such a calf a few years ago, naming him Albert--for obvious reasons. Albert the calf exhibited curiosity and understanding of his environment far enough above the other calves in that year that it was obvious to more than just me. He was impossible to keep inside the fencing, and he learned very quickly from merely watching things being done. The farmer had to place a lock ont he gate because Albert learned very quickly to lift the latch and let himself in or out ... and he was still suckling at that stage! So, what's the point of the example?
Well, Albert was at the high range of intelligence for a species. There have been lower range ones, too. But Albert was still a bovine member, never an ape or other species. Yet he was special in many ways. Perhaps his brain had more synaptic connections, perhaps more corpus. I would bet it did, but that didn't drive Albert to explore, his soul used his greater capacity to explore more fully. We humans are like that, also. But we are different in a significant way ...
We humans have a soul, but we also have a spirit component which has bearing on our soul's choices. We humans identify right and wrong, and can do wrong willfully. Albert might have learned to avoid certain behaviors, but he had no value judgment as to whether these were right in the eyes of his Creator or not. We humans have that capacity because we have a spirit component which is not our soul, but is using our soul, much the way our soul uses our body. So why this long winded spiel?
I would like to propose that there is some sort of mechanistic aspect regardless of whether we are speaking of the body or the soul. There is some connection between body and soul, thus there is a mechanism which is the soul of each of us. How can this mechanism exist yet we do not sense it? ... That's where my fancy temporal argument comes in ... Dimension Time has variable expression levels: linear, planar, volumetric. The quantum realm is limited to the linear temporal variability. Whatever makes the soul mechanism is not confined to the linear temporal limits, yet reaches 'down' into the linear in order to share a means of expression and exchange in simple functionality.
Planar temporal reality will probably have some mechanistic reality which allows for things to occur (time and space are required for events to happen, and energy will have some materialistic expression albeit very different from what we currently categorize). But the limits are such that the brane of soul cannot be experience by the linear limited realm, just as the brane of spirit cannot be directly experience by the planar temporally limited soul.
Though we may 'feel' the spirit's influence--like a twinge of intuition, and Jesus encouraged us to do just that, since faith is a very powerful force in planar temporal reality, though it is very limited in linear temporal reality.
I think that's far enough out on the limb for now ...