The real role of the immune system

TKendrick psycler at netcom.com
Wed May 17 23:43:19 EST 1995


ChrisThoburn wrote:

: The process of observation will change the system (basic physics).  My intent 
: was not to suggest
: that one should only study intact systems,
: but rather that when thoeries (drawn 
: from components
: of a system) are applied to the system as a whole, they can not be given the 
: same level of
: validity.  I understand that for practical reasons, one must usually do 
: experiments in this manner,
: but I find that the majority of people fail to understand this concept.

I wholeheartedly agree. The results of an in vitro experiment only allow us 
to predict more confidently, not more accurately, what goes on within intact
systems.

: I agree, perspective is the key.  First, 
: sementics are of dubious value when you 
: play with
: thoughts in your head, but are of critical importance when you try to convey 
: your thoughts and
: ideas to others. (As you can tell I have cartainly ot mastered this area).  

Interesting. To me, mastery might be more the willingness to improve
continuously, rather than attain a point where impovement is no longer
conceivable. (I know, off-topic to the max. :)

: Second, every theory is
: wrong (either by construction of limitation 
: of detail) but conveys some aspect 
: of the underlying
: truth.  This being the case, it would seem 
: that the best way to approximate this 
: truth is to
: compile as many points of view as possible.  The only thing we know about the 
: truth is that it
: must explain all of the observations (the boundry).  Knowledge can be taught, 
: but understanding
: must come from within.

Very wise. No arguments from me.

TKendrick



More information about the Immuno mailing list