05_(76-89) Wisdom Traditions Nature and Inherent Human Values.pmd


WISDOM TRADITIONS, NATURE AND INHERENT HUMAN

VALUES

Leon Miller

Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia

“To see the world in a grain of sand and heaven in a wild flower,

to hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour.”

(William Blake, Auguries of Innocence)

º·¤Ñ́ ÂèÍ

ÈÒʹÒÂؤáÃกàÃÔèÁ¹Ñé¹àÃÕÂกกѹÇèÒ �¸ÃÃÁ»ÃÐླջÃÕªÒ­Ò³� «Öè§à»ç¹ªèǧกè͹
·ÕèÁ¹ØÉÂì̈ ÐÃÙé́ ÕÃÙéªÑèÇ ÀÒÇÐàº×éͧµé¹·ÕèÁ¹ØÉÂìกÅÁกÅ×¹กѺ¸ÃÃÁªÒµÔ¹Õéµéͧ༪ԭกѺกÒÃ
á·Ãก᫧¢Í§ÈÒʹÒã¹ÂؤãËÁè ÍѹÁռŷÓãËé¤ÇÒÁÊÑÁ¾Ñ¹ ì̧¢Í§Á¹ØÉÂìáÅиÃÃÁªÒµÔ
à»ÅÕè¹ä»ã¹ÇÔ¶Õ·Ò§·ÕèÁ¹ØÉÂì¤Ãͺ§Ó¸ÃÃÁªÒµÔ ÇÔ·ÂÒÈÒʵÃìáÅлÃѪ­ÒµèÒ§กçÂÖ́ ¶×Í
á¹Ç·Ò§¢Í§µ¹ã¹กÒ÷Õè̈ ÐÈÖกÉÒÀÇÇÔ·ÂҢͧกÒôÓçÍÂÙèâ´ÂÁÕÈÙ¹ÂìกÅÒ§ÍÂÙè·ÕèกÒÃÃѺÃÙé
¢Í§Á¹ØÉÂìáÅÐÁÑก¨ÐÅÐàÅÂกÒúÙóÒกÒÃกѺ¸ÃÃÁªÒµÔ º·¤ÇÒÁ¹Õé¾ÂÒÂÒÁÁͧÂé͹
กÅѺ价Õè �¸ÃÃÁ»ÃÐླջÃÕªÒ­Ò³� à¾×èÍáÊ´§ãËéàËç¹ÇèÒ �¸ÃÃÁ»ÃÐླջÃÕªÒ­Ò³�
ÁÕÊèǹ·ÓãËéÁ¹ØÉÂìÁÕºÙóÒกÒ÷ÕèÅéÓÅÖกกѺ¸ÃÃÁªÒµÔä é́ÍÂèÒ§äà «Ö觨Óà»ç¹µèͤÇÒÁà¨ÃÔ­
§Íก§ÒÁ¢Í§Á¹ØÉÂì º·¤ÇÒÁ¹Õé̈ ÐáÊ´§ãËéàËç¹ÇèÒ ­Ò³ËÂÑè§àËç¹àËÅèÒ¹Õé̈ ÐÊѧà¤ÃÒÐËì
กѺÇÔ·ÂÒÈÒʵÃì »ÃѪ­Ò áÅÐÈÒʹÒÊÁÑÂãËÁèä é́ÍÂèÒ§äÃ

Abstract

Early religions have often been called “wisdom traditions” and repre-

sent a stage of human existence that was prior to knowledge of good and evil.

This initial harmonious state in nature was disrupted by more modern reli-

gions, resulting in a more dominating relationship with nature. Science and

philosophy has further pursued their own investigations into the ontological

nature of existence, centered on human perception and often ignoring our

Prajna Vihara, Volume 12, Number 2 July-December 2011, 76-89

2000 by Assumption University Pressc

- -~76



integration with nature.  This paper attempts to look back to the earlier “wis-

dom traditions” to show how they can contribute to a deeper integration with

nature which is essential to human flourishing. It will show how these insights

can be synthesized with the insights from modern science, philosophy and

religion.

INTRODUCTION

Western and Eastern wisdom traditions assert that humanity was or-

dained, by the primordial forces shaping existence, to be well-integrated within

the environment. Western religious traditions describe this as a stage prior to

the knowledge of good and evil, thus prior to judgments based on preconcep-

tions (suggesting that human cognition was a factor in the initial period of

existence). Science and philosophy investigated the validity of such claims by

pursuing empirical (rational) evidence concerning the nature of existence and

how perception influences the human understanding of the nature of existence.

The resulting evidence led scholars to conclude that perception is the basis of

how we experience the phenomenal world.  By understanding the role of

perception in shaping the human experience of the phenomenal world we gain

insight into how to sustain a focus on nature’s beneficial opportunities and

avoid what is harmful to human well-being.  As a result of such an inquiry we

can better understand how to reduce the nature-human dualistic split.

The world’s wisdom traditions assert that it is possible for humans to

enjoy the feeling of being well-integrated with the environment and they pre-

scribed how to maintain a perceptual focus on what is essential for human

flourishing. Such a perspective has long been prescribed by the world’s wis-

dom traditions as the key to human flourishing.  The world’s wisdom traditions

have asserted that this is a preferable perspective from which to view and

experience existence.  They also state that the subsequent alteration of this

preferable perspective is unfortunate and should be rectified. By synthesizing

insights from ancient wisdom, modern science, philosophy and religion we

gain a better understanding of how humanity could enjoy a better-integrated

experience with the environment.

Humanity’s understanding of the nature of existence is primarily based

on perception.  Humanity has held a perspective on existence where nature

Leon Miller  77



and human culture exist in dichotomy.  But this perspective of nature has not

always been the view through which humanity perceived and experienced the

environment and is not the only view through which the nature-human rela-

tionship is based.  It is possible and preferable to have a perspective that

allows taking advantage of nature’s signaled opportunities for flourishing while

diminishing what would threaten human well-being.  Being able to take advan-

tage of this improved nature-human relationship is a matter of understanding

how perception shapes the human perspective on ontology, thus shaping the

human experience of existence.

The first segment of this article describes why the human biological

system has an inherent value preference for perceiving existence in a way that

provides better nature-human compatibility. I offer a biological explanation to

support the claim that humanity’s natural drive to be well-integrated within the

environment is characteristic of how humanity’s biological nature is consti-

tuted.  The second section of the article describes the possibility of enhancing

the perception of the nature-human relationship. The enhanced perspective

on the nature-human relationship (a perceptual focus on nature’s life enhanc-

ing opportunities) would contribute to human flourishing and aids humanity in

enjoying more of what we value.

The final section describes the significance that our natural value pref-

erence for cooperative interaction has for human culture, the progression of

civilization and for improving the nature-culture relationship.  A flourishing cul-

ture is built on increasing the range of internal and external beneficial inter-

changes. The world’s wisdom traditions have continued to proclaim that the

highest level of being can be actualized when humanity holds such a perspec-

tive on existence and when this perspective shapes the practices of individu-

als. Such a perspective takes us beyond a sense of dualistic contention into

improved connections with the things we need to flourish.  This is followed by

a conclusion summarizing the arguments made in the article.  The conclusion

reemphasizes ontology and teleology (the natural preference for beings that

are well-integrated with as many other aspects of existence as possible).

HUMANITY’S INHERENT VALUE PREFERENCE

Aristotle believed that all things (especially all organic things) exist

78  Prajna Vihara- -~



with the ontological necessity of maintaining integrity without which they will

begin to deteriorate (this includes both individuals and societies).  Aristotle’s

naturalism prompted him to claim that knowledge is intended to increase our

understanding of the teleological significance of natural processes plus to en-

hance our participation in natural processes.1  On the basis of this claim one

could argue that realizing one’s full potential (entelechy) for happiness, flour-

ishing and well-being is based on understanding the teleological significance of

human interactions (intersubjective and with nature).

Because concern for the self is tied to a concern for having beneficial

interactions with the environment-the only source of nourishment and growth-

good (or that which benefits humanity) would be that which enables humanity

to achieve its telos.  Bad (or that which harms) are those things which interfere

with humans achieving telos or that which diminishes the quality of those things

on which the human biological organism is dependent for existence.  In other

words intentionality is evident as a feature of nature’s telos. However, the

value nature’s telos has for enriching human existence is dependent on hu-

manity learning to shape encounters into beneficial and life enhancing out-

comes.

Thus experiencing eudaimonia requires developing a character trait

that as human beings (given the human biological and neurobiological nature)

is needed to flourish-to do and fare well in this world in which we inevitably

find ourselves-not just in the particular culture or society we happen to find

ourselves in.2  In this respect the understanding of ethics needs to be ex-

panded to include a particular new trait that would specify the importance

interactions have to achieving human telos.  Humanity’s telos is preordained

by the primordial biological forces that shaped patterns of natural interchange

into complex structures of beneficial exchange (the very basis of life for the

human organism and for human society is the ability to form structures of

cooperative interchange).  The fact that human behavior is directed at (or is

about) veridical interaction with the natural order means that the ontological

reason for human interactions is the natural human predisposition for seeking

appropriate reintegration with the natural order. The elements of humanity’s

biological nature demand nature-human reciprocal integration.

The world’s earliest wisdom traditions all spoke about humanity’s ini-

tial, naturally ordained inclination for being well-integrated within the environ-

ment. The belief was that humanity’s initial immersion in nature was character-

Leon Miller  79



istic of the way humanity’s biological nature is constituted.  Thus, the earliest

conceptualization of the nature-human experience reflected a prescription for

experiencing at-one-ment with the natural order. We are demanded by the

urges of human nature to interact with the environment.  The necessity of

human interaction affirms that the nature of the human experience is enhanced

when properly integrated with other elements in existence.3  In support of this

claim the world wisdom traditions (Eastern and Western) have asserted that it

is possible to have a well-integrated connection with nature (that is not only a

source of nourishment and growth but also the basis of a heightened sense of

well-being and harmony).

Recent research in cognitive science sheds light on the connection

between humanity’s inherent biological impulses and perception thus on the

significance of perception in the human experience of nature. Studies in per-

ceptual psychology and neurobiology reveal that the human inherent percep-

tual preference for viewing and experiencing nature-human interactions is

complementarity.4   The theory of complementarity is rooted in Gestalt theo-

ries of perception and was originally used to explain the figure-background

dynamics involved in human perception.

That is to say, in accordance with Vygotsky’s social formation of the

mind, that cognition serves the attempt to shape internal and external stimulus

into complimentarity”.5  Cognition prefers to achieve a complementary inter-

action between the perceiver and the perceived. Modern research in

complementarity, conducted by physicists, biologists, psychologists and soci-

ologists agree that it explains the link between the biological aspects of human

behavior, how individuals self-organize, the structuring of culture and the hu-

man relationship to the environment.6  In other words “The whole body (in-

cluding the human cognitive abilities) is a biological self-organizing system that

interacts with the environment in a way that shapes out of environmental pos-

sibilities a unique eco-niche that best complements its organism.

Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientist Gerald Edelman implies that

complementarity explains the fundamental connection between nature’s bio-

logical principles and the value preferences naturally triggered as human cog-

nitive skills developed.  The human neurological system (an extension of the

human biological system) prompts a neurological value preference that rein-

forces behavior that promises an undisturbed enjoyment of nature’s beneficial

opportunities.7  The struggle for survival in an unpredictable environment pre-

80  Prajna Vihara- -~



disposes neural value preference.  The preference is in favor of values, proven

by natural selection, that contribute to shaping fortuitous encounters into an

experience of life sustaining outcomes.  He claims that humans are “hard wired”,

with a neurobiological, value predisposition that developed with the intent to

“reinvent” internal-external ecological equilibrium.

Many of the world’s wisdom traditions have always asserted that

achieving the natural value preference for life-enhancing interactions with na-

ture sparks regeneration, benefits health, increases human vitality and height-

ens mental abilities.  Eastern and Western science would add that the com-

plexity of the human organism is a composite of natural elements in coopera-

tive interchange.  These natural elements-reorganized into the form of a com-

plex structure-still require reintegration with the environment (sparked by the

biological nature of the organism) in the form of beneficial interchange with the

environment. “This is because our complex structures are generated by con-

junctive unions which depends on effectively integrating with others”.8  Both

myth and science agree that the human inherent value preference has been

shaped into conceptions of what will satisfy natural biological drives.  What

has been ordained by existence was shaped into the earliest and most cher-

ished cultural concepts of humanity.

ENHANCING THE PERCEPTION OF THE NATURE-HUMAN

RELATIONSHIP

The drive for complementarity or for continuous reintegration-evident

in the biological make-up of both nature and humans-can be thought of as the

tie that binds all of existence into integral relatedness. Science, philosophy

and religion all agree that the integrity of complex organisms is enhanced by

fulfilling the inherent urge for better nature-human compatibility and in the hu-

man situation helps the individual to experience a fuller sense of self.  Coop-

erative interchange can be thought of as a natural biological value preference

that establishes the inclination for social cooperation and culture. This natural

value preference has been expressed by the world’s wisdom traditions as the

conviction that harmonious interaction is consistent with what was ontologically

ordained to be best for human well-being and for the human experience in

nature.

Leon Miller  81



Eastern and Western perennial philosophy claim that viewing and ex-

periencing existence from the perspective of humanity’s inherent value prefer-

ence is personally beneficial, mentally beneficial (heightens cognitive abilities),

and is socially beneficial. Such a realization is more likely to result in the expe-

rience of elevated being.  Perennial philosophy has claimed that the funda-

mental biological principles of creation have encoded the organic elements of

nature with intention that can be decoded by humans into an understanding of

the teleological significance of existence.  From the perspective of the most

respected wisdom traditions of both the East and the West the teleological

significance of existence is realizing how to enjoy the sense of elevated being.

As human cognitive skills developed reliable knowledge was shaped

by the human neural network firing in patterns aligned with the neural value

preference. The value preference favored relating to things in nature in ways

that shape environmental interactions into outcomes that are beneficial for

individuals and cultures. Such knowledge was key to human survival and the

effort to organize flourishing cultures. In other words the thriving of humanity

and culture was dependent on realizing that in spite of nature’s threats culture

could produce accumulated knowledge of how to recognize nature’s signaled

opportunities for growth and how to effectively manage the disturbances that

would threaten the flourishing of the culture.  Many of the world’s wisdom

traditions have asserted that achieving the natural value preference for life-

enhancing interactions with nature sparks regeneration, benefits health, in-

creases human vitality and increases the feeling of Holistic well-being.

Knowledge is considered reliable if it helps the individual to maintain

organic integrity while interacting successfully with other aspects of the envi-

ronment that are needed for flourishing. As a result of such cooperative inter-

action the fullest sense of self is actualized.  It is such knowledge that is a

preferable basis for the cultural belief systems regulating human interactions.

The emergence of culture is indeed based on the recognition that structures of

cooperative interactions work best for helping humanity face environmental

challenges.  Charles Sanders Peirce asserted that knowledge of what extends

units of cooperative interactions thus increasing life enhancement is discerned

by accurately appraising the true nature of environmental signs.

Peirce claimed that patterns of natural interchange are evidence of

biological elements intentionally participating in efforts to cooperatively form

structures of beneficial exchange (the very basis of life for the human organism

82  Prajna Vihara- -~



and for human society is the ability to form structures of cooperative inter-

change). Flourishing depends on being able to recognize and participate in

these opportunities for cooperative interchange.  Peirce would add that the

recognition of ambiguity in nature is not due to environmental conditions alone

as perception is contingent on the perspective of the experiencer.  Peirce

argues that reliable knowledge reduces the disturbance of nature’s ambiguity

by increasing the probability of anticipation becoming experience.

Peirce claimed that nature primarily acts on the basis of repeated pat-

terns.  These repeated patterns (that we call the laws of nature) he referred to

as The Principle of Agape.  Peirce goes on to explain that there are always

some spontaneous, unexpected disruptions that are characteristic of this dy-

namic creative force.9  Because of such possible disruptions humans sensed

that the opportunities in the environment were surrounded by possible inter-

ferences to the effort to gain satisfaction. This resulted in humans developing

acute sensitivity to the ambiguity in the nature-human relationship.

Peirce realized that nature is filled with opportunities for nourishment,

growth and regeneration.  Nature is also abundant with encounters best

avoided.  This can result in the impression that the dreadful aspects of the

environment are juxtaposed to the individual, intentionality and culture.  Peirce

however thought that attempts to avoid the distressing disturbances in nature

are more successful as a result of accurately appraising nature’s signals, by

acting on the basis of accurate knowledge and by extending the range of

cooperative interchange.

Peirce believed that individuals act on the basis of knowledge that is

believed to be reliable for effectively managing encounters with the environ-

ment.  Knowledge proven effective for managing these encounters is consid-

ered to be epistemologically reliable knowledge.  Peirce considered knowl-

edge as reliable when it accurately describes how to enjoy nature’s life en-

hancing possibilities.  According to Peirce nature is abundant with signs that

can be interpreted to understand how to enrich the human experience.  Thus

he held that reliable knowledge guides the individual to perceive possibilities

that nature provides for being internally and externally well-integrated.

Leon Miller  83



THE HUMAN INHERENT VALUE PREFERENCE FOR

INTEGRAL  BEING

The world’s wisdom traditions claim that the fundamental biological

principles of creation have encoded within each and every human cell an in-

tention that can be decoded by humans as an inherent value preference for

extending the range of beneficial interchanges and interactions.  From the per-

spective of the world’s wisdom traditions nature has ontologically structured

the human organism so that it has a natural value preference for experiencing

more beneficial interactions (intersubjectively, socially, and with the environ-

ment).  I argue that all complex organisms sense this encoded ontological

intention as a natural urge to be even better integrated and to experience

enhanced cooperative interactions.  In this respect prudence demands con-

sidering that the world’s wisdom traditions are right to admonish reconciling

this breach between humans and nature in order to enjoy a more elevated

human experience.

The world’s traditional belief systems lay the foundation for the expe-

rience of integrity by promoting being in harmony with the primordial forces of

existence as the means of being in harmony with the self. They prescribe integ-

rity as a means of aligning human values and human actions with what has

been intended by the natural forces of existence.  The elements of one’s own

physical make-up demand interaction with other elements in existence.  We

are aware that doing this successfully brings benefit. Wisdom traditions advo-

cate acts of integrity in order to promote the beneficial reintegration of ele-

ments necessary for growth and regeneration. This is the key to the experi-

ence of health and wholeness.  We know that ineffectiveness in this regard can

bring threat or harm. The threat is maximized to the extent that humanity fails in

an attempt to be properly integrated with the other elements in the environ-

ment.

The nature of phenomenal existence-a composite of the elements of

nature constantly in interchange in the effort to experience reintegration-makes

evident the fact that the world is not made up of atomistic entities juxtaposed

to each other.  In other words, in accordance with Aristotelian teleology, as

biological organisms human survival, growth, nourishment and well-being are

dependent on shaping necessary interactions into harmonious interchange.

Because of the fact of interdependence the purpose, goal or function of hu-

84  Prajna Vihara- -~



man activity is enhancing interactions. Thus, to improve the quality of human

existence we must learn to view the parts in such a way that we perceive them

as Holistically integrated, thus the particular quality of the total increases in

life-enhancing value.10  Such a perspective on the nature of existence takes us

beyond a sense of dualistic contention into improved relationships.  It takes us

beyond a subject-object split into cooperative union.

Humanity’s value preference accounts for what John Searle (philoso-

pher of mind) calls the cooperative and coordinated character of collective

intentionality.  Searle adds that this value preference is rooted in the biological

structure of the human organism thus stems from the ontological nature of

“how the world in fact is”.  In other words collective intentionality  and coop-

erative behavior are displays of natural functions. “For the individual there is a

value in survival and reproduction, and for a culture there is a value in continu-

ity.  But natural function takes place only within a set of prior assignments of

value (including purposes, teleology, and other functions)”.11

It is in this respect that neuropsychologists assert that there is an in-

herent drive for growth and increased complexity imprinted into organic or-

ganisms by nature’s underlying biological principles. One way to appreciate

what this entails is to survey a few representative types of organism-environ-

ment couplings, starting with single-cell organisms and moving up by degrees

to more complex animals. “In every case we can observe the same adaptive

process of interactive coordination between a specific organism and recurring

characteristics of its environment”.12  Thus it can be argued that it is an inher-

ent human neurological (cognitive) urge that prompted shaping human coop-

erative interactions into culture.

Humanity has learned that culture, as an extended network of com-

plex cooperative structures, supports thriving in spite of the challenges the

culture is confronted with. Humanity’s fundamental cognitive experience be-

gan with a learned response to environmental stimulus.  These cognitive abili-

ties have been a special capacity that has played an important role in formulat-

ing our response to the challenge of unpredictable encounters. This ability, if

not a special gift of nature, certainly was developed to help us have a better

experience with nature as well as with each other.

John Dewey believed that a cultural worldview represents an accu-

mulation of knowledge of how to manage interactions in ways that promote

the flourishing of the culture.  Human culture was spurred on by the realization

Leon Miller  85



that beneficial interaction is not only basic to maintaining individual integrity it

is essential for the integrity of all structured units.  This means that the worldview

of a flourishing culture must be based on expanding its scope of internal and

external cooperative interactions.  In other words, to promote a thriving cul-

ture neural value preferences must be shaped into conceptual understandings

of how to extend the range of cooperative interactions.

Dewey understood that there is a certain contingency that human cul-

ture faces in relationship to nature that creates precarious nature-culture inter-

actions.  Dewey claimed that the ability to survive in the natural system de-

pends upon an ability to foresee possible dangerous consequences.  The abil-

ity to enjoy that system depends upon the perceptual ability to foresee nature’s

opportunities for satisfaction and fulfillment.13  Dewey recognized that be-

cause humans, like all animals, adapt to the environment in ways that effect the

environment; “Any disequilibrium of an organism in its environment, encom-

passes both organism and environment”.14

CONCLUSION

One of the old maxims that motivated much of our behavior toward

nature (and other aspects in existence) was “only the strong survive!” The

strong would flourish and the weak would diminish. This led many people to

presume that the weak would be dominated by the strong. I believe that we

are now beginning to conceive of the possibility of acting on the basis of a new

maxim:  Existence prefers those who create the least disturbance to other

elements in existence as possible. Existence prefers those who are well-inte-

grated with as many other aspects of the environment as possible. The prefer-

ence of the forces of existence is to restrict or eliminate beings based on the

extent to which they damage other aspects of existence. We are all aware of

the fact that existence can and certainly has at times eliminated those beings

not appropriately integrated with the environment.

Recent research in neurobiology affirms that humanity has been hard

wired by a natural biological principle urging harmonious, cooperative inter-

actions as a selective value preference.  We have come to value the nature of

harmonious interchange because our sense of self, as we prefer to be, is de-

pendent on increased cooperative interactions.  As admonished by the world’s

86  Prajna Vihara- -~



wisdom traditions by adhering to the human value preference we can achieve

a desired state. The advantages of achieving this desired state prompts reli-

gion, philosophy and science to promote cooperative interactions.  In other

words, there is a human value preference “For achieving unity as a self, to

have a unique center and to find common ground and relation or unity with

others. In other words, human beings strive for unique individuality or fulfill-

ment of capacities with a unique angle of vision and, at the same time, to

improve the quality of their associations and to establish new common ground

in friendship and communication”.15

Writers in such diverse fields as social psychology, neurobiology, phi-

losophy and religion have all found that the endeavor to enhance the human

experience is contingent on addressing the existential and ontological condi-

tions of humanity. In other words, scholars concerned about the social psy-

chological condition of humanity also demonstrate a concern about the onto-

logical nature of Being.  This has prompted many scholars __ in their effort to

help humanity experience greater well-being __ to address human nature and

the value preferences that motivate human behavior.  Results from the body of

research on the underlying motivation behind human behavior has led social

scientists to claim that humanity has basic needs for relatedness and also has

the need to feel well-integrated within particular social and environmental con-

texts. Society, according to this social psychological view, has the responsibil-

ity of structuring itself to satisfy the human need for experiencing well-being in

terms of being well-integrated.

Endnotes

1Falcon, Andrea. (2005) Aristotle and the Science of Nature: Unity Without

Uniformity.  Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 16.
2Hursthouse, Rosalind. (2002)  Virtues and Reasons: Philippa Foot and Moral

Theory: Essays in Honour of Philippa Foot.  (Hursthouse, Rosalind. Lawrence, Gavin.

& Quinn, Warren. Edts).  Oxford, Oxford University Press, 68.
3Dewey, John. (1922)  Nature and Conduct.  New York, Henry Hold and Com-

pany, 10.
4Gibson, James J. (1986) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. (New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 127.
5Portugali, Juval. (1996) The construction of Cognitive Maps.  Netherlands,

Kluwer Academic Publishers, 39-40.

Leon Miller  87



6Berntson, Gary. & Cacioppo, John.  (2008) A Contemporary Perspective on

Multilevel Analyses and Social Neuroscience.  Interdisciplinary Research, 36-37.
7Edelman, Gerald. (1992) Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of the Mind.

N.Y.: Basic Books, 102.
8Dewey, John. (1929) Experience and Nature. London, George Allen & Unwin,

Ltd, 15.
9Peirce, Charles S. (1893) Evolutionary Love. The Monist, vol. 3, 6:303.
10Peirce, Charles, S. (1974) Ethical and Esthetical Goodness. Collected Papers

of Charles Sanders Peirce (edited by Hartshorne and Weiss). Cambridge, Harvard

University Press, 84.
11Searle, John. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York, The Free

Press, 6 & 15.
12Johnson, Mark. &  Rohrer, Tim. (2007) We are Live Creatures: Embodiment,

American Pragmatism, and the Cognitive Organism. Body, Language and Mind, Volume

1: Embodiment. (Ziemke, Tom.  Zlatev, Jordan. & Frank, Roslyn. Eds.). New York, Mou-

ton de Gruyter Publishers, 24.
13Scheckler, Rebecca Klein. (2000) Weaving Feminism, Pragmatism, and Dis-

tance Education.  Doctoral Dissertation in Philosophy.  Published by the Education

Dept. of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 35.
14Dewey, John. (1929) Experience and Nature. London, George Allen & Unwin,

Ltd., 253.
15Ziniewicz, Gordon, L. (2006) Essays on the Philosophy of John Dewey.

Adventures in Philosophy, 4.

Bibliography

Berntson, Gary. & Cacioppo, John.  (2008)  A Contemporary Perspective

on Multilevel Analyses and Social Neuroscience.  Interdisciplinary

Research.

Dewey, John. (1929) Experience and Nature. London, George Allen &

Unwin, Ltd.

Dewey, John. (1922)  Nature and Conduct.  New York, Henry Hold and

Company, 10.

Edelman, Gerald. (1992) Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of the

Mind. N.Y., Basic Books.

Falcon, Andrea. (2005) Aristotle and the Science of Nature: Unity With-

out Uniformity.  Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.

Gibson, James J. (1986) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.

(New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

88  Prajna Vihara- -~



Hursthouse, Rosalind. (2002)  Virtues and Reasons: Philippa Foot and

Moral Theory: Essays in Honour of Philippa Foot.  (Hursthouse,

Rosalind. Lawrence, Gavin. & Quinn, Warren. Edts).  Oxford, Ox-

ford University Press.

Johnson, Mark. &  Rohrer, Tim. (2007) We are Live Creatures: Embodi-

ment, American Pragmatism, and the Cognitive Organism. Body, Lan-

guage and Mind, Volume 1: Embodiment. (Ziemke, Tom.  Zlatev,

Jordan. & Frank, Roslyn. Eds.).  New York, Mouton de Gruyter

Publishers.

Peirce, Charles, S. (1974) Ethical and Esthetical Goodness. Collected Pa-

pers of Charles Sanders Peirce (edited by Hartshorne and Weiss).

Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Peirce, Charles S. (1893) Evolutionary Love. The Monist, vol. 3.

Portugali, Juval. (1996) The construction of Cognitive Maps.  Netherlands,

Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Searle, John. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York, The

Free Press, 6 & 15.

Scheckler, Rebecca Klein. (2000) Weaving Feminism, Pragmatism, and

Distance Education.  Doctoral Dissertation in Philosophy.  Published

by the Education Dept. of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University.

Leon Miller  89