You are on page 1of 160

Towards a philosophy of gerontology, version 8

1.Introduction. 2.Fundamental gerontological considerations on aging. 2.0.Definition of senescence. 2.1.On the process of senescence.

2.3.The forms of the pressure of time. 2. . !"planator#$theoretic aspects of senescence. 3. %hilosophical thoughts on the e"planation of aging. . To&ards eradication of aging' a philosophical strateg#. 1.Introduction: An atempt to mediate a deeper compatibility between Philosophy and Gerontology (hat is philosoph# in general, or &hat is the

specific of philosoph#) For *ristotel, philosoph# is the +no&ledge of the first principles and causes $ those supreme principles &hich e"plain the &hole e"istence,-oltescu, 2002 p.1.0 /. For 0ant, philosoph# is +no&ledge 1# concepts2 or the search of the limits of our cognitive capacities. For 3egel, philosoph# is the rational +no&ledge of a1solute. For (ittgenstein, philosoph# is the activit# of eludation of thoughts. For analitical philosophers, philosoph# is the anal#sis of scientific language or of common language. For 3eidegger, philosoph# is the e"istential anal#tics , that is

investigating of those modes of 1eing that are proper to human e"istent,Dasein/2 For Fran+furt school representatives ,4arcuse/, philosoph# is the critical theor# of modern societ# and of forms of reification and human alienation in the 1ac+ground of this societ#. -oltescu considered that 5In its esence, philosoph# is this reflection, this meditation 1# &hich &e &ant to understand, to distinguish the sense of &orld and of our proper e"istence$$$and 1# understanding, to li1erate us, to con6uer our spiritual autonom#5,-oltescu 2002, p.21/. 4ost philosophers had

considered that philosoph# is a +no&ledge, differences appear either concerning its o17ect, first principles, the a1solute, the universal etc./ or its method ,1# concepts to 0ant/ or its facult#,reason, senses etc/. 8ut, is philosoph# limited 7ust to a form of contemplative +no&ledge disinterested from a practical or applicative point of vie&) Tudosescu considers that5...onl# in limits in &hich it conditionate value reedifications at the level of other forms of social conscience and, respective, modifications in the structure of the ta1les of cultural values, so that these to

stimulate changes &hith deep character in the structure and d#namics of civili9ations, &e can sa# that philosoph# have an applicative character5,Tudosescu 1::;, p.1.:/. <omeones had emphasi9ed the propensit# to&ards universalit#, the tendenc# to cover the &hole realit#' philosoph# is a general conception a1out the &orld2 it tries to discern the most general determinations of realit#, that is of nature, societ# and thin+ing. 8ut, neither thought is an universal characteristic of univers nor societ#. The most general determinations of &orld concern either the fundamental$necessar# level

of realit#, su1stance, microph#sics level, or some characteristics of the univers as a &hole, li+e evolution or cosmic 1ecoming. Others considered that, philosoph# studies e"istence in its totalit# . 8ut 8eaufret have &ritten a1out (ollf'5(ollf is proposing for himself therefore to ma+e the census of essentialias, that is of all that it can 1e said a1out 1eing as 1eing. This science is, 1# conse6uence, the science of 1eing as posi1ilit#....One can tal+ a1out 1eing &ithout to sa# a &ord a1out its e"istence. The last is 7ust a 5complementum posi1ilitatis5, a complement of posi1ilit#.5,8eaufret 1::8,

p.11/. On the other hand, there are special philosophies, as ethics or ethical philosoph#, &hich are 6uasi$disinterested a1out some ontic or ontological aspects of realit#. There is some autonom# 1et&een some philosophical disciplines, such as there is a certain freedom in human life. *n alternative characteri9ation of philosoph# concerns its aims. Thus, for =escher the characteristic aims of philosoph# are' ,i/ %rovide ans&ers to those domain definitive 6uestions, that is, propound and comunicate information that conve#s these ans&ers . , (e &ant

ans&ers./ ,ii/ <ee+ for cogenc#, that is, fit those ans&ers out &ith a rationale that attains cogenc# and conviction 1# &a# of evidentiation, su1stantiation, and demonstration. ,(e &ant not 7ust ans&ers 1ut ans&ers &orth# of acceptance./ ,iii/ <trive for rational econom#, pursuing the tas+s at issue in points ,i/ and ,ii/ in a &a# that is rationall# satisfacator#, that is, in an efficient, effective, economical ... The general characteri9ation pro1lem of philosoph# relative to its particular domains or of its specific relative to other cultural

forms$$$art, religion, science$$$is a metaphilosophical one. 8ut, ho& it can 1e 7ustified this diversit# of opinions a1out the esence of philosoph#) -oltescu had considered that' 5The t&o levels of philosoph#, >first$order philosoph# and metaphilosoph#? are in interaction, are situated in a circularit# raport, the thin+ers options in the plane of proper philosoph# having effects on their metaphilosophical conceptions and, converse, their metaphilosophical conceptions influence their investigations in the plane of

proper philosoh#.5,-oltescu, 2002, p.18$1:/. About the antireduction of philosophy, science, mind and imortality @i+e Aacariu et al ,2001, p.2;B/, I consider that the previous characteri9ations are partl# correct 1ut the# concern philosoph# from a single perspective, sometimes from a reductionist point of vie&. The# can 1e considered as 6uasi$complementar#. 3o&ever, previous characteri9ations, either in particular or ta+en all together simultaneousll#, do not succed to surprise all that

&as, all that is, all that &ill 1e, all that can 1e philosoph#. 8ut, until to &hat limits can 1e philosoph# e"tended and developed) (hat is philosoph#) Or, can 1e it unificated) If an unification 1# reduction at one of the previous characteri9ations is inaccepta1le, still remain a posi1ilit# of unification not 1# reduction 1ut 1# an ultimate persistent aim, ideal. I &ill ilustrate this &ith an e"ample from philosoph# of science. %opper considered that truth is the regulative ideal of science, and in this sense truth ma# have an unificator# role, relative to various special

sciences, as a common aim, ideal, tac+ to&ard all the scientific propensities converge. 8ut, truth single ma#1e is a too strong criterion of scientificit# and is not enough as an ideal of science, 1ecause the common statements as 5the sun is 1rilliant5 are not verita1le scientific statements, 1ecause the# are too common$truths. 4ore constrains are needed. In addition, science should to pursue also sistematic e"planation, the la&s and the freedom grades of universe at all its levels, from microcosmos to individual human conscience, societ# and macrocosmos.

Against antistructural reductionism Fet9er assume that science aims at the discover# of la&s of nature that have the form of general principles that are applica1ile for the purposes of e"planation and prediction. On the other hand, science should not to prefere simplicit# and econom# necessarl#. <impler theories ought to 1e prefered to comple" alternatives onl# in the cases in &ich the# are also ade6uate, truth. I addition, &e do not +no& a priori that realit# is simple. Other thin+ that, science tend to&ards unit#,cf. Cold and <tol7ar, 1:::/. 3o&ever,

science should to pursue unit# onl# in the case in &ich &orld is real# unitar#. 8ut, &e do not +no& a priori that universe have an ultimate universal unit#. This aims are prefera1le 1ut the# are contingent aims, there1# the# have a contingent scientific value. 4a#1e, the universe have a fundamental ontological level &ich have a necessar# e"istence, and conse6uentl# is universal, forDin ever# posi1le &orld, 1ut the universe unit# should not 1e identified &ith the unit# of science. The unit# of universe e"ist at the fundamental ontological level, 1ut the unit# of human science is at the level of

human conscious level. The human consciousness is something that e"ist at an upper ontological level, that depend on a more comple" level of organi9ation. If the 5elementar# particles5 are not elementar#, if there e"ist an ultimate uni6ue$t#pe$of$ ontological$primitive, ho&ever, 5organi9ation is a propert# &ich cannot 1e reduced to the properties of its parts, for the 1ehavior of each part depends on those of the others and on the aims of the &hole.5,Del =e, 1::8/. 8# previous phrase I have not intentioned to defend the autonom# of chemistr#, 1iolog# or of ps#cholog# against microph#sicsEs

imperialism. I onl# intended to critici9e the tendenc# to reduce all the emergent properties of s#stems &ith comple" organi9ation to the sums of the properties of their microparts. I disageed &hith idea that all the phenomena from superior organi9ational comple"it# levels supervene as simple sums of the phenomena from lo&er levels. The superior cognitive capacities of human 1rain are a1sent at the single neuron level, that is neurons are not small 1rains. 8rain is not a 1ig neuron. For e"emple, if &e ta+e t&o thousand of resistors and &e tr# to connect them in all

posi1ile structures, &e +no& that there is onl# one unnecessary structure, &ich is total serial, in &ich the total resistance, the phenomenon from higher level, is the sum of the resistance of each resistor, or the sum of the properties of phenomena from the lo&er level, 1ut in structures that involve parallel conected resistors, the total resistance is not a simple sum of the resistance of individual resistors. The propert# that is comon 1oth to the higher level and to the lo&er level is 5resistitivit#5. *nd, in the non$serial resistors corpus the difference in the total

resistance is than+s to structure. 3o&ever, this resistor corpus have a aditive propert#, a propert# that is onl# the sum of the properties of parts' its mass. Onl# its mass do not depend on its structure. 8ut, the previous e"emple concern a set of o17ects that are of the same +ind. If &e add to resistors also condensators, transistors and other parts, and tr# to erect a computer, than the properties of computer &ill 1e onl# the sum of the properties of its parts) 3o& &ill &e add resistivity &ith condensativity) *n other argument antireductionist in spirit,

comming from cognitive neuroscience, is that of Fuart9 and <e7no&s+i concerning ho& develop mind. The# present to paradigms that tr# to e"plain the development of mind' 5For selectionism, then, development mar+s a reduction in representational comple"it#. In contrast, neural constructivism sees development as a progressive increase in representational comple"it#.5 ,Fuart9, <. G <e7no&s+i, T.H., 1::;/. (ith regard to the measure of the representational comple"it#, the# present three main candidates 's#naptic num1ers, a"onal

ar1ori9ation, and dendritic ar1ori9ation. *nd, &ith man# empirical evidences,e.g., 8ourgeois et al. 1:: / the# sho& that there is no in the temporal interval of development a change,a sudenll# eliminator# selectivit# as pretend selectionism/ &ich sustain selectionism, on the contrar# the# argue for neural constructivism, that is for development as an increase in comple"it#. *nd, this is not in favour of simplicit#. 3o&ever, I thin+ that the developmental properties of mind should to depend also

on the s#naptic spatial distri1ution, not onl# on the s#naptic num1er. In addition, there are &riters, li+e van den 8os, &ich propose a frame&or+ for animals consciousness stud# &ich is 1ased on a hierarchical organi9ational feed1ac+ model of central nervous s#stem. van den 8os defined consciousness5 as a propert# of neural networks of self$organi9ing s#stems dedicated to dealing &ith rapidl# changing environments affording fle"i1ilit# in 1ehavioral patterning5,>van den 8os, 2000?/. 3e consider that'

the 1rain structures form a functional unit. the mental states have t&o parts'one invariant,&ich is open to stud# in relation &ith speciesE Im&elt/ and one variant. the specific contents of a mental state at a particular time point is dependent on momentaril# active neural connections &ithin the specific net&or+ and on the information encoded in these connections. the encoded information is formed 1# the specific input ,through sensor# organs/ and output ,the movements that are made/

relationship in the hierarchical sistem. On the other hand, 1et&een the neuronal level and the neuronal net&or+ level there is a difference that is partial analogous &ith that &ich there is 1et&een the atomic level and the molecular level, or 1et&een the macromolecular level and the celular level, or 1et&een celular and tisular levels . If thin+ing there is onl# at the conscious level, and the consciousness is a propert# of a net&or+ &ich is situated at a superior level of a hierarch#, then thin+ing and animals consciousness cannot 1e reducedDlimited at

properties of a singular neuron, as must to pretend the neuron doctrine.The correct tendenc# of present is to recogni9e that there is a dependenc# 1et&een organi9ation of conscience of animals and the organi9ation of 1rain. On the other hand, the posi1le relationships and comunications 1et&een neurons depend also on the properties of neurons. 8ut, the properties of interactions 1et&een sets of special organi9ed neurons, depend also on the glo1al properties of those sets, &ich depend partial on the specific organi9ation of those sets, and on the other

influences from -J<. Thus, properties of neurons plus the 6uantit# ,the num1er/ of neurons determine a 1ig set of posi1le -J<s, as the set of the -J<s of mamals. From all posi1le -J<s, the environment >competition, the fight for survival orDand reproduction, the capacit# of pro1lem solving even 1# deceptive conditioning? have selected some. 8ut, the properties of neurons, &hen there are more than one neuron, cannot determine onl# one t#pe of special organi9ation of -J<, 1ut onl# a non$diferentiated set of posi1ilities, or the general la&s of the organi9ation of an# posi1le

-J<, &ich permit the e"istence of a great num1er of different special organi9ations of -J<. *nd, if &e consider the superior cognitive emergent properties of an individual -J<, li+e that of human, I thin+ that, &e &ill reali9e that the properties of its single neurons form in the e"planation of those superior cognitive properties onl# the necesar# conditions$$$ &ith the same neurons ma# 1e constructed other different -J<s$$$ and that for the e"planation of the specific or individual properties of a -J< &e have to consider also its organi9ation, structure,

functioning, &ich form in its e"planation a sufficient condition. On the other hand, there e"ist aditive properties, as &ould 1e the ph#sical mass of 1rain, &ich do not depend on the arrangement of the parts of the &hole. Thus, at different levels of organi9ational and functional comple"it# there are emergent properties &ich cannot 1e founded at certain too lo&er levels and &ich are not 7ust simple sums of the phenomena from &ich the# supervene. For e"emple, chemists, at least Del =e, admit the ireduci1ilit# of higher levels properties ,li+e, the glo1al properties of cells/ to the

lo&er level properties$$$1# ireduci1ilit# I intended to sa# that a cell is not 7ust a 6uantit# of molecules or macromolecules$$$in the folo&ing &a#' a molecule is a collection of nuclei and electrons. the &a# in &ich are put together nuclei and electrons matter, and the connections ,chemical 1onds or microforce fields/ determine the properties of the &hole. a complete description of the electrons and nuclei &ich form the parts of a molecule is not a complet description of an individual molecule,

1ecause the &hole realit# of a molecule include also emergent properties. the properties of nuclei and electrons and their numerical cantit#, the constrains of universal environment plus the conte"tual constrains, determine all the t#pe of intramolecular connections and molecular arrangements. the particular arrangement of nuclei and electrons in a molecular structure tend to satisf# the actions of force fields. 1ut the non$additive properties of a molecule as a &hole depend also on its specific molecular

structure, and the# neither can 1e finded at level of the properties of nucleus, neither are uni6ue determinated 1# the the properties of the nuclei or of the electrons. a cell, is &hat it is, not 1ecause it &ould correspond to a metasta1le configuration of atoms and electrons 1# &ich it is constituted, 1ut 1ecause its coordinated activit# ,enteleh#/ is finali9ed, aimed at holding it alive in a particular ,normal/ state. Del =e considers that, for a complet description of an entit# &ich appear as unitar# at a certain level, &e must to descri1e the

collection of all the previous levels &ich appear in a hierarch# of an organi9ational and functional comple"it#, and that at each previous level the information a1out the considered o17ect is partial latent and indeterminated. In evolutionar# ps#cholog# it is considered that human mind is the result of a modular organi9ation of 1rain2 the modules of 1rain have multiple speciali9ed functions li+e' receptive functions, motor functions, or for the formation and the criticise of 1eliefs2 and these modules are interconnected. 3o&ever, this modular vie& is

critici9ed 1# neural constructivism. *ll these ,the hierarch#, modularit# or net&or+s properties/ tend to falsif# the thesis that human mind or the integral consciousness animal e"perience can 1e reduced, or can 1e the product of a single neuron, untill to the level of the singular neuron, as must to pretend the neuron doctrine. 4a#1e, neuron can 1e an unit# of J<, 1ut cannot 1e an unit# of conscious states. T&o man &ith the same num1er of s#napses and &ith the same num1er of neurons can differ in their mental properties, due to s#naptic spatial distri1ution. %olitical

sciences do not treats a1out the properties of elementar# particles, 1ut unit# must 1e, ho&ever, a comm$unit# of the particular sciences and a specific unit# of science, not a hierarch# of levels of e"istence or a histor# of molecular evolution from elementar# particles and forces to the human societ#. 3o&ever, s#stemati9ation and clasification of sciences are values from a rational point of vie&,3inti++a and 3alonen, 1:::/. The unit# of science should 1e an unit# not of all the levels of material organi9ation, 1ut an unit# of all the scientific products.

Civen the great diversit# of domains of sciences and scientific products, a content unit# is less e"pecta1le. On the other hand, the scientific progress can change the unit# of science &hith time. Therefore, an regulative idealDideals as unit# of science is good. As a kind of conclusion to antistructural ontology

3uman 1rain is a concretmaterialisation of an ontologically posi1le s#stem.

The set of all the posi1le s#stems and structures depend on the properties of ontological primitiveDprimitives, on their numerical 6uantit#, on the trans$conte"tual conditions and on the specific conte"tual conditions. The properties of the &holes depend on the properties of ontological primitives, on the 6uantit# of the ontogical primitives that constitue them, on their structures2 there e"ist emergent properties. *n ontologicall# posi1le mind is not a product of

human 1rain, 1ut it is a human discovery. The posi1le minds, the properties of ontological primitiveDprimitives, the la&s of univers, are not products of human mind2their e"istence is not conditionated 1# humans2 humans cannot e"ist if the# &ould not e"ist2 the# had e"isted 1efore the life apparition and can to e"ist if life &ould no longer e"ist. The ontological posi1ilit# of human 1rain is implicated 1# the properties of ontological primitiveDprimitives, 1#

their sufficient 6uantit# and 1# some specific conte"tual conditions. (hat is ph#sicall# posi1le do not depend at all on the imagination of 1rain, 1ut onl# on the universal and local ph#sical constraints. Implementation of a certain ontologicall# posi1le mind ma# 1e not independent of human 1rain, 1ut &hat is ontologicall# posi1le in ever# conte"t in space and time &ill never depend on human 1rain, ma#1e. Fuestion' (hat is the necessar# level of univers)

Is there something indestructi1le in Inivers) (e can to conceive the &hole space 1eing empt#. 8ut, &e cannot to imagine something aspatial. Is there something more primitive than the empt# space in univers) Is there something that &ould can affect the space itself) ...The matter densit# in some region of space can increase and decrease, 1ut the space itself cannot 1e destructed)...

Jo&, considered etimological#, philosoph# have the sense of love of &isdom. In an analog &a#, &e can consider that the eternal regulative ideal of philosoph# is &isdom. (e sa& that initial it &as considered that &isdom involve the +no&ledge of 1eing, 1ut then appeared an enrichment, preoccupation for the +no&ledge of 1ecoming, then for the +no&ledge of humanit#, then for the +no&ledge of the limits of the pure reason, and so on. The histor# of philosoph# reveal that the term philosoph# have a d#namical intension and e"tension. (hat &ould

should to 7ustif# the inclusion or e"clusion of certain conditions to the conceptual sense of philosoph# is their consistenc# &ith its final ideal' &isdom. This historical development and enrichment of intension and e"tension of the love of &isdom ma+e us to anticipate that &isdom is an ideal to&ard &e tend andDor progress, not a something present &ich &e &ould need 7ust to anali9e, li+e 1rain. I thin+ that, 1rain itself is nothing more than an mean &ich participate, 1# its cognitiveDscientific development, at the reali9ation of this ideal

result, and in conditions in &ich its functions or capacities can 1e multiple implementa1le, 1rain is not the onl# mean or the necessar# condition, the posi1ilit# condition of &isdom. If those capacities of 1rain ,li+e control of movement, stimulus reception and codification, information processing, imagination, pro1lem solving/ are reproducti1le 1# ro1ots, then the neuronal level is not a necessar# condition for the posi1ilit# of mind. The necessary and universal characteristics of whatever posible mind are

a set of capacities wich can be implementated by architectures wich can be different both at the organizational-cauzal level(the same capacity can supervene on different structures that do not simulate brain arhitecture) and at the implementational level. *s 8loc+ said, 5it can 1e implementated mecanical#, electrical#, 1iological#.5 8rain is speciali9ed in reali9ation of certain functionDfunctions li+e' sensor# functions'

,a/ reception, codification and processing of the light 6uanta flo&, in the limits of some fre6uencies. ,1/ reception, codification, processing of acusticDair pertu1ations, in some limits. ,c/ reception, codification, processing of the stimulus coming from the interaction &ith macro17ects. motor functions' for the reglation of movements' ,a/ for movement preparation. ,1/ for the movement in the e"ternal environment. ,c/ for the internal motions ad7ustment ,as the motions of heart, etc./

for the codificated store of informationsDcontents. for the a1stract processing of information. for reasoning. 8ut, the function or the ultimate utilit# of all this functions and su1s#stems of the 1rain$s#stem is onl# one' survival and optimi9ation of conditions of life2 to ma"imi9e the 6uantit# and 6ualit# of life2or the preservation and the improvement of life. * 1eter visual s#stem can help an animal to resolve some vital pro1lems. 8ut, the accuteness of human vision is inferior &hith regard to the vision accuteness of

other animal visual s#stem. 3umans are superior to all animals &ith respect to reasoning and a1stract processing of informationDcontent. In the case of a conscious authonomous ro1ot this final function or mission &ould can 1e conservation of its integrit#, information... I thin+ that, feelings have an unconscious ver# important role in animals motivation. The feelings of pain and pleasure have a fundamental role in the motivation of animals. If animals &ould not feel pain &hen are damaged, ho& much time &ould the#

survive) If the# &ould not feel the feeling of hungr#, if the# &ould not feel an# pleasure in their life, &ould survive the# sufficient time to reproduce theirself) That is &h# a ro1ot &hich &ould have the capacit# of feeling pain &hen is damaged &ould much resem1le &hith animals, in its 1ehaviour. On the other hand, feelings neither are necessar# for survival, nor are necessar# for presevation of the integrit# of a ro1ot. The capacit# of a1stract processing of information,coming from other sensorial s#stems/ and the capacit# of reasoning

can also reali9e the role or the utlit# of feelings. * ro1ot can 1e programated to have an ultimate mission and to use all its cogntive po&ers to reali9e it. 8ut in this case its freedom &ould 1e onl# relative...to means. 8ones, muscles, 1rains have as an ultimate utilit# or mission to solve the preservation and optimi9ation of life pro1lem) (e can conceive for ever# neuronal net&or+ of 1rain an artificial net&or+ &ich is superior 1oth in 6uantit# of its components and in its structural$functional, organi9ational properties,

that is in its performance. (hat is essential is the final utilit#, the set of actual structures and the actual capacities ma#1e is not the 1est one. -an &e conceive superior alternative capacities of mind) Is the a1stract principles of life multiple concreti9a1le) If the first person level of an individual human can supervene on different material implementations, if its long therm memor# &ould can 1e transferred, then the pro1lem of imortalit# is multiple solva1le. 3o&ever, here I had made a grave, 1ut, unconscious intended eror. <uppose that &e &ould

have the po&er to dou1le usself. <o as, linings &ould do not differ 6ualitativel#. (ould this mean that if &e &ould die 1ut our lining &ould survive, &e had not die) JoK T&o atoms of hidrogen are not composed 1# the same elementar# particles, 1ut onl# 1# the same t#pe of elementar# particles. I attracted the attention on the fact that t&o things cannot 1e identical in the summer of 2003, &hen one of m# anemies,<tefanescu *dina./, reactivel# to m# thesis suggested something a1out the 3arnadEs indiscerna1ilit#.

Jo&, &hat is more important -ognitive <cience or Cerontolog#) (hat is more mean and &hat is more aim) For humans gerontolog# is more important than creation of ro1ots. =o1ots should to serve humans. That is &h# m# fundamental idea is' Two objects never can be absolute identical, indifferently how many properties they share, because they are T !("uantitatively). (hen I presented first time, in a primitive version, Towards a #hilosophy of

gerontology, some of m# anemies tried to e"tend in mases hate against me 1# suggesting the feeling that m# speech is against procreation. (hen I refered to one of them, in m# previous version, ne"t da#, some local political voices suggested indirectl# that 5some5 do not listed the good things that had 1een maded locall# and that are a danger for the national interestsK To 1e local politicians so interested of philosoph#) Or had 1een the# helped 1# some friends to see m# &or+s) This +ind of deceptive and manipulative 1ehaviour is

present in all the countries of the &orld and its agents are a danger for the eternal interests of humanit#. 4a#1e, at the top of the political level are not those &ho deserve to 1e there, 1ut those who are the best in deceptive and manipulative inteligence. hort digression * manipulative person can inhi1it a person L 1ehaviour,1# fear/, 1# e"citing the hate of a mas M, 1# giving an ethical# negative misinterpretation of LEs 1ehaviour. To 1e more eficient, the manipulative person can

give an antinational or antihuman interpretation of LEs 1ehaviour. !ver# human action can 1e antinational or antihuman misinterpreted 1# those &ho have a deceptive and manipulative retoric. The deceptivel#$ manipulative person can prepare the mases to 1e ver# agressive at some point of time, progressivel#. It can progress until the idea that is more 1etter to die one single person than a nation. HesusK Or if t&o person are in competition for something, one of them, the deceptive one can tr# to suggest to mases that its competitor have some familiar dut# and

is more 1etter for it to sta# home or something. Or, to inhi1e the progress of its competitor a deceptive person ro1 its competitor intimate 7ournal from its naive adolescence and treath him &ith its pu1licit#.That is, the deceptive persons use even ethics to misinterpret and deceptivel# manipulate humans. * little nation can 1e affected,e.g., ro1ed/ 1# a more po&erful nation. * religious representative can give the folo&ing 5e"planation5' 5this &as permitted 1# god, due the decrease of faith in the first nation5. * political leader

can provide this teleological e"planation'5this to punish the antidemocratic politics >practiced 1# the little nation? and to stimulate religious faith increase5. If it is not truth, ho&ever, &ill 1e preventive. That is &h# ever# &rong action can 1e deceptivel# sanctified. Or, another, a media agenc# present at the place of an inter1inational conflict select and transmit to other nations onl# those ne&s that are in the favour of one part and is for the destruction of other one2 and all this in function of offers. *ll is negocia1le, even the right to +ill.

*t least some political actions are the su1lime e"pression of the most 1ar1arian &ill. *nd this posi1ilities can 1e infinitel# diversified, developed and mi"ed function of re6uests and offers. (ith regard to this t#pe of man, 5&e &ill never survive unless...5 Mou do not thin+ that this persons should 1e detected, discredited and eradicated from leadership) !eflection on the idea of nothing and its rele"ance for science and humanity !n the reference of the idea of nothing

It seems to me that there can 1e no a1solute nothing. *rguments' an idea is not nothing2 indeed, ever# posi1le cognitive s#stem is material and, therefore, is a function of matter2 it is something material' as a material state of a material s#stem2 therefore, until &e have an# idea, the a1solute nothing cannot 1e. on the other hand, if the 6uantit# of energ# from universe is constant, that is, if energ# cannot 1e destro#ed, 1ut onl# transformed from a state in an another state, than outer nothing cannot 1e,

therefore a1solute nothing cannot 1e, that is nothing 1oth inside and outside, cannot 1e. If the empt# space is indestructi1le, than the same it holds. !n the content of the idea of nothing 8# our e"perience of relative nothing,e.g., an empt# 1o" or 1# the e"perince of relative destruction/ &e can arrive, 1# mental operations, at the idea of a1solute nothing, 1# e"tension. Or 1# thin+ing at a continuousl# reduction of a cognitive content of an idea,e.g., &e can arrive until the idea of 0/. *s &e

can arrive at the idea of infinit...That is, 1# increasing continuousl# someho& a cognitive content. 8ut, an# idea in order to 1e understooded should to have a content. Thus, idea of nothing cannot 1e understooded &ithout starting or relating it &ith something positive content. 0 is understooded relative to 6uantit#. The empt# can 1e understooded onl# relative to matter or ph#sical and space. That is &h#, the idea of nothing have, ho&ever, a content...it is not merel#

negation, in addition is the negation of all that is . On the other hand, &e must to understand that the idea of nothing is something material, is a material state of a material s#stem. Onl# together &ith a positive content this idea is inteligi1le. N single have not an# meaning. !ven single, N have a content, although not a meaningful content. Therefore, the idea of nothing does not involve an ideatic nothing.

3o&ever, &e can thin+ someho& at the idea of a1solute nothing positive content, 1ut this idea is not content$empt#. (e can anticipate the idea of a1solute nothing, 1ut &e cannot arrive to it... 4# fundamental idea is that there can be no an absolute empty-content idea 8ut, content can to come from man# sensorial s#stems, not onl# from visual s#stem. *nd, man# animals have sensorial contents.

I thin+ that, there are animals &ith 1etter senses than humans... That is &h# mental opertationsDprocessingsDco mputations are ver# important. *s &as argued 1# Fuart9 and <e7no&s+# in The neural basis of cognitive development , evolution of cognition lead to a more fle"i1le capacit# of forming free representation...1ut, as the# argue, development also involve an increase of the comple"it# of representations...not a reduction to nothing...

Therefore, a depeer understanding of everithing involve more logicalDscientificDrational coherence of all that is from 1ottom to top. The nothing cannot increase the inteligi1ilit# of science. I fear that idea of nothing is a sterile one. 4etaph#sicsOchemistr#. 4etachemistr#O1iolog#. Jeither science nor animal cognition, evolutionaril# spea+ing, do not 1egin &ith the nothing$content, 1ut &ith some content, at least a sensorial content.

(e do not start from nothing$content, 1ut &e anticipate this idea starting from some content. 4ore than simplit# &e &ant inteligi1ilit#, and this involve not onl# isolates primitives, 1ut also relations, structures, processes etc. (e should to arrive not to the idea of nothing, 1ut to the coherence of the &hole e"istence...to the understanding of all that is. *nd this is not than+s to the idea of nothing. 3umans and the &hole e"istence &ill never

participate to&ard idea of nothing. Jeither had &e started, nor &e should to arrive at the idea of nothing. (e should to arrive at the understandig of all that is, all that &as, all that &ill 1e and finall# to understanding all that can 1e and all that cannot 1e2 to an ultimate 1ut coherent understanding of all ...and to the discover# of those posi1ities that &ill ma+e &e happ#. Jot to nothing. Jeither simplit# nor econom# is our ultimate and necessar# scientific and philosophical aims. 8#

science &e &ant primarl# understanding and secondl# happiness. The lather involve e"tension of life 6uantit# and 6ualit#. The lather involve 7usticeG loveGpeaceGfreedomGpo& er and ma#1e others. Towards a unification by aim (e o1serve that, at the same time &ith the e"tension of science, art and culture domains it is posi1le the e"tension of domains of philosoph#, for e"emple apparition of philosoph# of gerontolog#. 3o&ever, the enrichment of the content of the term philosoph# ma# 1e

initiated even from the inside of philosoph# itself. The progress in philosoph# can result in multiple &a#s' 1# development of some ancient fundamental 6uestions and ans&ers. 1# a1andonment of some theses, directions &ich had 1een proved untrue, ine"acte or improper. 1# addition of ne& topics supervened 1# philosophic intuition and reflection. *nd, ma# 1e, ever# domain of realit# or even the posi1ilit# can to 1ecome an o17ect for philosophical reflection, 1ut much more those themes &ich are more

compati1le &ith its fundamental philosoph#cal ideal' &isdom. =easoning thin+ing, and its forms, is the necesar# condition of human &isdom, 1ut it is not enough. (hat it can 1e &isdom) Or, at least, in great lines, &ith &hat it is incompati1le) (isdom cannot mean ignorance, therefore it is compati1le &ith cognition. 3o&ever, &isdom cannot mean an# +no&ledge' philosoph# is not identical neither &ith science, nor &ith religion or art. *nd, some proper o17ects for cognitive philosoph#, had 1een sho&ed 1efore . On the other hand, &isdom cannot

mean insuficient inteligence, therefore it must involve also inteligence. In a1solute, inteligence involve the capacit# of solving pro1lems, indifferent of their importance or values for humans. 8ut, in addition, &isdom should to involve also the evaluation of the fundamental function or pragmatic utilit# of inteligence in acord &ith the fundamental needs of 1io1eings. Thus, &isdom is compati1ile &ith the conscious attempt to resolve the folo&ing pro1lems' survival2 adaptation have a value onl# as a mean to

survival, not an a1solute value2 sometimes is more &iser the adaptation of univers to the needs of humans. optimi9ation of life conditions. e"tension of life span. eradication of senescence, if it &ill 1e posi1le. and progressing in this sense &e tend to&ards an ideal limit' imortalit# and happiness. In addition to inteligence, &isdom must to involve the capacit# of correct appreciation of the possesor most important aims, for long term. I propose the

folo&ing measure la& , as a potential 1iouniversal la& of &isdom' The wisdom of creatures, either at individual level or at species level, is directly proportional to the "uantity, "uality and the balance between "uantity and "uality of their life in the history of univers$ however, considering the dificulty of their conte%tual conditions of life.

This la& is &ell$grounded on a supposition and appreciation of &hat is and &hat should to 1e the final

aims of all creatures>continuousl# survival, conservation and development of life?. For 3," miliards of #ears, the final sense or utilit# of most 1od#$environment interactions either conscious or unconscious, of +no&ledge, of the navigation &ithin environment, of the political organi9ations and actions &as the increase of the 6uantit# and the 6ualit# of life, at least for actor. 8# 6ualit# of life I mean all the good mental pleasures,li+e those related to freedom, 7ustice, cognition, love, non$deceptive pleasures

etc./ . I thin+ that philosoph# neither is deceptive inteligence nor is manipulative inteligence. (isdom is consistent &ith 7ustice, 1ut all the humans in &orld tr# to impose theirself 1# ever# imoral means. !ver#one aspire to manipulate human mases. For most of humans &isdom is relative to the po&er to gain man#. 4an# is the ultimate ethics of most humans. Jo&, previous considerations,the good ones/ can function as alternative conditions &ich enrich the conceptual sense of philosoph# term. Or, the#

can su1sume the alternative conditions. If man+ind &ould 1e suddenl# threatened 1# a natural disaster, as a collision &ith an celestial 1od# or 1# a ne& glacial era, all the human +no&ledge &ould 1e utili9ed as a mean to solving the pro1lemDaim of survival and unlimited conservation of life. In relation &ith the other 1od# parts, 1rain have a role of control, orientation, pro1lems,li+e survival, reproduction and other involved 1# happiness/ solving, 1ut in relation &ith life is onl# a mean2 the mental life of 1rain depend on the life, the state and the

functional relation 1et&een its ,neuronal, glial/cells2 and survival and conservation of other 1od# parts cells depend, at least in part, on the 1rain inteligence2 there is an interdependence here. 3uman mind have as fundamental tac+, or, the &spirit& or the& finality& of brain is the conservation and the optimization of life. From this perspective, of ma"imal e"tension of the 6uantit# of life and in an non$suficient measure of its 6ualit#, I &ish to dra& atention on the importance, 1ecause it is compati1ile

&ith the 1iouniversal &isdom la&, of gerontolog#, and to the posi1ilit# of a philosoph# of gerontolog#. 2. #undamental gerontological considerations on aging In &hat it &ill folo&, I &ant to present a minimal consideration on some important aspects of gerontolg#. 2.1. $efinition of senescence !remia consider that, 5senescence is apparently

the spontaneous process of progressively deterioration of life structures, released at the molecular level, starting with the first moment of this structures and having as result the permanent reduction of biological performances, as well as the increase of the risk of life cesation as a result of all environmental aggressions kinds5. ,>!remia, p.38?/ 2.2. %n the process of senescence <trehler divide the processes of senescence in t&o categories'

determinated , 1# &ich he understand that part of an# senescent process &ich is genetical# determinated. and, subsidiary, related to the aggressions efects &ich appear in the frame of the interactions 1et&een 1od# and environment. 4ost gerontologists ,cf. !remia/ consider that a process is senescent &hen it fulfil the folo&ing four fundamental conditions' universality' all the mem1ers of species must to 1e affected 1# it &ith time.

progressivity' &ich suppose that the lesions &ich are at 1ase of senescence are acumulated &ith time2 the affection of a macromolecule is spontaneous, 1ut accumulation of this lesions it is produced gradual# and, therefore, progressivel#, regressivel#. to be intrinsic' are e"cluded those lesions &ich come from e"ternal causes as diseases. to be no%ious. 2.3. The #orms of the Time Pressure

!remia unif# under the Etime pressureE phrase the folo&ing factors &ith senectogen character' thermic agitation of molecules &ich implement the structure of life. fotonic and corpuscular 1om1ardment caming under the form of environmental radiations. interconnection of macromolecular chains, in special of proteins and nucleus acids, &ich is the chemical reaction &ich generate the most ample no"ious efect, starting from the most lo&er level chemical interaction.

2. . &'planatory( Theoretic Aspects of enecence

In his 5'n attempt at a rational clasification of theories of aging5, 4edvedev estimated the num1er of theories &ich e"plain aging to appro"imatel# three hundred. This is a part of them,cf. !remia/' 1. Theories of genetical program 1.1. The hypothesis of morphogenetic active program$ &ich release the

death of animal at short time after the end of reproduction act ,at species as somon, marsupial mouse etc./ or at short time after certain modifications of environmental properties ,da# shortening, drought etc./. 1.2. The hypothesis of postreproductive suicide program $ most often 1# non$feeding , at some insects, nematods etc./. 1.3. The hypotheses of morphogenetical passive aging' 1.3.0.The hypothesis of aging as a continuation of

differentiation, as a supradifferentiation or as a increase of genes repression. 1.3.1. The hypothesis of aging as a disdifferentiation with genes repression disappearance and disregulation of se"uential transcription. 1.3.2.The hypothesis of aging as an efect of incomplete repression of development program . 1. .The hypotheses of the e%istence of some specific or non-specific genes of senescence.

1. .0.The hypothesis of non-balance between mutator and antimutator genes action. 1. .1. The hypothesis of some pleiotropic genes wich act in the late life. 1. .2. The hypothesis of the programmed synthesis of some mitotic inhibitors or of some inhibitors of transcription and translation. 1. .3. The hypothesis of some mutations wich accellerate aging ,theories inspirated from human the

sindroms of premature aging/. 1.B. The hypotheses of the e%istence of some longevity specific genes. 1.B.0. (ypotheses based on the identification of some genes wich e%tend the life of some inferior eukariotes . 1.B.1. (ypotheses wich e%plain the human superior longevity comparatively with the primates by some additional genes that have humans. 1.B.2. (ypotheses wich have as starting point the identification of mammals

longevity genes with the help of selection by hibridization. 1.B.3. (ypothesis of the e%istence of some genetical programs for correction wich are released only in germinal cells. 1... (ypotheses about the e%istence of some biological clocks . 1...0. (ypothesis of the e%istence of temporal genes, hypothesis of gradual loss of temporal organization, hypotheses based on the connections between senescence and biorhythms.

1...1. (ypothesis of )*' shortening in postmitotical cells. 1...2. (ypothesis of )*' repetitive se"uences methylation. 1...3. (ypothesis of limited potential of cellular divisions. 1... . (ypothesis of the cellular 5capitulation5. 1...B. (ypothesis about hipotalamic neuroendocrin centers. 2. Theories of the first lesions

2.0. (ypothesis of wear by work. 2.1. (ypothesis of autointo%ication . 2.2. The (ypothesis of the suffocation by waste products. 2.3.The (ypothesis of calcification ,calcifila"iei/. 2. . The (ypotheses of the diminution of the coordination grade between the metabolic pathways . 2.B. The (ypothesis of the erors in the protein synthesis.

2... The (ypothesis of the secondary efects of the intermediar metabolits . 2.;. The theory of the free radicals. 2.8. The theory of the thermic microshocks . 2.:.The theory of somatic mutations. 2.10.The theory of entropy. 2.11. The theory of the deuterium accumulation . 2.12. The theory of the accumulation of some metabolits isomers.

2.13. The theory of the metallic ions accumulation . 2.1 . The theory of the radiations senectogen efects. 2.1B. Theories of lesions 1# stress. 3. Theories 1ased on the anal#sis of senescence manifestations at the molecular, cellular and organic level 3.0.Theories of the structural sta1ili9ation and of the macromolecular intercconection.

3.1. Theories 1ased on the calitative modifications of protein 1# post$translational causes. 3.2. Theories 1ased on the cantitative changes of proteins. 3.3. Theories 1ased on modifications in protein 1ios#nthesis. 3. . Theories 1ased on modifications of structure of nucleus acids. 3. .0. 3#pothesis of DJ* chain 1rea+ings. 3. .1. 3#pothesis of DJ* metilation diminuation.

3. .2. 3#pothesis of metalic ions &ich are connected &ith DJ*. 3. .3. 3#pothesis of modifications in DJ* proprocessing. . &"olutionary Theories .0. Theories of rate of living. .1. Theories 1ased on the correlations 1et&een 1reeding rate and aging rate. .2. Theories 1ased on the correlation 1et&een

development lenght and rate of aging. .3. Theories 1ased on the carrelations 1et&een 1od# si9es and life span. . . Theories 1ased on the correlations 1et&een some modifications at molecular level and the life span. .B. Theories 1ased on the correlations 1et&een some modifications at genetic level and rate of aging. ... Theories 1ased on the correlations 1et&een some modifications at celular level and longevit#.

.;. Theories 1ased on the correlations 1et&een tisular regeneration performances or of celular proliferation and life span. B. Theories of certain particular tissues aging B.0. Theor# of the colesterol in aterosclerosis. B.1. Theor# of the protein modification in cristalin aging. B.2. Theor# of eritrocites aging. B.3. Theor# of tooths &earing.

;. Inificator# Theories' $ &ich tr# to com1ine elements from different groups of theories2 for e"emple, so called 5net&or+ theor# of aging5 ela1orated 1# 0o&ald and 0ir+&ood in 1:: , &ich 7oin the theor# of erors &ith the theor# of free radicals. The pro1lem &ich is put in gerontolog# is that of distinction 1et&een efects and causes.The main 6uestion &ill 1e al&a#s the folo&ing' is the incriminated modification really a first cause of senescence or is

only the result of some emergent changes from a more fundamental level) ,>3a#flic+, 1:83?/. !remia had affirmed that 5most gerontologists consider that senescence is, most probable, a multicauzal and multifactorial phenomenon, at wich realization take part many biophysical, biochemical and biological mechanisms. +ach type of cell, tissue, organ or organism have its proper trajectory of aging. ,ellular senescent processes are at the base of global phenomenon of aging, but they form, at the

same time, the component elements of a an interactive superior hierachical network of wich integrity is deteriorated with time. There are senescent processes wich affect systems of different hierachical grades5,>!remia, p.12.?/ >italics are of mine?. *s &e have seen 1efore, in the 4edvedevE rational classification, most theories of senescence indicated different factors &ith senectogen efect. It is possi1le that certain factors to 1e of non$first order. Then &ould 1e posi1le an e"planator# reductionism at

some firstDfinal senectogen factors) 8ut, the process of senescence is released onl# from the fundamental >ph#sical, chemical? level to&ards macroscopic, tissular levels) There is no a 1idirectionalit#) %s#chical stress>at the sistemic, emergent, macroneronal level? &ould cannot affect senectogenl# the individual cells level) Or the human etiological and therapeutic ignorance >I thin+ at the po&er of present$da# gerontolog# to eradicate senescence? &ould cannot ta+e a place, as a condition, in a rational, complete e"planation of human aging) (e see that, the

senescence conditions cannot 1e found in totatlit# at an fundamental ontic>ph#sical$chemical, atomic$molecular? level, 1ecause cognition and human ignorance are states &ich depend on the d#namical interactions in the space phases of a cellular ensem1le. Therefore, a complete e"planation of senescence, &ich have to e"pose all the conditions of senescence, cannot 1e a reductionistic one, 1ecause human ignorance is a cognitive insufficienc# and conscious cognitive level is an emergent one. *nd, if ps#chical stress ma#

influence the speed or the rate of aging, than again the reductive e"planation is incomplete. 3uman conscience is not to 1e found at the singular intraneuronal level. On the other hand, senectogen factors can 1e 1oth intrinsec> for e"emple, replicative senecence? and e"trinsec >for e"emple, reactive species of o"igen =O<?, &ich ma+e havier the reduction of e"planation to a singular factor &ith senectogen efect. On the other hand, if &e &ould unif# the previous theories clasificated 1# 4edvedev and create the folo&ing reasoning'

T1 or T2 or ...or TJ,JOapro".300/ L is a human L &ill 1ecome specificall# old in a specific time, &ith a specific rate ,sure, if it &ill not die 1ecause of certain accident or incura1le diseaseDs/ &e &ould ma+e a non$valid reasoning, 1ecause, on the one hand, &e have not a demonstration of senescence eradication imposi1ilit#, on the other hand, a good e"planation of human aging must to include all the causes of aging in order to 7ustif# all

the efectsDmanifestations of aging. * single cause of aging that human 1od# cannot neutrali9e it is sufficient to produce aging, 1ut a different form af aging, a different rate of aging, a different longevit#. 8ut, there is a mea rate of human aging &ich determ a mean human longevit#. *nd if the eradication of aging is not imposi1le, than aging is a contingent fenomenon and previous conclusion is not necesar#, therefore the reasoning is non$valid. Is hope is that human aging can and &ill 1e eradicated, ma"imal minimi9ed, or at least, ver#

much minimi9ed. If there are non$aging cells, li+e those &ich are caled 5imortal5$$$1ut the# can 1e destructed$$$, than aging, relativ to class of all living things, is not an universal and necesar# phenomenon. 8ut, our reasoning is relative to human. Our present ignorance permite to us neither to eradicate aging nor to +no& if the prediction is necesar#. If human aging is contingent, than in the e"planation of the human actual non &anted aging, ignorance have necesaril# a role to pla#, as a condition that permit. If human aging is

non$necesar#, even if for human its eradication &ill 1e for a long time or forever imposi1le, than the reasoning conclusion$ prediction is non$necesar# or contingent. *nd therefore, the reductive e"planation of aging is incomplete. 8ut, even if human aging &ould 1e ineradica1le, the e"planation of specific of human aging traiector# &ould re6uire a consideration of human 1od# arhitecture, of its structural and functional specificit#. Ceneral cellular senescence &ould indiferentl# e"plain the aging of all mamals, 1ut

there are certain diferences &ich cannot 1e e"planated &ithout refering to special structural or arhitectural conditions. On the other hand, no& humans can modulate in some limits the rate of aging, and in this case the pro$longevive actions are initiated from a macrolevel. If &e &ant an unificator# theor# of aging, it must 1e a general theor# or a dis7untive one2 1ut, a theor# &ich unif# all the theories of aging 1# a dis7unction &ould unif# factors &ich are at diferent levels of organi9ation. *ging also can 1e conceived as failure of s#stems, trans1iogenicall#.

From a philosophical point of vie&, &ich tend to the a1solute,necessar# and sufficient conditions/, these are good tendencies. <uch general theor# of aging &ould offer an most e"tense and rational understanding of aging. On the other hand, the most generalOuniversal theor# is the most minimal one. If &e restrict our general theor# of aging to the class of living things, than that theor# should to refer to celullar processes, 1ecause the most simple living thing is a unicelullar. 8ut, ho& much resem1le, or ho& much relevance have the unicelullar senescence to the human senescence)

!remia have &rote that anemona, a pluricelular organism, do not age 1ecause it continuousl# replace its unicelullar parts. <ome even have said that all unicelullar do not age, 1ecause the# are imortal2 in this case a 1iouniversal theor# of aging is not posi1le. 3o&ever, a general theor# of aging can 1e general in another sense' it is general not relativ to all the living things 1ut to all the things that are agingable or senescentable. *nd, if &e conceive aging as trans1ioaging than that theor# &ill 1e from an a1solute perspective ver# good, 1ut from a

perspective &ich 6uest for a complete e"planation of human aging &ill 1e ver# minimal and insuficient. 8ut, &e must evaluate theories also from the point of vie& of solving the pro1lem of eradication of human aging. It seem that a such general theor# of aging &ould offer the most rational help to&ard creating a fundamental strateg# for eradicating of human aging. 8ut, a general theor# of aging cannot su1stantiate a complete e"planation of human aging2 and, if that theor# cannot 7ustif# all the aspects of human aging, than the strateg# &ich is 1ased on it

cannot lead to eradicating of human aging. On the other hand, those la&s of nature, li+e termod#namics la&s, that e"plain the failure of nonliving things, cannot e"plain or are 6uasi$ irelevant for e"planation of living things. @iving things cannot leave in state of minimal entrop#,Oe"le/. If the la&s of nature that e"plain the progressive deterioration of non$living things are truthl# irrelevant to the e"planation of the aging of living things, than can 1e a general theor# of aging) If the ans&er is #es, in &hat sense) * such theor# must 1e a cover# theor#, not general. It must

must to refer at a formal generalit#, or formal a1stractivit#. (e must to conceive the general concept or idea of aging as an progressive, cumulative process of deterioration &ich can 1e initiated 1oth from the inside and the outside of 1od#. The form of senescence traiector# of diverse o17ects, or the their senescence rates are not identical 1ut similar. Those characters of process of aging that are proper onl# to living things, li+e no"iousness or the diminuation of 1iological performances, cannot 1e characteristics of the universal form aging. Onl#

the progessiveness of a deterioration can constitue the universal form of aging. Jo& I &ant to return to the previous reasoning$ prediction$e"planation. For the conclusion to form a necesar# conse6uence, the premises must to form a sufficient condition. 8ut, even if the theories from the first premise are all true, &e dont +no& if the# form or not form a complete causal e"planation2 sure, the causal e"planation is not a complete e"planation 1ecause it do not see the permissi1ilit# conditions of aging. *nd, it seem that the previous theories form a

complete causal e"planation of aging, 1ut the premises of e"planans are not sufficient to determine the conclusion as a necessar# conse6uence$prediction. 8ecause the conditions are not sufficient2 e"planans do not contain a e"plicit condition a1out the imposi1ilit# of eradication of aging. If the argument &ould contain a condition a1out the a1solute imposi1ilit# of eradication of aging or a1out the imposi1ilit# to arrive at this result, 1# the progress of science, in a given period of time,in the life of L/, than the prediction &ould folo& &ith necessit#. 3o&ever,

our reasoning &as formed in an a1solute form, in the conditions is not esta1lished a temporal interval. That glo1al aging must correlate,<hurt9/ or depend ,Thalos/ on endogenous,e.g., genetical, celullar, tisular carelates/ and e"ogenous,e.g., ph#sical andDor evolutionar# conditions/ senectogen corelates it is truth, 1ut in order to a conse6uence to 1e necessar# its conditionDconditions must 1e sufficient. For <chur9, 5an e"plicit and complet ans&er to an e"planation$ see+ing 6uestion )% is

formall# a pair * O ,%rem, %remOP%/,for it claims %rem to 1e true and %rem OP % to 1e correct... . %rem is the descriptive and %remOP% the inferential part of *5,<chur9 1:::/. In our case, the endogenous and e"ogenous correlates of aging can form %rem. *nd, this %rem implies %Oaging phenomenon. 8ut, there is a pro1lem' even if the causal corpus from %rem is complete, the implication is relative. If 3arnad &as right &hen he said that ph#sical la&s are contingent, then there is no implication there. If the implication it holds onl# in the case in &ich are e"cluded accidents

or antiaging interventions than it is relative to some conditions. <hould &e add al&a#s some conditions to causesDcorrelates in %rem to sustain the ontological implication of -on) 2.B. ome philosophical Toughts on the e'planation of aging 3uman 1od#, as a multicelular colon#, is a part of &hole univers2 it neither can isolate itself from the univers nor can live in the outside of universe2 for e"emple, it need to inhale o"igen and to ingurgitate food from e"terior. * living 1eing

&ich &ould live eternal# 1# its proper energetical production &ould resem1le &ith a perpetum mo1ile. 8ut, the atempt to reduceDlimited the e"planation of aging at a ph#sical process as entrop# &as criticated. In this sense, Oe"le, a specialist, consider that 5 <imple generali9ing e"planations of aging in terms of entrop# are insufficient for the follo&ing reasons' i/ Jon$ e6uili1rium entrop# itself is not a simple concept. ii/ The second la& of thermod#namics does not demand that each temporal process has to 1e e"plained in terms of entrop#. iii/

Thermod#namic entrop# must not 1e confused &ith informational entropies, i.e., comple"it# measures. iv/ Jone of them is sufficient to e"plain 1iological organi9ation. The same applies to the e"planation of disorgani9ation in aging. Indeed, 1oth t#pes of entrop# ma# decrease &ith age. v/ Theories that e"plain aging as a declining se6uence of minimal entrop# production states, are not &ell founded in thermod#namics. Organisms do not live in states of minimal entrop# production. Declining entrop# production is a conse6uence 1ut not the

cause of an age$dependent decline in meta1olic activit#. *ging is a function of self$maintenance &hich varies 1et&een species and &as set 1# evolution 1ut not 1# thermod#namic la&s. vi/ The effect of free energ# availa1ilit# on aging is not transmitted 1# entrop#. vii/ The overall entrop# production of an organism indicates its activit#, 1ut is not a useful measure of efficienc#. The %DO$ratio ,rate of *D% phosphor#lation per o"#gen consumption/ does not seem to decline significantl# &ith age. viii/ *ging involves all aspects of life. Jeither life nor

aging can 1e e"plained sufficientl# 1# a single state parameter such as entrop#. 4inute changes in a regulator# part ma# cause large, positive or negative changes in entrop# and entrop# production of the entire s#stem. i"/ 8ioenergetics, i.e., the research on regulation of and 1# free energ#, should 1e fit into the frame&or+ of emergent properties of an organism. Then it &ill contri1ute to the understanding of aging5. *nd, I thin+ that, even if the universal spatial 1ac+ground, the 6uasi$ elementar# ph#sical properties, alltogether &ith

micro an macro forces influence, &ould determine the fundamental la&s of matter compositionalit#, and, therefore, &ould lie at 1ase of all forms of posi1le material e"istence, and if microscopic events &ould lie at the 1ase of macroscopic entropic processes, if entrop# &ould have a fundamental influence to&ard deterioration of all microscopic e"istents, ho&ever e"planation of a specific deterioration of certain class of e"istents, aging of living sistems, &ould involve also conditions related to their specific 1od# arhitecture,

and this &ould mean that, real#, entrop# neither have a sufficient and ma# 1e neither a necessar# role in the 1ioaging e"planation. *ppear the folo&ing 6uestion' Ereall# living organism cannot elude the process of entrop#)E or Ehave entrop# a necessar# senectogen efectDinfluence in ever# moment of life)E *t least, at the age of 1reeding, it seem that entrop#, in the sense of disorgani9ationDdisorder increasing, have not po&er2 and than it is not a a1solute inevita1le fenomen2 therefore the necessar# condition of human aging must to 1e at a more

specific level. The causes of human aging are 1oth e"ternal,for, e"emple, =O</ and internal ,for e"emple, replicative senescence/. 8ut &ath a1out the posi1ilit# conditionDconditions of aging. It seem that destructi1ilit# or perisha1ilit# of human 1od# is its first condition of aging, if aging is understuded as a progressive deterioration it is a +ind of destruction. 8ut this is also posi1ilit# condition of accidental death. 4a# 1e this condition is too large or there are multiple conditions that onl# together form a aging

posi1ilit# condition. 3o&ever, human aging is not a simple or general form of progressive deterioration2 it involve that some cells to arrive non$replicative stage, some cells must to acumulate certain su1stances,lipofuscin, neurofi1rilar# tangles, senile pla6ues and others/, deterioration of certain path&a#s for signal transmission2 the human aging is more than the sum of celular senescence, 1ut the interneuronal path&a#s are also parts of 1od#...2 human aging is not a simple deterioration of organi9ation or is not 7ust this, it is a progressive

decrease of functional capacities &ich ma# supervene not onl# on organi9ational deterioration,for e"emple, lipofuscin acumulation or 6uantitative neuronal loss/. * part of aging supervene on organi9ational deterioration and other parts can depend on a functional decrease &ich is determinated not onl# of 1od# microparts organi9ation deterioration. (e must to reduce death to a form of destruction' life destruction, at least at the &hole 1od# level. *nd, &e must to reduce aging at a decrease process, it is a regressive unidirectional

change of 1od#. *ging is a specific change at a higher level &ich ma# emergeDsupervene on multiple microchanges, &ich are not all of a deterioration character. <urel# this change is a structural one, 1ut this structural change not involve 7ust deterioration, 1ut also sediments acumulation,lipofuscin/ or cantitative decrease,neuronal loss, or loss of via1le cells/. 8ut, &hat ma+e posi1le these emergent changes) On the one hand, the imperfection of 1od#' a1sence of certain regenerative mechanisms >for anti,telomere

shoretening/? , the insufficience eficienc# of some preventive, protective, reparative mechanisms,li+e those again =O< attac+, &ich are antio"idant su1stances li+e' tocoferols, <OD, ascor1ic acid/, the a1secence of some mechanisms for elimination of certain su1stances,lipofuscin/ &ich acumulate continuosl# in 1od#, and on the other hand certain cognitive imperfectionDinsufficience. (e +no& a1out a reductionDregresion of hormonal,testosterone, D3!*, melatonin/production in aging, 1ut &ath are its

causes and &ath are its condition of posi1ilit#) In other cases &e +no& a1out the ine"istence of some mechanism for regulation of some processes ,e.g., celullar senescence, apopthosis, arteries calcification,>Hudit, 20032 (ic+ et al 2003?/ of &ich action is senectogen on long term. 8ut, is the eradication of aging pro1lem suita1le to 1e solutionated at the genetic level) I dont 1elive. The solution of this pro1lem involve thin+ing and cooperation of some researchers, conscious inteligences. 3o&ever, 1rain arhitecture specificit# is partial genetical#

determinated ,>Delacour 1::8?/, and therefore, certain cognitive capacities, li+e thin+ing po&er/ and their limits are at least partial genetical# predestinated, 1ut not forever and the solution to the aging eradication is not in1orn.5 In the natureDnurture de1ate that still pervade neuroscience, Ca99aniga argues in favor of nature, 1# emphasi9ing that nurture alone is not enough to shape 1rain function. 3e advocates a prominent role for modularit#, adaptive speciali9ation and geneticall# driven mechanisms in the

ontogeneticDph#logenetic development of the 1rain5,Tei"eira 1::8/. 3o&ever, I thin+ that the most general 1ehavioural actions and attitudes of individual life form have formed a special9ation2 this speciali9ation ma#1e have determined a minimal change at the genetic level2 ma#1e some genetical changes due to continuosl# learning have accumulated ver# slo&l# until the apparition of...species. 8oth genetic factors and nurture factors should 1e involved in the e"planation of human mind development. 8ut, &ith regard to ontogenetic development of mind, I

agreed &ith Fuart9 and <e7no&s+#' 5learning is a d#namic interaction 1et&een a changing, structured environment and neural mechanisms. The neural machiner# is e"tensivel# shaped 1# activit# stemming from the environment, &hile its intrinsic properties also constrain this modulation and pla# an indispensa1le role in shaping the resulting structures 5, Fuart9, <. G <e7no&s+i, T.H., 1::;/. I thin+ that, something from this structures can 1e geneticall# transmited. The solution to the pro1lem of eradication of aging,

&ich is one of the main provocation of human mind, re6uire the more efficient and the more rapid, intermediation of human 1rain cognitive capacities. I tend to 1elive and hope that, the imperfection of antisenectogen 1iological mechanisms of human 1od# or the a1sence of certain compensator# means for its imperfection have as a condition of posi1ilit# the present human ignorance2 I tend to reduce the aging posi1ilit# condition to some insufficience of mindEs cognitive states. I 1elieve that &e age and die 1ecause of foolishness. 3uman organism &as not designed

1# a conscious inteligence, li+e a race car. There is no an e"ternal entit# &ich is call evolution or natural selection &ich act as a ph#sical force on the living organisms. 3o&ever, there &as and there is a fight for survival, reproduction, adaptation, domination, fame, 1# force, deceptive conditioning or 1# a su1tle ps#chological coercition. *daptation have not an independent of conte"t value, it have value onl# &hen is necessar# for survival or for progress. %rogress itself is re6uired onl# &hen is necessar# for something, at least for happiness. The previous

pro1lems can 1e solved in multiple &a#s, &ich had maded posi1le the appearance of certain ha1its$speciali9ations$ specifications &ich later have geneticall# preserved. If certain species have survived until no&, this mean that the# have some capacities &ich, on the one hand, advantage their survival posi1ilit#, on the other hand, advantage them much more in solving of some fundamental pro1lems,for e"emple, reproduction, adaptation, control and manipulation of minds, comunication, social organi9ation and orhers/.

Jo1od# have selected these capacities, 1ut the# had advantaged much more some species &ich conse6uentl# have imposed themselves in num1er, fight, adaptation, reproduction etc. 4a# 1e, the most important value$capacit# for evolution is inteligence, and the diferences are graduall#. (h# isnEt 1od# endo&ed &ith mechanisms &ich to permite it to remain forever #oung) 8ecause in late life there is no fight or interest for imortalit# or for non$ aging) Jot at all. I consider that apoptosis and celular senescence are not present in human

organism 1ecause the# have positivel# selected 1# evolution or 1# nature due to their positive or negative efects, 1ut 1ecause their negative efects do not ma+e imposi1le their life and 1ecause organisms that e"perience them can reproduce themselves, have not superior competitors and not in least measure due human insufficience inteligence. (h# there is celular senescence and apoptosis) (h# e"ist aging) <upporters of evolutionar# theor# of aging propose the concept of antagonistic pleiotrop# for e"planation

of aging origin. In conformit# &ith evolutionar# theories ,(illiams 1:B /, senecence is genetical# predeterminated and senescence efectors genes &as selected 1# evolution, 1# an accidental process nondirectionted to&ard aging per se, 1ecause, on the one hand, the# advantage their reproductive activit#, on the other hand, the force of natural selection decrease after the post$reproductive age. Therefore, in conformit# evolutionar# theories, the root$cause of aging is natural selection, that is selection resulted

after the fight, competition, for survival and for the e"tension of terrestrial regions domains and of alternative species. This fight had as a conse6uence the disparition of some non$ senescent species, though it is not +no& evidence that &ould 1e ever e"isted superior species, li+e mammals, non$senescent, and a1out fact that the# &ould dominated 1# the senecent species. 8ut, there e"ist also thin+ers &ich thin+ differentl#. Thus, -lar+ conider that recent genetic anal#sis a1out the senescence fundamental mechanisms, and of genes &ich underdetermine them,

are remarca1l# similar in ever# eu+ariot organism studied, &ich is hardl# consistent &ith an independ acumulation of mutations &ith harmful character in late life of eu+ariots evolutionar# histor#. -lar+ propose, in the place of gradual# accidental# accumulation though the 1ig periods of time, the thesis in conformit# &ith &ich almost ever# genetic elements of senescence$$$ genes &ich determine senescence,senescence effector genes/ and those &ich it opose to their efects ,senescence resistor genes/$$$have 1een esta1lished after short time,

or in some cases even 1efore, the eu+ariots emergenc# from their pro+ariots antecestors and &as preserved 1# su1se6uent evolution. -lar+ assert that selection of this elements &as guided 1# t&o radical ne& 1iological parameter &ich define the eu+ariots life forms' endos#m1iosis &ith o"igen$ meta1oli9ing pro+ariots, and use of se" for reproduction. 3o&ever, there is autors &ich consider that there are no senescence effector genes , 1ut onl# genes that allo& senescence appearance. Hohnson ,1:88, cited in %erlmutter 4. and 3all !.,

1::2/ thin+ that genes ma7orit# are involved in esta1lishing of organisms longevit#...<uporters of evolutionar# theor# of aging have too litle succes in imagination of some proper mechanism 1# &ich DJ* to induce planned senescence,>!remia?/.

3. Towards eradication of aging: A philosophical strategy (e should not to forget that that the final aim of gerontological research is a practical one' eradication of aging. In this sense,

research must 1e guided, organi9ated to&ard realisation of this aim. 8ut it is needed a first strategical idea concerning the reali9ation or progression to&ard eradication of aging. I thin+ that &e can divide the aging posi1ilit# conditions in t&o sets' those aging posi1ilit# conditions concerning imperfection of 1od#Emechanisms for regeneration, prevention of lesions,for DJ* and mem1rane damage due =O< etc./, or concerning the a1sence of some

inerent mechanisms &ich is also necessar# for radical eliminaton of aging. (e can call this conditions as aging first order posi1ilit# conditions. and those conditions &ich concern our ignorance a1out the all aspects of e"planation of aging, orDand our insufficience cooperation, coordonation, organi9ation of research to&ard aging eradication. (e need a ver# a1stract, 1ut necessar# and sufficient to eradicate human aging, strategical principle. I thin+ that a posi1le strateg# &ould can 1e

grounded on the folo&ing pragmatic regulative principle' +limination of conditions of aging posibility implies eradication of the process of aging. 8ut, eradication of the condition of posi1ilit# of aging can 1e multiple realisa1le,e.g., free9er reduce efects of aging etc./. From the set of all posi1le &a#s of eradication of all the conditions of posi1ilit# of aging &e must to select onl# those &a#s &ich do not stop life, if there are such &a#s.

(e should to conceive the conditions of the posi1ilit# of aging in relations &ith the complet set of the fundamental causes of aging. *s an inteligi1le e"emple, the# are those mecanisms, factors, conditions, devices or something L &ich permit to M,fundamental causes of aging, e.g., =O</ to have an causal role, that is to determine Q,damages, sediments etc./.

*s it &as sho&ed 1efore, at the level of aging

manifestations and causal factors there is a disconcertant diversit# and comple"it#. !ach cell t#pe have its proper aging traiector#,>!remia 1::; ,p.12.?/. 3o&ever, all cell t#pes have their first origin in an one single egg cell. First egg cell divission generate a celular multiplicit#. !ach cell have a finit num1er of the same genes. 8# repression and e"pression certain genes differentiate the organism different sus#stems cells' nervous s#stemEs cells, muscleEs cells, 1oneEs cells etc. On the other hand, all celullar t#pes >pro+ariots and eu+ariots? have ceratin

common features' celullar mem1rane, DJ*, c#toplasm, and ri1osomes. !ven 1et&een human 1od#Es cells there are some similarities. For e"emple, neurons have in common &ith other cells of human 1od# some capacities or processes' celular mem1rane. nucleus. genes. c#toplasm. mitochondria. celular organeles. protein s#nthesis. energ# production.

On the fundamental mechanisms of senescence, !remia select the folo&ing theories' theor# of senescence as a result of genetic insta1ilit#. 8ut &ath are the posi1ilit# conditions of genetic insta1ilit#. It is posi1le someho& eliminate them) Or &ould 1e posi1le to repair the lesions of genetic level. theor# of senescence 1# somatic mutations. theor# of senescence as a result of the deregulation of transcription and translation processes. (hat are the posi1ilit# conditions of this

deregulation. It is posi1le for us to control this regulation) theor# of senescence due acumulation of meta1olic &aste products. theor# of senescence 1# mitochondrial deterioration. theor# of senescence 1# &ater loss. 3o&ever, aging at the highest level, 1ehavioural, depend on the aging of different organs2 1ut it is posi1le that the aging of each organ depend not onl# on the its celullar senescence 1ut also 1# the other organs aging2 and the organ aging depend also 1#

its 6uantit# and its structuralDfunctionalDd#nami cal properties. That is, aging aspects are 1oth general and specific. 4a#1e, a strategical plan &ould to&ards eradication of aging have to start &ith investigation of 1ehavioural manifestations of aging, as age$dependent decline of cognitive performance, at the all organs and s#stems ,-J<, muscular s#stem, 1oned s#stem, vascular sistem, digestive s#stem, respirator# s#tstem, imunitar s#stem, reproductive s#stem etc/ level2 Investigation of

aging at celular, in general, is not enough, tough research of aging and its posi1ilit# conditions at general structural$ functional celular patern is necessar#, 1ut is sufficient) There are some researchers that e"plain the decline of cognitive performance, as memor#, not 1# loss of neuronal cells or 1# ma7or deterioration of neuronal properties 1ut 1# deterioration of certain signaling path&a#s2 is organism more than cells) it ma#1e that path&a#s are not made of cells) This first step &ould ma+e posi1le the ne"t step.

esta1lishing of aging causes at each level' the general causes of celular senescence, special causes of special cells senescence, the causes of aging at the organic or s#stemic level, the causes of aging at the inters#stemic or interorganic level, causes of aging at 1ehavioural level. *ging must to depend 1oth of interdependence 1et&een organs, s#stems, and also on the specificit# of cells, on the specificit# of organ arhitectures, and on the certain posi1ilit# conditions. It is posi1le that at each level to 1e also

posi1ilit# conditions of aging) esta1lishing of aging posi1ilit# conditions at each level &here the# e"ist. eradication of aging posibility conditions at each level, in the limits of posi1ilit#. !radication of aging involve either perfecting of human 1od#Es structural$functional model or utili9ation of some therapeutic tactics to compensate, from outside, its imperfections. It is posi1le that elimination of aging manifestations to 1e multiple solva1ile. 4# hope is that human &isdom and

inteligence &ill succed, in final, to carr# out one of the most loved dream of man' the dream of #outh &ithout old age...and of life &ithout death. !&#&!&)*& 8eaufret, H.' 1:::, -ectii de filosofie, vol.2, !DITI=* *4*=-O=D, Timisoara. 8ourgeois, H.%., Coldman$ =a+ic, %.<. G =a+ic, %.'1:: , .ynaptogenesis in the prefrontal corte% of rhesus monkeys. ,erebral ,orte% ';8$:..

8loc+. J.''ntireductionism .laps /ack, internet.. -lar+ =. (.' 0eflections on an unsolved problem of biology1 evolution of aging an death, internet. -oltescu, A.' 2002, 2storia filosofiei, !ditura Iniversitatii de Aest 1:00 Timisoara, =omania. Del =e C.' 1::8, !ntological .tatus of 3olecular .tructure, 3M@!, vol. , Jo.2, p.81$103. Delacour, H.' 2001, 2ntroducere in neurostiintele cognitive , %olirom, =omania.

Tei"eira, H.'1::8, 0ewiv of 4azzaniga5s The maind5s past, in internet. Cold, I.G<tol7ar,D.'1:::, ' neuron doctrine in the philosophy of neuroscience , 8rain and 8ehavioural <ciences, on internet free archive, unpagined. !remia, D.' 1::., .tructurile 6ii sub #resiunea Timpului , !ditura *@@, 8ucuresti, =omania. Fet9er, 3.,H.' 2002, #ropensities and 7re"uences1 2nference to the best e%planation, Synthese, 132.

3alonen I. and 3inti++a H.' 1:::, 8nification - 2t5s 3agnificent but is it +%planation), Synthese, 1+,, 2;$ ;. 3a#flic+ @.' 1:83, Theories of aging , in #undamentals of Geriatric medicine eds. =.D.T. -ape, =.4. -oe and H.=ossman =aven %ress, Je& Mor+ 1:83, 3$B0. 4edvedev Q.*.'1::0, 'n attempt at a rational clasification of theories of aging, 8iol. =ev., .B, 3;B$ 3:8. Fuart9, <. G <e7no&s+i, T.H. ,1::;/. The neural basis of

cognitive development1 ' constructivist manifesto . Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 , /' B3;$B:.. =uud van den 8os'2000,
4eneral !rganizational #rinciples of the /rain as 9ey to the .tudy of 'nimal ,onsciousness, %<M-3!, .,B/.

<chur9 C.'1:::, +%planation as unification, Synthese 1+,: :B$11 . Tara9ona =., <olana =., Ou#ang F., %a&elec C.'2002, /asic biology and clinical impact of immunosenescence , !"perimental Cerontolog#, 3;, 183$18:.

Tudosescu, I.' 1::;, 3etafilosofie, !ditura Fundatiei ,,=omania de 4aine58ucuresti, =omania. Aacariu C., Dalia T., Aacariu 4.' 2001, Toward ' very 2deea of 0epresentation, <#nthese, 12:, 2;B$2:B. (ic+ C., 8ergera %., Durra$ Hansen %., Cru1ec+$@oe1en <.' 2003, ' )arwinianevolutionary concept of age related diseases, !"perimental Cerontolog#, vol.38. (illiams -.C.' 1:B;, %leiotrop#, *atural .election, and the +volution

of .enescence, 4ichingan Iniversit# %ress.