CONCEPT
The Whole-Animal Argument
Midgley's insistence that a living being is <em>not an assemblage of components</em> — and that the properties that matter most are properties of the whole, not of any part.
The whole-animal argument is the load-bearing commitment running through all of Midgley's work: a human being is not an assemblage of components. A human being is a whole — a living, integrated, caring, wondering whole — and the aspects of human life that matter most are properties of the whole, not of any component. The argument is directed against a culture that has been moving, with increasing speed and decreasing self-awareness, toward the component view: that a person is a language module plus a pattern recogniser plus a problem solver plus a creativity engine, and that replicating the components produces the person. Midgley's response is that a pile of car parts is not a car. The car is the system that emerges when the parts are integrated in a specific way, and the system has properties — it can drive — that no part separately possesses.
In The You On AI Field Guide
The argument is grounded in Midgley's training in ethology and her long engagement with
Keep reading with YOU ON AI
Unlock the full book, 10,000+ field-guide entries, and a 1000+ thinker library. If you have a book code, register now — it takes a minute.