Dr Goodwin went to the other side July 15. His work was deep and embracing, embracing of transdisciplinarity and of being human; however, as it often happens with too-ahead of-their times-scientists and-artists and-saints-they are perversely push aside. More power to their spirit(s). I deeply admired this, his quintessential quality, which I suggest it is a gift, grace, and not something we can apply for to NSF or NIH (maybe Templeton would fund research on how to acquire grace to become “successful”). On the other hand and analyzing : “ahead of their times” is kind of a non-sequitur: actually I suggest that work like that of Dr Goodwin is EXACTLY what the times need to change a particularly overwhelming zeitgeist, as it is now.
In an interview with John Brockmann: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/goodwin/goodwin_p2.html (April 29th 1997!!!) “Instead of the traditional science of control we are involved in the science of participation, which is where complexity leads us, involving sensitive participation with nature. This requires cultivation of intuitive ways of knowing about wholes as well as analytical ways of knowing about parts, which takes into what may be called a “science of qualities”.
To have an idea of the overwhelming zeitgeist we live in today just check the blogs of Dr. Richard Dawkins or Dr. Pharyngula: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/ and check the work of Dr DD (Daniel Dennett) (one of the original horsemen of the Apocalypses, in his own words: bad choice; I wonder which one: conquest, war, famine, or death.???…). Understanding coming from some of the most recognizably public voices of “science”? Undoubtedly, “the tres amigos” are bright, informed and possibly sincere-not reason not believe they are-: However, is kinda funky that neither Dr. DD or Dr. Dawkins are scientists (in the empirical classical sense: you think, you hypothesize, you work at the lab or field-or computer and you write up). Lets say they are ‘theoreticians”.
I will argue that Brian C. Goodwin biology is close to our quest here at SEED, my personal ’emotioning’ of science and I am sorry I never realized it was so very critical to highlight it more on behalf of a more comprehensive Dialogue and understanding.
Dr Goodwin was not only bright; he was-is-genial, in a Bohmian sense. Rest in peace.