I appreciate and partly agree with this perspective, but I think you’re expressing it quite a bit too strongly.
As salient counterpoints, consider that nature repeatedly (in unrelated phyla) invented ganglia and brains, and that human-invented systems sometimes benefit from distribution and parallelism while other times benefiting from centralisation and vertical scaling.
So I certainly don’t think you can say that nature empirically strenuously asserts in either direction.
I do think you’re on the money saying
There is little reason to suppose an silicon-based and carbon-based life cannot likewise form greater wholes.
though of course a key question is whether it’s competitive (and under what conditions), and if not, what can be done about that (or what can be done to set conditions so that it is).
I appreciate and partly agree with this perspective, but I think you’re expressing it quite a bit too strongly.
As salient counterpoints, consider that nature repeatedly (in unrelated phyla) invented ganglia and brains, and that human-invented systems sometimes benefit from distribution and parallelism while other times benefiting from centralisation and vertical scaling.
So I certainly don’t think you can say that nature empirically strenuously asserts in either direction.
I do think you’re on the money saying
though of course a key question is whether it’s competitive (and under what conditions), and if not, what can be done about that (or what can be done to set conditions so that it is).