Steve,
Some little comments in blue.
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Smith
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: 6/21/2009 5:37:03 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Was human nature, now EvoDevo
Nick
Sorry. Misspoke. Don't really make a distinction between human nature and the
human condition. Each is a creation of the other. they are dialectically
intertwined.... or whatever. So, you cant disagree with me on that point any
more.
Ah, but it is Human Nature *and* the Human Condition to disagree (for fun and
profit).
So, let's take this occasion to transition to a different topic ...
development.
Embryological models then...?
And I have to say, I still don't quite "get it" But I think I am beginning to
understand why ... the metaphors they use are bad. Nobody has come up with a
good metaphor to come up with how we now know development to work.
Metaphors are like (to use a Simile) using piecewise linear (or more apt for
several reasons, piecewise sigmoids) curves to fit an arbitrary 1-D Function.
Each piece can be pretty good "locally" but begin with, but to stretch the
application to far leads to disaster... thus the "piecewise". Depending on the
specific parameters of your linear (or sigmoidal) fit, there are regions where
more than one parametric model (or metaphorical target domain) fit equally well
and it only matters which one you choose if you know which direction you are
headed away from the region of interest.
How do we get pluris e uno?
nst --> I think the "e" means "from" "many from one"
Eh? All are One? One are One? We are all one? All one vs Alone?
The stunning discovery of the last 25 years is how widely and in what detail
sequences of genes are similar among animals of widely different form. The
metaphor they use is of a genetic tool kit. Even tho organisms have many
different genes, they all share an essential toolkit. Carroll actually depicts
a little toolbox with cubbies in for the "tools". The DNA sequences in this
basic, shared tool kit are often similar down to the last base. So even though
planaria, bees, octopi, and humans have wildly different eyes, the making of
eyes in all of these species is dependent upon a shared sequence of genes that
generate a shared bunch of proteins.
Actually I believe that eyes are the favorite example of multiple, parallel
(and sometimes convergent) evolution. That is not to say that they don't
share some of the same basic proteins, but that their higher level structure
(and coding) was (apparently) arrived at independently.
nst --> I think Carroll would disagree with you. It's the highest level of
coding that seemst to be widely shared. The Hox proteins and their like.
I think this might be more like noticing that many "stone age" cultures use
"stone", "plant materials", and "animal products" for the basis of their
technology. The fact that around the world that many different cultures
*knapped* stone and then lashed it onto sticks to make spears and arrows and
then made atlatls and bows to hurl these missiles, seems more like the
situation of re-invention/discovery of eyeballness across many genera.
...
what would be GOOD metaphor to encapsulate this process? Remember, we have
stipulated here repeatedly that all metaphors are faulted and that a GOOD
metaphor is one whose faults do not encourage defunct notions of what is going
on. So, for instance, in matters of development, a GOOD metaphor should
scrupulously avoid any implication of intelligence in its description of what
these "organizing" proteins are doing.
So... I've already used my simile of "piecewise curve fitting" to describe how
(inherently multidimensional) metaphors work to model the "real" world in our
language. I believe that a GOOD metaphor has more properties than just having
a "good fit" in the dimensions and range of a system/phenomena/concept we are
modeling. A minimally sufficient metaphor would have that. And if it *also*
yielded a *bad fit* in one or more dimensions (especially those which we hold
high weight on) such as you describe here with the "toolkit metaphor"
immediately calling forth the need of a "toolwielder". So GOOD metaphor
"fits" the phenomena well (within a relevant and desired subset of it's
dimensions and range) without yielding "false positive" matches in the source
domain ( such as the "tool wielder" example). A GREAT metaphor has some other
properties, such as being inherently parameterizeable.... such as if the
"toolkit" had tools which could be more or less self-motivated/articulated and
in invoking the metaphor, one could appeal to the more rather than less
motivated/articulated nature. Another property is that the metaphor can be
deliberately "twisted" or "broken" to yield interesting variations. I suspect
the "toolkit metaphor" *does* get broken/twisted to fit, but not very
gracefully it would seem. Some metaphors seem more amenable to (deliberate and
thoughtful) distortion than others. Similarly, *mixing* metaphors can be very
useful... blending between two.
nst --> Steve, I would really like to sit down and study this text with you.
I have been reading on all day, and the metaphoric stew gets lumpier and
lumpier with each passing paragraph. I read one paragraph with 8 different
metaphors in it, all more or less inconsistent.
Does any one have a better metaphor?
My training (or lack of imagination) leaves me thinking of gene expression and
regulation in cybernetic terms... feedback loops, etc. This is not new, so
probably not useful to you in this case.
nst --> Well, not so fast! I think metaphors from control systems are natural
here. The more carrol writes, also, the more parallels I see between a gene
and a motor neuron.
If any of you are wondering why I am so verbose and wondering, further, when it
will stop, try sending some decent weather to Massachusetts.
Eleventh straight day of rain.
FWIW, I am enjoying your verbosity... and we've been having our own spate of
wet weather here in NM... very nice for this time of year...
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
