Steve writes:
< Of course, the confines of a career in (big) academia or government or industry can provide a narrowing, as can the conveniences of modern (professional) living where one needn't repair their own vehicles (flat tire? call AAA! oil change light? Stop at Jiffy Lube!) or grow their own food (that is what supermarkets are for) or cook (prepared packaged meals, microwaves, fast-food and other restaurants!) or build/repair/maintain their home (there are service industries galore as well as handymen to do that for us), etc. But even if during the power-band of our professional careers, we give up all extraneous activities/skills, we might return to (discover) them in retirement, either as "hobbies" or out of financial opportunity (I can retire early if I quit eating out, paying others to do my maintenance/repair, etc.) > There's another intermediate phase that can occur, namely tenure. Not everyone that gets that opportunity recognizes they can ease-off on the narrowing. Instead some (many?) prefer to keep their focus but at a slower metabolism, ending at retirement at a metabolism near zero. I don't see the appeal of that approach, myself. It seems tragic, almost. Marcus ________________________________ From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Steven A Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 9:34:57 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] death I'm wondering if pupating isn't more relevant to the topic than moulting? As for molting, I was surprised to learn that lobsters (and other decapods?) appear to avoid/eschew cellular senescence... and their apparent increase in sexual reproductivity with age... death seems to come (if not from accident or predation) from literally out growing some square-cube law that means the demands of molting exceeds their resources? There are also accumulated diseases/parasites that aggravate this over time/age, but not senescense at the cellular level as most multicellular life seems to have. I suggest pupating to reference going from specialized to general. I *think* of the larval stage of any insectoid as being more specialized than the mature version (mostly good at just burrowing through (hopefully) nutrient-dense material near where they were hatched)... especially in some beetles which seem very generalized (compared to the average larvae). Other creatures (lipidoptera?) might seem to be going to *more* specialized in some sense? Do humans become more specialized with age? I propose that we go through cycles of specialization/generalization. Babies are optimized for two things, ingesting and metabolizing nourishment (eliminating waste is a sub-process this) and triggering adults to provide nourishment and protection from predators and the elements. As vertebrates go, we spend a LONG time in this specialization (until weaned and diaper trained?). As babies become ambulatory and then learn language, they become generalists. At some point in their growth into adults, they may at least dabble at specialization... picking a sport or a topic of study to excel at. If they don't manage to arrest their development by becoming professional athletes, soldiers, or perennial students, adulthood returns them toward being generalists... not just getting good at physical or intellectual excercises within the confines of a set of rules (a sport, a game, a class, a field of study) but in more "real world" settings as well as perhaps (also) excelling at non-team sports, or mechanical skills or gardening or building or cooking or... . Of course, the confines of a career in (big) academia or government or industry can provide a narrowing, as can the conveniences of modern (professional) living where one needn't repair their own vehicles (flat tire? call AAA! oil change light? Stop at Jiffy Lube!) or grow their own food (that is what supermarkets are for) or cook (prepared packaged meals, microwaves, fast-food and other restaurants!) or build/repair/maintain their home (there are service industries galore as well as handymen to do that for us), etc. But even if during the power-band of our professional careers, we give up all extraneous activities/skills, we might return to (discover) them in retirement, either as "hobbies" or out of financial opportunity (I can retire early if I quit eating out, paying others to do my maintenance/repair, etc.) In olden times, our elder years might represent an opportunity to pass on the wisdom/skills gained in a lifetime... which could be very generalized (ask old Jake, he knows more than a bit about just about everything!) , or very specialized (Sally can put the finest edge on your blade with her files and stones like nobody's business!). Today, it is somewhat rare... cultural shifts? Or the details of life change so quickly that a lifetime of "specialized skill development" is often irrelevant (how many carburators need rebuilding when all modern engines are fuel injected)? > Molting is a fantastic metaphor. But do we have any species to look to that > molts for greater generality instead of greater specialty? I suppose we > could argue that some species jump from one specialty to another via molting. > But that passes the buck to some set of processes that hold the program for > specialty selection. > > On 10/30/2017 01:52 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote: >> So maybe AIs will have molting stages? ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
