Maybe I am misremembering (which clearly happens), but didn't the discussion of gen-phen-like maps arise in the context of goal-function distinctions? In this latter class, we included the thermostat system where constraining systems to Weismann's doctrine would not be meaningful. Clearly, in the goal-function system, an individual that changes the thermostat dial because they prefer the house to be at 60 degrees rather than 80 degrees (a variation on function) performs downwardly to affect the tolerance of the piece of metal or mercury switch (a variation on goal). Are we breaking the semantic game by now demanding that our admissable gen-phen-like maps preserve Weismann's doctrine? I understood Glen's evocation to not be so constrained.
-- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
