Some of us, we are just a few syllables short of a haiku
On 2/5/21 9:09 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Gosh. We’re all pretty good at this. N > > > > > > Nick Thompson > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> > > > > *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Stephen Guerin > *Sent:* Friday, February 5, 2021 8:52 AM > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] what complexity science says ... > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 1:29 PM <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Roger, I have to admit that this is one of the papers that causes > me to display “howling in the wilderness” syndrome. > > Howling in the wildnerness > > Murder of complexity crows accompany me > Their beaks move, but I can't hear what they say > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 1:29 PM <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi, Roger, > > > > Have I ever sent you THIS > > <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288818273_Shifting_the_natural_selection_metaphor_to_the_group_level> > before? It makes the argument that group selected individuals > will be selected for flexibility, like some classes of immune > cells, for instance. Or honey bee workers. I am not sure how > this idea works with the idea in the paper you sent out. Flow IS > an emergent trait, so that works. But it’s hard to think of > LeBron James as a “generalist”. I guess we could argue that if > his team is to have “flow”, he has to have enough versatility NOT > to do the thing he’s best at when it’s not called for by the > demands of “flow.” I certainly agree with the Aeon article that > there are “flow-catalysts” among us and that they are great to > have on a team. > > > > Here is the relevant text from the article (pp 97-8). > > > > If trait-group selection is to play the role of a "genetic > mechanism" in group selection theory, then it must be the case > that, for instance, groups with more "group promoting" individuals > (an aggregate trait) must be better organized and more harmonious > (emergent traits). What sorts of individuals would > begrouppromoting in this way? What sort of elements which, when > aggregated, would foster emergence of some group trait? The answer > that comes to mind immediately is "flexible elements." A boat > would be a poor competitor if it had all the best coxswains in the > race or all the best stroke oarsmen; but a boat with all the most > educable rowers in the race might be a very good competitor, > since educable rowers could learn the skills appropriate to each > position in the boat. Thus, the relationship between emergent > traits as a selective force and trait-group selection as an > inheritance mechanism may account for why complex organizations in > nature seem so often to be composed of generalist elements that > become specialized during development to serve different > functions within the whole. Think of the body's cells, for > instance, which all contain the same genetic information but come > to serve very different functions during the course of > development. Think of the neurons of the human cortex, which > become structured and organized by position and by experience. > Think of the workers in a beehive (Seeley,1995). … > > > > The analysis of this paper . suggests another reason why humans > might be generalists--powerful group selection. Selection for > aggregate properties at any level is impotent to select for > functional differentiation. It can, however, select for > differentiability. Thus, the undifferentiated brain tissue and > generalized behavior potential that characterize human beings and > that make human language and culture a possibility may be a > direct result of group selection (Boyd & Richerson, 1985; Boehm, > 1997). The exact mechanism by which this selection would come > about is a combination of group selection, which would assure that > functionally integrated groups generate more offspring groups than > their nonfunctionally integrated alternatives, and trait-group > inheritance, which would assure that aggregations of > differentiable individuals are available to form functionally > integratedgroups. > > > > > > Roger, I have to admit that this is one of the papers that causes > me to display “howling in the wilderness” syndrome. I think it is > one of my most interesting, both in the conclusion it reaches and > in the formal analysis of metaphor that leads to that conclusion. > Yet, nobody seems to see any reason to discuss it. Any thoughts > on this quandary would be deeply appreciated. > > > > Nick > > > > Nick Thompson > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > 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 > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 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 FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
