Steven - I don't consider that adaptation is akin to induction. It's
akin to abduction.
1] And I disagree with your comment about random mutation - which
you seem to suggest is sufficient to provide a species with an
adaptive capacity. As I pointed out, for the reasons of both
statistical viability and conservation of energy, I consider that
random offerings, so to speak, are insufficient and indeed, even
dangerous, as a means of dealing with environmental pressures.
2] I will repeat yet again, Peirce's dictum. 4.551
"thought is not necessarily connected with a brain. It appears in
the work of bees, of crystals and throughout the purely physical
world".
that is - my point is that the biological organism - without a brain
- let's just say a paramecium, much less a bird - is in informational
interaction with its environment - and as such, comes up with
constructive solutions to environmental challenges, within its
organic and inorganic composition.
3] And no- this is not consciousness. Again, as Peirce pointed out,
"consciousness is a special and not a universal, accompaniment of
mind" 7.366
4]What is Mind?
"Mind has its universal mode of action, namely by final
causation....the motions of a little creature show any purpose. If
so, there is mind there. 1.269
I note that there is no concept here of 'consciousness'. Rather,
Peirce continues: "Passing from the little to the large, natural
selection is the theory of how forms come to be adaptive, that is, to
be governed by a quasi purpose. It suggests a machinery of efficiency
to bring about the end"...and this end is the purpose or final cause.
That is, my view is that ALL matter [and I include the
physic-chemical realm, but will refer here only to the biological']
functions within MIND, which is to say - matter functions logically,
rationally, with a purpose, which is...to be matter, to not
dissipate, to increase in complexity and diversity.
Therefore - adaptation and evolution are not random happenings, but
MIND-produced actions, produced by local organisms in informational
interaction with their local environment, to enable constructive
continuity of that matter - whether in that particular form or in
another form. Informational interaction does not require a brain nor
consciousness. After all, trees are in constant informational
interaction with their environment, producing pheromones when, for
example, attacked by pests, that will attract birds etc to come to
attack those pests. Producing sap to close water evaporation gaps,
and so on.
Adaptive responses, requiring deeper biological changes, are, in my
view, the result of information interactions with the environment,
where the species will produce a new form - not randomly which is a
waste of time and energy - but functionally, ie, one that will fulfil
that 'final cause' function - and thus, change the beak size.
Edwina
On Thu 17/12/20 6:40 PM , "Skaggs,Steven" [email protected]
sent:
Thanks, Edwina. A lot of the problem has to do with discerning
scales and other kinds of boundaries, i.e. phylogenic from ontogenic.
The division of scales of any sort, even splitting the rainbow into 4,
6 or 8 colors, is difficult. I agree with what you're saying about
adaptation, a word that sits more comfortably for me here than
inductive reasoning. It is local in the sense of being an interactive
feedback response between organism and environmental context, both of
which may change through time. Don’t know about "reject random
mutation as a means of dealing with environmental challenge",
though. Seems that pressure from threatening conditions would greatly
favor those individuals that differ in ways that defer or blunt the
pressure. And, short of conscious agency (for example, on the part of
social groups who could indeed use inference), most biological forms
would probably blindly fall into the sweet spot — or become
extinct. —SxS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected]
with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
