Re: Formalizing the concept of design

Posted by Nick Thompson on Oct 29, 2018; 6:20am
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Formalizing-the-concept-of-design-tp7591958p7591966.html

Hi, Glen,

 

I am continuing to think about what you say below.  I guess, in my defense, I would say that this a statement about what natural designs means, not a claim that all animals behave in this highly schematized way.  After all, even in the course of orgiastic sex, the organism continues to breath (well mostly) so the different activities can be simultaneous as well as switched between.   For real examples, have a look at some of the diagrams in Tinbergen’s Study of Instinct.  See below

 

I just reread Rosen's chapter on epistemology:  God what a hot mess!  But exciting, still.  I wish somebody would sit down and read it with me.

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of ? u???
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2018 4:53 AM
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Formalizing the concept of design

 

This description suffers from the same criticism I made before: you're assuming a *strict* hierarchy, where the higher order can only operate over whole components from the lower order.  I.e. the gun's algorithm 1st chooses the type/medium of target (ballistic, air, water), then uses that type to select the specific tracking sub-algorithm.

 

And while this is mostly how it's done in artificial systems, I suspect biology does NOT use strict hierarchies.  A higher order function can operate over a mixture of operands, some complex wholes in that higher order and some from the lower orders.  E.g. if the gun's higher order selection is based not only on the 3 types (ballistic, air, water), but also on a lower order measure like *speed*, then it may well use he same sub-algorithm for both air and water.  So, it takes both high order constructs and low order constructs as its operands.

 

You see your assumption of a strict hierarchy peeking through when you say sex is the only motive that is ESSENTIALLY social.  What do you mean by "essentially"?  Couldn't we say that *all* the behavior of all the social animals is, in part, social?  ... including following others to the water hole?  So, these functions would be mixed ... do not obey a strict hierarchy.

 

On 10/27/18 11:32 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:

> But the function that connects the two arrays will be different in the two kinds of gun because a surface target is capable of different sorts of motion from an aerial target.

> [...]

> So, the gun would display two levels of design, the lower level that relates trajectory to firing and the higher level that relates the lower level design to target type.

> [...]

> This conception of multiple hierarchical layers of design is a useful

> way to describe many of the phenomena that ethologists and

> socio-biologists are required to explain. …

 

 

 

 

 

--

∄ uǝʃƃ

 

============================================================

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