Canon PowerShot G9
ƒ/2.8
7.4 mm
1/5
200

Immersed in a brain spa at the Santa Fe Institute today, a weekend symposium on the multi-dimensions of evolution.

The first speaker was Prof. Daniel Dennett, always entertaining and provocative.

Here he shows a termite colony on the left and Gaudi’s cathedral on the right.

“The termite has no boss. None of them understands what they have built. Gaudi was an autocratic builder.”

David Krakauer’s Introduction:
“Evolution is the most important science of the 21st Century. But it is often treated as a field that has not itself evolved. Criticizing evolution by targeting Darwin is both foolish and amusing. If Darwin dropped into one of our labs today, he would not recognize it. Our work is very experimental, quantitative and mathematical. Evolutionary biology is the most mathematical of the biological sciences.”

Dennett quotes:
The trickle down theory of creation was “obvious” to people.
The bubble up theory of creation provides one unified perspective, one elegant synoptic model.
Darwin and Turing present a strange inversion of reasoning.
Turing showed that the computer does not need to know what arithmetic is. Computers have competence without comprehension.
Understanding is the effect, not the cause.
Natural selection is an automatic reason-finder. It doesn’t have to know what it is doing. The “Need to Know” principle in the intelligence community has an analog in the biosphere, driven by thrift rather than security.
We attribute more understanding than there needs to be. We lack a familiar conceptualization of semi-understood quasi-representations.
Like life being made of non-living parts, comprehension can be made from non-comprehending parts.
Our brains are more like termite castles than Turing’s computers.
Italian newspaper headline, translated: “Yes we have a soul, but it’s made of lots of tiny robots.”
Branching neurons are descendants of free-swimming organisms.
When running cultural software, brains become minds.
It’s not magic; it’s teamwork.
Words are memes that can be pronounced.
For evolution, you need high-fidelity copying, but it can’t be perfect copying.
The sea shapes the designs of Polynesian boats. If the boat makes it back home, copy it.
Memes are software viruses.
We are the first intelligent designers in the tree of life.

In response to my question about inscrutability of evolved artifacts:
“Yes, reverse engineering the brain may prove infeasible.”

11 responses to “Termites and Towers”

  1. "We lack a familiar conceptualization of semi-understood quasi-representations.
    Like life being made of non-living parts, comprehension can be made from non-comprehending parts."

    He’s onto something big here! Any operationalization? What’s Dennett’s position relative to phenomenology?

    As far as evolutionary biology is concerned, I still remember an article from Atlantic Monthly of 5-6 years back when a lot of our diseases were attributed to some virus (cancer, etc.). Even though little empirical research has confirmed that hypothesis, a trend might be in the making.

    Excellent entry, thanks!

  2. …..still bathing….

    Stuart Brand: climate change will not kill people. People will kill people, engaging in new conflict over water and climate-induced scarcity.

    Currently speaking: Jessica Flack, SFI, “The Evolution of Conflict”
    She just posed a profound question:

    Are new levels of aggregation in evolution a solution to conflict of interests among components?

    Prok->Euk
    Asexual reproduction ->sex
    Protist->animal
    Solitary->colonies
    Primate societies->human societies

    Canonical view: (e.g., peacock feathers) to be reliable, signals must be costly. Handicap signals to signal strength. Function like conspicuous consumption. Red queen arms race. Lots of invention but no fitness improvement.

    But, if signalers prioritize outcome of interaction the same way, signal can be cost free despite conflict of interest. Losing monkey agrees to be subordinate. Winning monkey agrees not to be violent. Female bowing to the male. No cost here. Contract is in interests of both as long as outcome of fight is predictable. Has to be temporary contract, because things may change. Low level of aggression in the background. Slowly changing contract. Reduces complexity in state of relationship. Higher quality relationship.

    A slowly changing but temporary, self-enforcing, social contract can arise.

    Two time-scales are key. One at contract level, other is background process for change. [reminds me of religion and secular capitalism as a means to maintain the peace]

    Leads also to proto-division of labor by allowing for role differentiation.

    Memory can produce conflict cascades.

    The triad is the fundamental unit of conflict dynamics. Individual agency might be overemphasized in social evolution with regard to conflict.

    I hope to ask her about the ongoing battle of the sex chromosomes in our bodies. Subsumed conflict?

  3. Jessica Flack is covering a lot of ground. She seems to be merging game theory with evolution.

    Two questions:

    1) What does she mean by: "The triad is the fundamental unit of conflict dynamics?" In other words, what is the 3rd party in any given conflict? Why stop at 3?

    2) "Individual agency might be overemphasized in social evolution with regard to conflict." Is this a move towards some sort of holism? In other words, conflicts are social by definition?

  4. Spit and polish. =)

    The termite mounds can be 30 ft. tall, and derive more than beauty from their architecture. Wikipedia:

    The column of hot air rising in the above ground mounds helps drive air circulation currents inside the subterranean network. The structure of these mounds can be quite complex. The temperature control is essential for those species that cultivate fungal gardens and even for those that don’t, much effort and energy is spent maintaining the brood within a narrow temperature range, often only plus or minus one degree C over a day.

    Reminds me of a quote from SFI four years ago, on the value of diversity:

    “Bee hives must stay at 96 degrees for bees to reach maturity. Bees can cool with their wings or huddle together for warmth. Genetically homogenous bees all move together, and the temperature fluctuates widely. Genetically diverse bees keep the hive at a constant temperature.”

    Gaudi had a very interesting design technique, an inverted reasoning of gravity…What’s That? (75)

  5. Speaking now: Krakhauer, The Evolution of Evolutionary Theory

    Einstein’s book: The Evolution of Physics. “False clues murder the story.” “The method of reasoning directed by intuition was wrong and led to false ideas” Galileo destroyed an intuition, and replaced it with another.

    Mechanical view (Aristotle, Galileo), theory of fields (Faraday, Maxwell), theory of relativity, quantum theory.

    Micro-evolution of evolutionary theory:
    Inheritance: Initially, much of the debate was focused on Inheritance, continuous and blending or particulate and genetic. Biometricians vs. Mendelians.

    Darwin believed in blending. Weird theories and mechanisms to support it. “Crossing plays a very important part in keeping… species true and uniform to character” (1842). And “Nature does not make leaps.” But Darwin was absolutely wrong. Clear for autosomal dominant traits. And recessive trails look like anti-blending. At Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, you have a distribution of traits, dominant and recessive. When enemies found that Darwin’s inheritance theory was wrong, they used that as the basis to attack the entire edifice. Then Fisher introduced the concept of variance. Features are determined by many Mendelian factors, and many of these interact non-additively. Dominance is often incomplete in heterozygotes. Like genes for height.

    Looking at paper reference trends: “When a theory dies in the sciences, it comes alive in the humanities.”

    Selection: balancing selection and the Neutral theory. Selectionists vs. neutralists.

    Heterosis/Overdominance: sickle cell. Polymorphism maintained my high mortality. Selection only comes from selection on the dominance. To maintain, have to have a lot of deaths from either homozygote (SSA or malaria). And Malaria is really bad, you have to kill off a number of people with SSA to maximize overall survival.

    “Balancing Selection.” The Paradox of excessive electrophoretic allozyme polymorphism. Selection theory that selects polymorphism is wrong. No way to maintain variability at the levels that we observe it.

    Motoo Kimura: most of it is neutral and nearly neutral isoalleles. These variations do not make phenotypic changes. Led to predictions that got it right. “Neutral Theory”

    Levels: individual selection & kin/group selection

    Individualism. Darwin recognized sterile insects as an objection to his thoery. Variable ant castes that are sterile. How could they possibly evolve? What about group/kin/family selection? Just a question, but led to a theory that’s right.

    Kin vs Group selection: they are mathematically equivalent.

    William Hamilton in 60s: demonstrated it mathematically. Endless debate before that. If benefit of interaction > cost, then cooperative dynamic emerges. Critical threshold is 1/coefficiant of relatedness. P(same genes) by descent. #genes/(#members + #genes)

    For some reason, group selection papers > kin selection, even after they were shown to be identical. Need a new name for them.

    Development: Phyletic gradualism & punctuated equilibrium.. Micro vs. macroevolutionists.

    Alternative to phyletic gradualism, which was wrong. Darwin saw this as the most serious objection against the theory.
    Eldredge $ Gould ’72 You see jumps and static periods. Punctuated equilibrium.
    Gould: “stasis is data”
    Darwin was wrong to claim it was gradualistic. This is what we would expect. Geographic separation. Get founder effects. Quickly get diversification. Isolation -> max mates of change. If you could zoom in, would see divergence (relatively short time frame). Darwin also intuited that. Peripheral isolate theory.

    Gould: It’s not gene selection. It’s macromutation and high-level selection, at level of whole species. Controversial. Davidson & Erwin 06 evolution progresses from mutations in developmental programs, in the genetic regulatory networks. Evo-devo. Coyne: rabid evolutionist. “There appears to be no basis for Davidson & Erwin’s claims.” I have no doubt Coyne is wrong.

    Evo-devo: Breeding foxes in Russia from wild to tame. All kinds of other traits changed too. Selected only for tameness. If look at all animals selected for domestication. All showed increase in dwarfism and giantism. All show piebald coat color. Most show wavey/curly hair and rolled tails. Common signaling networks. How much will come from understanding of GP map?

    Organisms are made by the environment. External factors become encoded by the organism. Closest to a foundational challenge to Darwin. Caddis fly, termite mound. Does selection pressure structure the organism or does the organism self-structure. Odling Smee: niche construction. The gene pool constructs future selection pressures on itself. This is clearly what “society” is about. This is a change. When selection is encoded in genes. An extension of the extended phenotype.

    He ended with a series of Art Math Slides…. A series of equations + naked roman statuary… something for everyone.

  6. The comparison in the slide is full paradoxical.
    Gaudí was inspired by natural forms, particularly
    in nests and anthills. Therefore, here we can see
    an example of intelligent design mimicking an
    emergent natural pattern.

  7. "Understanding is the effect, not the cause."

    Uh-oh! There goes Cogito ergo sum.
    It had a good run.
    May it rest in peace.

  8. In an awake state we try to bend, shape and understand the world around us but in dreams (especially in mine) we don’t stand out, we stand ‘in’. Maybe we are the only species that has emerged from sleep.

  9. Love Gaudi too..heard about Russian foxes before…it is a small world:) see the same exact thought here…understand the understanding might not be possible..harmless enigma:) like Vennetaj idea about termites trying to connect:) Evolution is evolving…I need a memory microchip enhancement….too much curiosity..not enough memory…interesting subject!

  10. Great! We will be connecting to this enormous post on our site. Continue the good writing.how to be graceful and elegant

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *