unsubscribe
Arthur Jackson (ajackson@SSA.CO.SANTA-CLARA.CA.US)
Thu, 19 Nov 1998 07:54:12 -0800
Don Mikulecky wrote:
>
> Don Mikulecky replies:
>
> Luis Rocha wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > >
> >
> > > Nobody argues that the evolution of genes and memes is different.
> > > The problem is that you don't want to see any similarity.
> >
> > You and others have argued that they are essentially the same. I do see
> > a lot of similarities and have mentioned those from the start: both
> > refer to an evolutionary process of semiotic selected self-organization.
> > Furthermore, I do think that cultural evolution has aspects of blind
> > variation, and biological evolution has aspects of evolution by
> > adoption/amalgamation/crossover, but blind variation is the prime mover
> > of biological evolution, and evolution by adoption the prime mover of
> > cultural evolution. What I insist is that we should aim at understanding
> > the different evolutionary processes that exist, and then give
> > appropriate credit to them in each context. We should also be aware of
> > the risks of over-generalization.
> >
> > If I am right about the predominance of different evolutionary processes
> > in biological and cultural evolution, more empirical studies such as
> > that of McShea should confirm this. In particular, I concede, one will
> > probably find (as Stan Salthe suggested) that biological evolution,
> > though mostly passive, will also show some increase in minimum
> > complexity due to non-Darwinian evolutionary processes. Likewise,
> > studies of cultural evolution should show that progress and complexity
> > (however those may be defined in social systems) will not increase as
> > expected of purely driven evolution, due to the failure of some radical,
> > revolutionary, (blind variation) strategies -- though, of course, some
> > revolutionary events will also be successful, and needed, just like in
> > natural (blind) evolution.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Luis
> > ______________________________________________________
> >
> > Luis Mateus Rocha (Postdoctoral Associate)
> > Los Alamos National Laboratory
> > Computer Research and Applications Group (CIC-3)
> > Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA
> > e-mail: rocha@lanl.gov or rocha@santafe.edu
> > www: http://www.c3.lanl.gov/~rocha
>
> The comparison of genes and memes might be made a bit more clear if we use
> rosen's technique of askink why?....Aristotelian causality. Remeber there are
> four causes:
> material
> efficient
> formal
> final
> clearly the trivial difference here is in material cause......DNA vs
> individuals in a culture
> the efficient cause difference is more telling......the replication and
> expresssion mechanism in a cell vs some means of passing on cultural
> information
> formal cause is profoundly different.........the code vs ??????
> and then final cause......their purpose seems to be the driving similarity.
> It is ironic that science rejects final cause arguments so strongly.
>
> Also, Gould has written more on these issues since the book. I'll be
> commenting on those writings as soon as I finish rereading them.
> Respectfully,
> Don Mikulecky