impactology, 19 days ago

"The very existence of Kantian wholes in the nonergodic universe above the level of atoms allows, as noted, a noncircular definition of function. The function of a part is that subset of its causal properties that sustains the Kantian whole"

The very existence of Kantian wholes in the nonergodic universe above the level of atoms allows, as noted, a noncircular definition of finction. The function of a part is that subset of its causal properties that sustains the Kantian whole. What of purpose? As Jacques Monod famously said in Chance and Necessity (Monod, 1971), the project of every cell is to create two cells. Living cells are molecular autonomous agents, able to reproduce, perform thermo- dynamic work cycles, and choose (Clayton & Kauffman, 2006). To choose, cells must sense the world, evaluate it as “good or bad for me,” and act (Peil, 2014). This triad is central to the project of every cell and is the root of “value” (Peil, 2014). The same triad is the root of affordances: “goal,” “affordance,” and “means to seize the affordance” (Walsh, 2015). Here is where teleonomy comes into play: organisms act according to their values, and so their internal goals, and the opportunities they have. The tight, irreducible coupling between goals and affordances emphasizes the prominent role of organism purposiveness in the process of affordance-seizing exerted by natural selection, which is central for teleonomic selection (Corning, 2014, 2018). Furthermore, given that living organisms are nested Kantian wholes, teleonomy—and its impact on evolution—can be found at every level of organisms.

tanepiper, 19 days ago

@impactology Sort of 'Turing Complete ' in a way

impactology, 19 days ago

@tanepiper Hehe funny you mention that because just in the next paragraph they talked about Turing machine

impactology, 19 days ago

@tanepiper

Its bit of a word salad but I think what they mean is as each part of a whole undergoes evolution, the parts must always sustain the functioning Kantian whole.

And for that they say only a living organism can do that.

impactology, 19 days ago

@tanepiper

They give a diagram to explain, though could have given a proper example to flesh it out well (not the most creative writers i'd say)

the process of surviving, and the things mediating this process of survival can be the things in the niche of the surviving species. The things can be goods sold in a market, regulated by relevant legal laws. A corporation is a Kantian whole embedded in the larger Kantian whole economic and legal world enabled by laws that constrain human activities into the specific human work that sustains the Kantian whole corporation and its enabling legal laws. By abstracting any properties from a thing, the indefinite actual uses of any physical thing can be captured. In short, the physical, legal, ideational character of a thing is irrelevant to the abstracted thing, its transformations, and the regulations of transformations among things by things. If we are precluded from using set theory with respect to real things, stones, hammers, and enzymes, we are fully allowed here to use set theory with this fully syntactic model of things and their transformations.

tanepiper, 19 days ago

@impactology wait, they just reinvented ontology??

impactology, 19 days ago

@tanepiper

The one related to evolutionary theory yes, that's what the book is about

[open access] Evolution "On Purpose" Teleonomy in Living Systems Edited by Peter A. Corning, Stuart A. Kauffman, Denis Noble, James A. Shapiro, Richard I. Vane-Wright and Addy Pross

https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-edited-volume/5634/Evolution-On-Purpose-Teleonomy-in-Living-Systems

It has chapters like 👇🏾

Toward the Physicalization of Biology: Seeking the Chemical Origin of Cognition By Robert Pascal, Addy Pross

tanepiper, 19 days ago

@impactology that last sentence 🚀

Reality is just a loose set of agreements laid over time

impactology, 19 days ago

@tanepiper

😅

Theoretical biologists, the way they write can appear a bit "woo-woo" lol.

I just skim it to get some possible ideas on diet, lifestyle changes.

its from this book, open access

https://mastodon.social/@impactology/112332068516781930

rzeta0, 19 days ago (edited 19 days ago)

@impactology

Reminds me of an idea suggested by NN Taleb that organisms (and organisations) need random stressors to remain fit.

Stasis bad.

Constant challenge and response, and maybe change/evolution, are necessary to stay fit, alive, and for organisations, relevant.

impactology, 19 days ago

@rzeta0

Kinda sounds like buddhism's concept of impermanence