[FRIAM] Epidiagram

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

My objections remain and are further highlighted by your very last sentence about what is a side effect and what's not being a matter of perspective. What you seem to have done in the diagram is taken some baby steps toward modularity, composition, and rates of information flow. Your straight arrows seem to be fast/tight couplings and your fat swooshy arrows seem to be slower/looser couplings. Why not simply toss all this confounding stuff about "epiphenomena" and talk directly about composition and modularity?

The locally scoped {belly-soothing, analgesic objective, size sorting} flows are only different from the widely scoped flows {blood thinning, egg incubating, color sorting} in their tightness and rates. Why do you insist they are so different? Different in *kind*? "Epiphenomenal"? It smacks of artificial distinction.

We could just as easily draw distinctions between the rates of as-yet-unidentified *other* flows in any of the 3 model systems. Other flows that you've violently excised out of your models. But whether those distinctions are objectively significant would be a matter of experimental protocol, manipulation, not a matter of perspective.

And it's that last point that (I think) causes the ALife community to focus on open-ended evolution (or the more subtle concept of evolved open-endedness). In my ignorant opinion, the basic concept is that there is no significant difference between the causal chain and the side effects. The dynamism of the system is free to use *either*, free to exploit either, free to amplify a side effect, hone in on a primary cause, completely ignore a primary cause, etc. What you seem to be doing is trying to *isolate* and set in stone a structure that doesn't exist ... to *impute* your thoughts into the model rather than discovering the structure from the referent.


On 8/13/20 9:09 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> This diagram is pursuant to last week’s discussion of the device I called he Sober Epiphenomenator.  You will recall that, in it’s simplest form, the epiphenomenator is a device that sorts spheres into colors, but only because each of the different colors of sphere is of a different size, and the device sorts for sphere size.  The idea is that the color of the balls, while salient to the human eye, is an epiphenomenon of the machine’s sorting system.  My suggestion is that this model can be used to clarify many concepts that are kicking around in our discussions. 
> 
>  
> 
> I think of an epiphenomenon as a side effect.  It is a consequence of an action that is not part of the causal chain that brings that action into being.  Allow, for instance, that aspirin was initially developed because of it’s effects on pain.  Later it was found that aspirin is a blood thinner.  Thinned blood was, at that point, a side effect of aspirin, whose main effect was the easing of pain.  Thinned blood was an epiphenomenon in that it was not part of the causal chain that led to the development of aspirin.
> 
>  
> 
> Already we can see that there is something screwy here.  Painkilling and blood-thinning are both consequences of taking aspirin.  How consequence can play a part in their own causal history is not immediately evident, unless there is some iterative process that involves a feedback loop from consequences of a decision of some sort to the decision process itself.  So any time we are talking about epiphenomena, we are, of necessity, talking about feedback loops.  An epiphenomenon is a consequence of some sort of decision-process that has not feed back on the development of the process itself. 
> 
> But even in the aspirin case, simple as it is, we can begin to see a complication.  Many of us take aspirin for its bloodthinning properties.  So while these properties might have been epiphenomenal for the purpose of the development of the product, it is not epiphenomenal for my taking of it.  And to the extent that the tablet I take has been modified for its blood-thinning purpose – it is smaller – the blood thinning properties are no longer epiphenomenal with respect to the tablet I take. 
> 
>                                                                                                                                        
> 
> I am running out of time so I better get to the explication of the attached diagram.  My working intuition is that the notion of epiphenomenon lurks in many of the domains we regularly discuss.  The first I want to explore is the one most familiar to me, /The Law of Short Sighted Striving/.  The law states that in animal behavior generally, that which the animal strives to attain is not that which the behavior has been selected for.  Rather the animals strive to attain some other end which when attained, because of the nature of the animal’s environment, provides the consequence for which nature selects.  In the diagram attached, the particulars filled in may be fanciful at best.  They arise from a paper I read decades ago by the Rutgers behavioral endocrinologist Danial Lehrman, about the origins of incubation behavior in ring doves.  Given the length of time that has passed, it would be extraordinary if any of the facts asserted are still regarded as true. 
> 
>  
> 
> Nevertheless, the facts asserted are that hormonal changes in the dove raise a painful patch on the underside of the dove which is soothed by placing the patch on the egg.  Through a process of learning , the dove comes therefore to incubate the eggs.  Note that such a dove would not care a whit for any of the things that biologists care for in this situation, including the fact that incubating the eggs leads to their hatching, which has, presumably, led to the evolution of the brooding patch.  So, from the point of view of the dove, the hatching of the eggs is an epiphenomenon.
> 
>  
> 
> But shifting our attention to the origins of the relation between cool eggs and dove incubation, we find that the warming of eggs is not epiphenomenal to that causal loop. 
> 
>  
> 
> Thus, what is, or is not, an epiphenomenal is a matter of point of view, a conclusion that suggests that any further consideration of the matter is likely to both fraught and interesting.


-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ