[FRIAM] gene-culture coevolution

[Tom Johnson]

But only if there's a shell in the chamber.
TJ

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 12:29 PM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> You can define both with probability assertions.  If you smoke you alter
> the probability distribution life length.  If you pull the trigger the gun
> will fire with probability 0.99996.
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 12:26 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> F
>>
>>
>>
>> is one of them nonsense?
>>
>>
>>
>> n
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick Thompson
>>
>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 9, 2021 2:24 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene-culture coevolution
>>
>>
>>
>> My causal reasoning colleagues make a distinction between statistical
>> causation (smoking causes cancer) and token causation (pulling this trigger
>> causes this gun to fire).
>>
>> ---
>> Frank C. Wimberly
>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>
>> 505 670-9918
>> Santa Fe, NM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 9:09 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Pieter,
>>
>>
>>
>> Are you perhaps caught in a tautology, here?  If genetic changes are
>> DEFINED as those that occur slowly, then the statement that genetic changes
>> occur slowly has no empirical force.  Such tautologies have been the
>> life-blood of my work.
>>
>>
>>
>> Gardening makes me skeptical.  Why didn’t my peas come up this year, when
>> the beans right next to them leapt from the soil.  I dunno.  I can have
>> hunches, and I do have hunches, and having hunches makes my world seem a
>> safer place.  When I garden, I easily get lost in what Philosophers would
>> probably call a Humean Swamp.  It’s the same as having IBD which 30 percent
>> of the American population does.  Every day’s different; every day’s the
>> same in being different; and no doctor has a clue.  One can do experiments,
>> and experiments are suggest that changes in the population of some events
>> will lead to changes in the population of some other events.  But to speak
>> of causality in a single instance, as we all so confidently do, is just
>> nonsense.
>>
>>
>>
>> Out here amongst the humus the world returns to its natural state, a
>> blooming buzzing confusion.  I get to wondering how ANY Darwinian process
>> can occur, anatomical, physiological, OR behavioral: i.e., natural
>> selection OR learning.  For something to be selected in any way, it has to
>> be isolated from all other consequences except the desired one.  In a
>> garden (as in a gut) things just seem just too ENTANGLED for selection to
>> be possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Now back to our conversation about rate of change.  It seems to me that
>> the rate of change is determined in part by the degree of entanglement of
>> the trait of interest.  Highly entangled traits change slowly, whether by
>> learning or by natural selection; free standing traits change quickly.  THE
>> BEAK OF THE FINCH has a wonderful example of the bill shapes of one of
>> Darwin’s finches changing in cycles according to El Nino.  (Geez!  I hope I
>> remember that right!)  One can suppose that learned traits are easier to
>> disentangle than “genetic” ones, but I don’t know any rule that makes that
>> so.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the puzzle of evolution and the puzzle of learning are the same.
>> In whose interest is the platform, the level playing field, the
>> disentanglement, that makes selection possible.  Is it possible that
>> Darwinian mechanisms are self -disentangling?
>>
>>
>>
>> Pieter, I have taken the liberty of forwarding this to the list, so I can
>> resume being dope-slapped by the Erics and Glencus.  It’s time to drain my
>> Humean swamp.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick Thompson
>>
>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pieter Steenekamp <pieters at randcontrols.co.za>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 9, 2021 7:13 AM
>> *To:* thompnickson2 at gmail.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene-culture coevolution
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick, please enjoy your gardening, I really don't mind if you ignore this
>> email.
>>
>> You say the physiological resistance changes rapidly. How rapidly? If
>> it's in let's say two or three generations, then it's obviously not
>> genetic. In this case I don't have a clue how that happens. If it's say 100
>> generations or more, genetic evolution could well explain that and I can't
>> think of a better explanation. If you offer a better explanation then I'll
>> accept it. In the absence of a better explanation I'll accept that the best
>> explanation given for physiological resistance is genetic evolution.
>>
>> It makes perfect sense that the speed of genetic evolution on
>> physiological resistance is much faster than the genetic evolution on
>> behaviour change. The venom kills the animal and that very quickly removes
>> the genes from the gene pool. To evolve to change the genes to change the
>> behaviour back to before the prairy dog got in contact with snakes has a
>> much weaker influence and will obviously take much longer. The prairy dogs
>> that still have the genes causing defensive behaviour are not removed from
>> the gene pool, or if then very slowly.
>>
>> If the behaviour was learned and not caused by the genes, the behaviour
>> change will obviously be much faster. The slow change in behaviour hints at
>> genes causing the behaviour.
>>
>> You obviously don't like it, but I find it difficult to express the
>> relationship between genes and traits without using the word "cause".
>> Do you understand what I mean if I say "genes cause traits"?
>> Are you offended by me using it like that?
>> How would you say it? Maybe "genes determine traits"? Or maybe writing
>> the whole story, explaining all the mechanisms and relationships?
>>
>> Bottom line, if you understand what I mean by using "genes causing
>> traits" and you are not offended by it, then I prefer to carry on using it
>> like that. I think it conveys the meaning perfectly well. There are many
>> instances where intelligent people confuse correlation with causation. I
>> have a sort of bee in my bonnet about this. That's why I generally tend to
>> emphasize the cause, to distinguish it from the correlation. There are
>> certain genes that correlate with certain traits, in this case it's not
>> just an arbitrary correlation, there is also causation.
>>
>>
>>
>> But if you don't understand it or are offended by it, then I'll gladly
>> change my wording in future.
>>
>>
>> Pieter
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 21:47, <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Well, then, why does the physiological resistance to the snake venom,
>> which presumably is a genetic thing, change rapidly.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, while I am quibbling,  I am never sure that a gene is the sort of
>> “thing” that can cause anything.  How can things, which are extended in
>> time, be the cause of things.  Don’t causes need to be events?  Shouln’t we
>> talking about the events necessary of sufficient for an the increase or
>> decrease in the relative frequency of an observation event?  Any way, I am
>> still on leave from FRIAM and should keep my mouth shut. The garden is
>> starting to look like something.  Whenever my instructions weren’t clear,
>> my planter put in lettuce sets.  So now I have roughly 40 perfect heads of
>> multicolored lettuce.  Need human rabbits to partake.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick Thompson
>>
>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pieter Steenekamp <pieters at randcontrols.co.za>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:51 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> *Cc:* thompnickson2 at gmail.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene-culture coevolution
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick, I'm not sure I follow your logic. It seems you imply behaviour
>> cannot be caused by genes? Help me if I understand you wrong. The way I see
>> it is that the behaviour of the prairie dogs is caused mainly by their
>> genes, that's why it changes very slowly.
>>
>> Human behaviour on the other hand is caused to a much larger extent, but
>> certainly not exclusively, we are not born blank slates, by culture that's
>> why it changes much faster.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 17:36, <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dispatch from the bog.  Assumption that behavioral adaptation is
>> necessary quicker than genetic gratuitous  STOP in region of west where
>> there have been no rattle snakes for a zillion years, prairie dogs still
>> have behavioral defenses long after their venom resistance has faded STOP
>> yes I can think of other explanations STOP there are always other
>> explanations STOP  Also, genes are relations not things  STOP
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick Thompson
>>
>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Pieter
>> Steenekamp
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:40 AM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam at redfish.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene-culture coevolution
>>
>>
>>
>> The paper makes intuitive sense for me. Human traits are a complex
>> function of genes and culture. Genetic evolution has stopped, or is very
>> weak, and culture is evolving very fast. The changes in future human traits
>> will therefore almost exclusively be determined by cultural evolution.
>>
>> But, this is assuming humans are not going to modify their genes, or the
>> genes of their children. With current technology it's probably very risky
>> to do that, but what will the future hold?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 04:25, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I have been trying to make the point about culture - not only for
>> evolution, but for cognition as well. Had many an argument with Nick on
>> this topic at Mother Church.
>>
>> davew
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, at 2:17 PM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:
>> > Researchers: Culture drives human evolution more than genetics
>> > https://phys.org/news/2021-06-culture-human-evolution-genetics.html
>> >
>> > Paywalled Paper:
>> > https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2021.0538
>> >
>> > Accessible version:
>> >
>> https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039&context=eco_facpub
>> >
>> > --
>> > ☤>$ uǝlƃ
>> >
>> > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> >
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20220302/2c480d81/attachment.html>