[FRIAM] Group Selection IS a metaphor.
Santafe
desmith at santafe.edu
Sun Aug 10 22:17:57 EDT 2025
Thanks Frank.
Okay. Yuck. I am going to limit what I write, because emails are documents.
There’s a lot of the branding-language in the digest below. A lot even in proportion to the operational language telling you what is going on. So it reflects one subspace of the traffic, and largely passes over other subspaces.
Let me give one of my a-semantic formalism takes. There are various ways you can tie yourself up in knots, and find ways to accommodate the branding language, but that is a lot like granting horoscopes validity, and I don’t think it’s a good way to write if the goal is to see something in whatever might be its clearest terms.
Caveat any reader; my view is incomplete, and some people who work in the area might emphasize other things. I don’t think what I will write below is wrong, but they might tell me it is.
1. Suppose you have some family of objects, which by most reasonable measures seem to have hierarchical organization that links the instances both internally and among each other through apparently re-used elements.
1a. Obviously, the description in 1 is what leads us to seek data-compression algorithms in any number of areas, and I believe all that language and concept-structure is the thing at work here too.
1b. To the extent that compressibility is often the quantification language from which complexity is approached, it is also very normal and natural to see this as a discussion of complexity measures. So far, so good.
2. Suppose you start with a general-form premise, that there is some strong cost-differential: that “re-use” is somehow very very much easier or cheaper than “de novo origination” of “whatever it is” that the objects in this family are “made of”. Right now these are imagistic terms; we don’t have given meanings for them, and need to choose some. What will you do?
3. Well, you have to decide on a program to say what kinds of “objects” you will recognize as entities in the described-set, and what kinds of joining- or aggregating-operations you admit that will turn collections of objects in your set into other (bigger) objects also in your set. You want your definitions of all these to make sense recursively. There can be base-level “elementary” or “given” starting objects, which are like lowest-level building blocks, but you want anything built up by connecting them to also be an eligible building block, to which the joining operation can again be applied.
3a. For any given class of final objects “to be accounted for", there may be many ways to choose what intermediate-level objects are allowed in the class as part of the accounting, which of these are “elementary” and which “composite”, and how joining or aggregation might be done. So how will you choose?
4. You can propose an optimization criterion. For any _particular_ collection of recognized objects, and joining operation, you can form a kind of composition graph that will get you from your elementary building blocks to some final object. The graph could be a tree — only one preferred order of addition of components — or it could be a lattice — different orders for adding components get to the same final thing. However you do it, for such a graph or tree, you can count the number of times any novel element needs to be recruited to add to the existing structure to complete that addition-link. Like many cost measures for a compression algorithm, this one penalizes the innovation steps, and gives no penalty for multiple uses of the same object once it has been recruited. (So for example: a polymer like PVC would have very low cost-penalty, as the same unit is added repeatedly to a chain’s end by the same joining operation. There is a cost for the first monomer or the first join, but after that no further cost as it’s all re-use).
4b. Among all the ways to get from your elementary building blocks to a given final object, you can choose the lowest-cost graph or tree to get to that object, and associate its cost as the “cost of” that object.
4c. Then, among all the choices of building blocks, joining operations, and intermediate objects you can propose, and given the collection of final objects you want to produce, you can choose the building blocks and joining operations that give the aggregate lowest cost from the sum of all the lowest-cost graphs. Since you are treating intermediate-scale objects at the population level, you don’t add the costs of the graphs independently: if any graph produces or recruits an object, any other graphs can then take that object or the things it recruited and use them at no cost.
5. So everything about 3 and 4 was an ensemble-level of description. After you have chosen your cost-minimizer, you can interpret your resultant choice of objects, operations, and “assembly trees” (as the building-up graphs are called) to be the “explanatory system” for your family of structured objects.
That’s what gets done, more or less. It is easy to see how it is a kind of data-compression scheme, designed to be applicable to structured objects that can be of quite general kinds, and emphasizing recursivity.
Okay, so what does that have to do with the language in the LLM digest (which is coming from many papers the authors write)?
1. Well, if one wants to attach a “likelihood” interpretation to any of these costs, you have to avoid being fooled by “birthday paradoxes”. Example: Whereas it may be surprising for any two people in a group of 23 to have the same pre-chosen birthday, it is not surprising that some pair of them will be found who have _some_ same birthday. Or: every vulcanized car tire is effectively one gigantic molecule. It has enormous detail in all of its specificity, and in some absolute Kolmogorov sense, its complexity down to the bond-scale would seem to be enormous. But do we want to say the car tire is “complex” in some meaningful sense? Every other car tire would have had about the same degree of particularity, but the particulars would all be different. So they should be regarded as “multiple hypotheses” as statisticians use the term in “multiple-hypothesis testing", and while it would be surprising that a car tire fulfills any _one_ such hypothesis chosen in advance, it is not surprising that every tire fulfills _some_ hypothesis in the class, because the class as a whole is coextensive with the way the tires are made.
2. So this is where the AT people bring in copy number. Seeing one instance of something complicated shouldn’t be interpreted as significant. But seeing multiple copies that are suitably identical, and all therefore complicated in the same way, should be accorded significance. Now the way I said it here isn’t going to get anybody a professorship, because statisticians have known this forever. And of course, it’s a completely good thing to do (accounting for copy number), so nobody should be looked at sideways for doing it. But if you say that the existence of multiple copies thereby reflects _memory_ in the process that generated them, and that that memory is implicitly evidence that there was _selection_ that put the memory there, now you’re talking professorship-worthy words. This is what the cool kids care about. etc. There are probably even cases where that is a good interpretation.
3. If you do statistics, or work in the world of structured spaces, or have read a little of the history of computational complexity, you know that the reasoning in point 2 can be very hazardous. You may not be wrong, and your two copies of the same complicated thing could be really important. But you may also have just overlooked a compact explanation for what you thought was complicated, and adding all the overhead-language of memory and selection, as terms to set apart the order you are seeing, may be spurious because there are lots of forms of order that you wouldn’t want to set apart with such terms — they have completely ordinary origins — and the only real insight in your complexity measure was your own oversight that this new case is really in the same class as the old ones. (Some range of the digits of pi, chosen from somewhere in the middle of a long expansion, look pretty random; but they aren’t actually.) So anyway, you can see how you have to do a lot of the difficult things statisticians have always had to do, to claim that something is a signal.
4. A few weeks ago (or maybe less), I put a link to an article by Michael Lynch, who is just scathing about the whole language in which this is rendered. It is behind a paywall, and I am not rich enough to survive being sued, but it is here:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2425772122
Complexity myths and the misappropriation of evolutionary theory
pnas.org
Maybe an LLM can give a digest of this. I would not hit the road to become a disciple of Lynch, and while he is probably a capable statistician, he probably isn’t the reincarnation of Kolmogorov, so he too will have limits in what he sees. But that is also part of the traffic surrounding this topic.
A related but very much not-identical take, not as polemical, but also kind of light-and-easy, is this one by Yoni Jaeger, and it is not behind a paywall (cited in the foregoing article by Lynch, too):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00239-024-10163-2
Assembly Theory: What It Does and What It Does Not Do - Journal of Molecular Evolution
link.springer.com
I hope this is at all helpful.
Eric
> On Aug 11, 2025, at 10:04, Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Pardon the length. This what Gemini says:
>
> "Assembly theory is a framework that quantifies the complexity of objects based on the minimum number of steps required to build them from basic components. It assigns an assembly index to an object, which is the number of steps in the shortest possible path to create it. This theory is a way to bridge the gap between physics and biology by explaining how selection and evolution can emerge from fundamental physical laws.
> Assembly Theory and Its Connection to Evolution
> Assembly theory offers a new perspective on evolution by defining objects not just by their physical form but by their history and the memory required to produce them. The core idea is that highly complex objects, which have a high assembly index, are unlikely to be created by chance. Instead, their existence points to a process of selection and the reuse of components over time.
> Evolution, according to this theory, is the process of discovering and then reusing assembly pathways. Rather than being a random process, it's a directed one in which life "finds" a way to build a complex object and then replicates it, or uses it as a building block for even more complex structures. This allows for the open-ended increase in complexity that is a hallmark of life.
> Here's how it relates to evolution:
> * Quantifying Selection: The theory provides a way to mathematically quantify the amount of selection required to produce a specific set of complex objects. This is a key departure from traditional physics, which often describes the universe through timeless laws that don't account for the emergence of complex, historical systems.
> * The Role of Memory: In assembly theory, evolution is not just about the dynamics of particles but about the dynamics of assembly plans. The "memory" of a successful assembly pathway is what allows for the repeated construction of complex molecules and structures, leading to their abundance in the biological world.
> * A "Physics" of Life: By focusing on the historical and causal factors behind an object's existence, assembly theory attempts to provide a new set of physical principles that govern life. It suggests that the emergence of complex life is a natural, quantifiable outcome of the universe's tendency to produce things with a high assembly index through selection.
> In essence, assembly theory provides a novel way to measure and understand the link between the simple rules of physics and the complex, historical process of evolution, suggesting that evolution itself is a kind of physical process that can be quantified."
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025, 6:39 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>> Fraught topic, Dave, and not for any good reason (as I judge such reasons; others clearly have judged otherwise).
>>
>> I know both the principals responsible for the term and a lot of the early work (going back to before it took on that name, and was just a pragmatic complexity measure that Lee Cronin was using for his high-throughput lab experiments and analysis. In those days, as a short-hand, we used to just refer to it as “Cronin complexity”. More has been built up around that core since then, though, and not just the branding of it as a program.
>>
>> Will be running a workshop with several lieutenants from those groups in attendance next week, with AT as one of the focal tools or frameworks to be used. So one can take that as a costly signal that there is work I am willing to commit time and effort to.
>>
>> I haven’t seen what the LLMs put out if asked about it, but could perhaps tell you whether they are giving a fairly faithful rendering of the traffic that currently circulates surrounding the topic. I have also put in some time trying to get people away from the sociological sparring, to just try to get clear what is or is not in the formalism, and what has or hasn’t been done with it. That said, I have not put in nearly the commitment of time to know their whole corpus or even to speak at an expert level on methods. I think I understand the methods at sort of a pseudo-code level, though probably not all aspects even that well.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 11, 2025, at 9:13, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm <mailto:profwest at fastmail.fm>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Who knows anything about AT - Assembly Theory - and evolution. I know the web/LLM provided stuff. Want more depth if anyone can provide such.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025, at 5:01 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Stephen,
>>>>
>>>> I hoped for some sort of answer like that.
>>>>
>>>> If Eisenhower was the president for the Age of Collective Reasonableness, and Reagan wa the president for the Age of Noble Selfishness, and Trump is the president for the Age of Anarchy, what is next? How does a complexity theorist plan his way out of this one, baby? Inquiring geezers want to know. What do the ants have to say? I want to say that we ants should all get together and think this through, but that is, of course, exactly what a geezer from the ACR would say. I do despair.
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of Stephen Guerin
>>>> Sent: Saturday, August 9, 2025 8:36 PM
>>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Group Selection IS a metaphor.
>>>>
>>>> Nick writes:
>>>>
>>>> > I moved to Santa Fe 20 years ago to confront The Enemy – Complexity, which made nonsense of the idea making a best guess for the future and planning for it collectively , calmly, and rationally.
>>>>
>>>> Nick — you came to Santa Fe to “confront The Enemy – Complexity,” but I’ve always admired how that move was also a reach to extend the individual into the group. Your framing of evolution beyond the lone actor fits naturally into complexity’s home territory: the study of collective dynamics.
>>>>
>>>> Complexity challenged the civic ideal you grew up with — that we could make our best guess about the future, then plan together calmly and rationally around stable facts — by showing:
>>>>
>>>> The world is nonlinear — small perturbations can cascade.
>>>> Prediction decays fast — best guesses expire before guiding long-horizon plans.
>>>> Feedback loops are short — conditions shift before consensus can form.
>>>> From the Victorian lens of the forward-propagating individual — the gene, the photon, the solitary actor — the unit of selection is the forward-propagator itself, competing with only a once-in-a-lifetime reproduction as feedback, with everything else treated as downstream consequence.
>>>>
>>>> But complexity might instead be the handshake of duals — like the mutual adjustment of fireflies flashing in unison or pendulums entraining to a common rhythm — where coherence emerges from continuous exchange, not solitary advance. This shift is much like physics’ move from solid state (crystal order, replication) to condensed matter (emergent phenomena, reproduction) — the very distinction Eric Smith draws between systems that merely repeat and systems that generate novel, coherent forms.
>>>>
>>>> This spirit runs through the science:
>>>>
>>>> Stuart Kauffman’s autocatalytic sets — molecules persist as part of collectively closed webs of reactions.
>>>> Harold Morowitz & Eric Smith — life’s core metabolic cycles may emerge as planetary-scale solutions to channel geochemical energy flows; selection might happen at the network level, not molecule-by-molecule.
>>>> Afred's Hübler’s ball bearings — conductive spheres collectively grow to dissipate massive charge gradients more effectively.
>>>> Per Bak’s self-organized criticality — critical states are properties of the network, not any single grain or fault.
>>>> Ilya Prigogine’s dissipative structures — ordered patterns like Bénard cells exist only through system-wide throughput of energy/matter.
>>>> Physics offers a parallel in Feynman–Wheeler absorber theory, where interactions are bidirectional handshakes between advanced and retarded waves, settling into a self-consistent exchange. Carver Mead’s Collective Electrodynamics carries this into the macroscopic: electrons act as part of a global configuration, not as isolated particles.
>>>>
>>>> It’s the same dynamic in my favorite ant foraging model: food-seekers diffuse “nest” pheromone outward, nest-seekers carrying food diffuse “food” pheromone outward; each biases its walk along the other’s field. The shortest-time path emerges from the handshake between complementary propagations, not from any one ant “deciding” the route.
>>>>
>>>> Seen this way, complexity might not be the death of rational planning — it could be pointing us toward a different design target: the coherent configuration. We're still on the lookout for our “Carnot” to formalize these principles.
>>>>
>>>> And for me, that search has been shaped by the voices in this group — especially yours. Your probes have been part of the collective dynamic here, and I’ve been heavily informed by them. For that, I’m grateful.
>>>>
>>>> -Stephen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 9, 2025 at 4:55 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Ok, but I am not done with my infernal questions. The way you pose your question, I cant help thinking that you know the answer. You and I could recite fo one another the thousand ways in which we know that humans are groupish. We know that people can make sacrifices for the good of groups of all sorts, some of which are incorrigibly abstract. We know that humans identify with the fate of other humans to the extent that they will put aside their own good fortune for that of an iconic figure. We know the people are capable of appalling group nastiness. There is no savagery like the modern army, sitting around in an anonymous office bloc in New Jersey lobbing missiles at wedding parties in Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> So what is the question concerning human groupishness . What is it beyond these facts that you need to know and what will change when you come to know it. One question you might be asking yourself is “Am I justified in keeping any money I earn beyond the median income of my fellow citizens. The answer is almost certainly, “No”. Knowing that and knowing that I am damned well not going to give it away, what next?”
>>>>
>>>> One of the hardest projects to take on is the discovery of one’s own hankerings. Glen, Jon, and DaveW have been very good at exposing mine. Make American Rational Again. Return to the genteel rationalism of the Deweyan 1950’s where every town had a town meeting and every discussion was “informed” by the “facts.” (And we were all cheerful racists instead of the guilty racists that we are now.) That I have grown up and helped to create a world in which nobody knows anymore what a fact has been like living my worst childhood nightmare. I was head of our planning board for three years in the early 70’s where I learned that small towns are the scariest, least rational places on the face of the earth. When we moved in from California, marginal hippies, the town could not rest before it was decided whether we were Catholics or Protestants. What???!@!! Sorry, I am ranting. I moved to Santa Fe 20 years ago to confront The Enemy – Complexity, which made nonsense of the idea making a best guess for the future and planning for it collectively , calmly, and rationally. The idea that people should build businesses models on destabilizing the present and then swooping in and pillaging until one has established an irrevocable monopoly on the future just seems WRONG to me. I loved the idea of American exceptionalism. But lo and behold, we were exceptional in only one respect. WE had discovered destabilization as a business model. Drop by, plant a lethal virus, wait a few years and then return (with your slaves) to a “virgin” land populated only by a few desperate savages. Let the rape of the virgin begin. Calm down, Nick.
>>>>
>>>> These are my commitments, and I cannot escape them. What are yours?
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of Pieter Steenekamp
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 8, 2025 4:21 PM
>>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Group Selection IS a metaphor.
>>>>
>>>> Nick,
>>>>
>>>> Too good to miss — I’m in. Lead me into the jungle of group selection, especially the human variety.
>>>>
>>>> What I’m after: a clear, simple (but not dumbed-down) take on what group selection in humans is, and why it might explain our behaviour better than individual selection alone.
>>>>
>>>> Happy to start at the very beginning — dawn of the argument, cave paintings, whatever you think works.
>>>>
>>>> And yes, send me that Famous Great Amateur reading list. I promise to read it with respect… and just enough suspicion to keep it fun.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 at 17:05, Nicholas Thompson <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Hi, Pieter,
>>>>
>>>> Let me be a George to you as you explore this topic. I will try to respond off hand, quickly, and unself-consciously as you think along. I think this whole topic is fascinating both substantively, and historically. The literature seems to track (or lead?) the Zeitgeist so precisely from post war peace-nikery (Wynne-Edwards), to the revanchist academic Reaganism (Williams-Dawkins), to chaos (evodevo). It's really hard to take the whole argument seriously once one begins to understand how complex and multi layered are the mechanisms by which parents do and dont resemble their children. One of the tools to thinking straight is to own up to one's hankerings before one dives into the literature. What are you hoping to find? Post war peace-nikery was covertly deistic, hoping to find that there was some sort of over arching regulatory agency that would keep the species and the planet safe. Academic Reaganism said good luck with that! Success is virtue. And then evodevo, the bull in the china shop of that whole argument. I recommend reading the biologist, Sean B. Carroll, (not the physicist), Endless forms most beautiful, and The making of the fittest. It's really hard to take the whole argument seriously once one begins to understand how complex and multi layered are the mechanisms by which parents do and dont resemble their children. That there is any resemblance at all begins to seem like some sort of miracle. Or perhaps just momentum. One hankering that misleads us is naturalism, the idea that we can find some sort of MORAL guidance in the way things are. Is the opposite hankering, existentialism? The belief that what makes humans special is their power to CHOOSE. You should remember that I am not a philosopher and am, in fact, an amateur in all things.
>>>>
>>>> "Any time you want to explore this issue, I am here ready to help. Would you like suggestions of articles to read by that Famous Amateur, Nick Thompson? "
>>>>
>>>> signed,
>>>>
>>>> ChatNST
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 5:19 AM Pieter Steenekamp <pieters at randcontrols.co.za <mailto:pieters at randcontrols.co.za>> wrote:
>>>> Thanks, Nick. Just like you struggled to get your head around entropy, I’m battling to wrap my mind around how the basic but very powerful mechanism of evolution works in human groups. I can easily understand individual human selection, or even group selection in swarming insects where only the queen has babies.
>>>>
>>>> I think I’ll take a page from your book and work with George to help guide me through this learning journey. Every now and then, I might check in with you and others here for a chat or to ask a question.
>>>>
>>>> The only catch is that I’ve just started a really exciting AI project, so I might not have much time for my group-level evolution journey — but I’ll try to keep it going.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 at 03:40, <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Pieter,
>>>>
>>>> Sorry I have taken so long to get back to you. If FRIAM ever started a journal, it should be called “the emperors new clothes”. We are not committed to anything if not to the validity of an “amateur’s” perspective. As people will be quick to tell you, mine has always been of that sort.
>>>>
>>>> If I read you carefully, the position you take is that laid out in Dawkins The Extended Phenotype – that the genes are the basic unit of selection. But as Dave Wilson has been pointing out for years, Who made that decision? For one thing, as epigenic studies have made clear, when one looks in detail, it is really hard to find a thing that is exactly the gene. For another, that decision runs the risk of confusing the the thing that is selected with the forces that are selecting it. Whatever level you care to calculate the impact of selection, it is differential group success that is driving selection or it is not group selection. And if it is differential group success that is driving selection, then it is group selection. I think you might quite enjoy The Extended Phenotype. For a whild ride, have a look at Elliott Sober and D. S. Wilson’s Reintroducing Group Selection to the human behavioral sciences. There is a wonderful metaphor in there about two riders riding three horses. It was the article that broke the tide for me. I had been totally up Dawkins ass for the preceding 20 years.
>>>>
>>>> Here is the citation, courtesy og George Patrick Tremblay IV
>>>>
>>>> Wilson, D. S., & Sober, E. (1994). Reintroducing group selection to the human behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17(4), 585–608. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00036104 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fdoi.org%2f10.1017%2fS0140525X00036104&c=E,1,qc4BSmVWnjaBnu_eMFu91fsJnRyXKDVZkiBj_K-mc-2vcO5B88AU5GmJHjdOc0yaiFwONd2bxnkrn1e4A8VBme6OnkVsQ2sOt06kD_fsE5jmPQU,&typo=1>en.wikipedia.org+15philpapers.org+15 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fphilpapers.org%2frec%2fWILRGS%3futm_source%3dchatgpt.com&c=E,1,8uh8-gEcjdXw0q5WQ48I45eHCk1eucwp2cJNV7xDWHUKTChTjIo7z3uVpsXtNt2tTFlcQkCogaaj63eznJqvJiWrqkvhkYrKg0PyO663eaIy&typo=1>….
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of Pieter Steenekamp
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2025 12:55 AM
>>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Group Selection IS a metaphor.
>>>>
>>>> Nick, I'm genuinely impressed. Honestly, I feel a bit out of my depth trying to respond meaningfully on this topic.
>>>>
>>>> So please take my reply in the same spirit I’d expect a response from my 10-year-old grandchild when debating computer programming with me. The gap between your understanding of evolution and mine feels about that wide.
>>>>
>>>> That said, I’d still like to offer a response to your group selection argument—fully aware that it may come across as amateurish, and I'm okay with that.
>>>>
>>>> Here's the question I’m grappling with:
>>>>
>>>> Is the following valid?
>>>> Genes as the Unit of Selection:
>>>> Modern evolutionary theory generally views genes as the primary unit of selection. Natural selection acts on individuals, and the success of an individual is ultimately determined by the genes they carry.
>>>> Group Selection as a Modifier:
>>>> Group selection can be seen as a process that influences the expression of genes. For example, if a group-level trait (like cooperative behavior) is advantageous, then genes that promote that behavior will be favored, even if those genes also have individual-level costs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 6 Aug 2025 at 00:12, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm <mailto:profwest at fastmail.fm>> wrote:
>>>> Nick,
>>>>
>>>> I wish to embody the fear of being dragged away from what you think you are supposed to be doing, to be engaged in the topic you raise in your paper.
>>>>
>>>> I have read the paper before and, as then, I find it meritorious, well written, and reasonable in argument. I am, basically, convinced.
>>>>
>>>> However; two points:
>>>>
>>>> First, your use of the concept, "metaphor," is the way that I use the term, in a manner that glen pointed out is inconsistent with the literal definition of the term. I speak of metaphor when there is some thing of which I think I know something and I have a suspicion that some other thing might be of the same ilk. I use what I think I know to craft a 'model', one that suggests particular points and particular relations that, if my suspicion is correct, will have direct analogs in the unknown thing. I check them out individually and in combinations and, if substantiated, confirm my suspicion. If unconfirmed, the metaphor is refuted.
>>>>
>>>> This seems to me to be what you are doing in the paper, albeit it more abstractly and academically. Please correct me if wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Second, and here is the real time sink, would it be possible to make your ideas concrete, real groups with actual history and demonstrated differential "success." If you were amenable to such a conversation, I would propose the Mormons as a test case.
>>>>
>>>> One of 20 or so "religions"/"societies" to emerge from the "Burnt Over District" of western New York. The only one still extant.
>>>>
>>>> Disproportionately successful, (in material and social terms), to their neighbors. Smith was living in a two-story New England style home while down the road, Abe Lincoln, was living in a log cabin with mud floor.
>>>>
>>>> A schism immediately after Smith's death, with the Reformed LDS barely evident while the main group flourished. (Last time I checked, Mormonism and Sokka Gokai, in Japan, were the two fastest growing religions.)
>>>>
>>>> In Utah there was a concerted effort to spawn multiple small groups by sending out colonies. Because each group was originally "seeded" with four or five families, you get a strong genetic/heritance component as well as "traits." (It is still possible to identify what part of Utah someone is from (especially females) by their physical appearance.)
>>>>
>>>> Some interesting "adaptations" at the trait level, e.g., when Smith was alive blacks were included in the community and held the priesthood—something that Missourians, at the time, could not abide. Brigham Young 'suspended' (restored in 1978 with the admission that the suspension was not for theological, but merely political reasons) black priesthood membership and gave up polygamy (de jure only) to appease the Federal Government and avoid a second martyrdom.
>>>>
>>>> davew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025, at 1:10 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>>>> Dear Colleagues in FRIAM,
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes, if I am going to get anything done, I just have to ignore Friam, and keep my head down, and work at the thing I am working at. It always seems, on that occasion, that you-guys dangle in front of me some enticing topic so I must scream and put my fingers in my ears to keep focus on my work. So it was that when I decided I must fish or cut bait on entropy or it would take me to my grave, that almost immediately you-guys started not one but two conversations close to my heart: on the centrality of metaphor to science and on the group selection controversy.
>>>>
>>>> A couple of decades ago I brought those two interests together in a paper called “Shifting the Natural Selection Metaphor to the Group Level. There are two things about this paper that make it salient for me. The first is that I think it is the best paper I ever wrote. The second is that for each of the two people whom I most hoped to reach when I wrote it, D. S. Wilson and Elliott Sober, it is a piece of crap. In it, I try to show that the problem with metaphors is not with their use in scientific thinking: on the contrary, it is with their ill-disciplined use. Metaphors need to be worked in a systematic way, not simply flung out in a gust of poetic exuberance. This lesson I try to teach by working the natural selection metaphor in a systematic way to show that if it had been treated seriously in the first place, the whole dispute about group selection might have been avoided. Thus the paper is not only arrogant, but meta-arrogant.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing is more pitiable than the retired academic who would do anything to have anybody read his moribund essays. But, alas, I simply am such a person. So, I am attaching a copy of the paper in the hope that it will have some value to you within the context of your two discussions.
>>>>
>>>> Mumble,
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
>>>> Clark University
>>>> nthompson at clarku.edu <mailto:nthompson at clarku.edu>
>>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwordpress.clarku.edu%2fnthompson&c=E,1,UgDi3ltsaP_bQQs8hXRUFcqMhuscd7WEBcJeSF7LMKZB9Tor45H32RiVXhoT0xLpDI7beBuSR_PmJmuC8JX0xixxJxOhFaOMNFSveTwsUIN2VX5L6LlAsZadi7k,&typo=1>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,oReVLefNCMake6r23PCWZcmAmE6VZepcrbJZtVRBQrdD8TznFetilP24K4ih0L11F4MSWB7z6e0sd4oOaPrxH24CLqZBF3jB7_2M-KieU_a7fXVJy8GdnSccgkA,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,LwGVwXs-fxDsu2w0EmKveSz3DvLHthfjQx7NwJTUocMNCD5Pdbc0uK3iLB3k16o9_wxgWUUnaPkjCvPs0erYr58zHHyTNOn5bu2jWXOSwMfF4NJQZVwu&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,M_payu6TR1KPH6Qj9uLYYrZtErEs0dPqhlt-7Dn0JBj-ZXVmq4hbDnAoIIbgZ6WWZLRuujvDrheiIPDdNd9cDszBc74_Yg0x_HvO2ruHQX2St9JMV-qU5tXNHA,,&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,e-c0cl2NXI3-oYuxU7mBvC2njBTq1noS_UuUorWb3UeYgE1w9v7zb_2NIyPj-QnGxXWGNuIbDiT0HMre8krJAH7Ii_13p1QSc2Xa2SjNLJsxphbwUD9SdAg,&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Attachments:
>>>> Shifting the natural selection metaphor to the group level.pdf
>>>> Shifting the natural selection metaphor to the group level.pdf
>>>>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,AhX8thh5e4bM83LF6eFRWNXExksyyJR36kqovTD25aqwgKiEZ2VP-0e4ZGJTs9HsGqZoplvu_a1uc6N_AUx3MeD__2DbH0lsMqdth6arXbfljw,,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,G0eAL31pjaYwPjUlEaVMk3pSB66b0oTfqEMJf3tnD8uu4PC8ItDp0Tgbkr7HEo4vAIHffFCiPdMEM6rqsj6NhmMCcXx3e4CpsQiUNF9jD1i38Nee1Hs,&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,L30sSicYtCWNpnNooVtVQ1YuxH9Vrt6Rt9i4bl3MjYB_MSJfHCILKIi60ddgBlCmIG-8fpTiJNQiJKeQOA4PJC2NbFtRYpATaZ9OUKbkSiU,&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,BWClBqMorCkodm-qVffQTKRDSCO4Ffjcy4DlL9jaWMBD3dFBdF8-IVgDiWZ2SWXDJ5t2DvdBFFc00htgFT7oYEng_RM-bRdv41kKOBrHLQoHgFXbMA9AoZmu&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,RDsAUjIax8q63YIwIqtKX9dQYMm2hhDnsCCSqSLP7KmA-DZP0B0uWf1quqxl1IpCmv3RwYN9f0efoAG8IdWQeEM35XPLmxIP__8JUckiUw,,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,kf4adwZRyklZR_9gFPpsAyot2eBch4Ksuoc7OvpbqQ5NrBPyvFw-dQX_ss79SdIbB6JLzIENWs85nt5wCNvjoW2jWEDn5uOfKDQ1BCLRPamx_Lbd32INVP2mFg,,&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,oEDU9amZWrmhKUsXu4zFIHDF7WTr9LCXgVScZnccwjdPJ7Mk6U4oLRnqzlS7WgjLcvu1JYK0nx1wX_ZeBKdkYkAjo3Kn7FsuMRqzB4u-9r7ivGDsCeff1qMI&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,ULs4BbbWxI9nBEDGgoh3yBPQHg1IypoJFbH-eYr2RORVaGqh4adXDUn8iR1ycwcXaSAham1xbt_Dqmv5AnVRnGGBSJlhnqt_1Kk7-MNKmC4,&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,7BSO7xLaHQGJrTPALWHB_iU6i8pfuI1W9oAl5Ig87l4xijDJroKhQO_hd2w596wHKUZxBKuHJKuQYc9RKT4MVZOLlYUrsL96vbs5xgT8mJ0,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,uRFm9cvshzH5VNberi5ZA5GN93pUE5KiQEjrbfCcMxXWLmTEWBKmE16ylMVeYFXRTAR1FSU5zlEhrFKg7Zb9fB6K_3E1pUE1pFhQjdc1ck4T&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,BfwqeANdDXxIWHbAg-rsUstqZc5fMue2LKcMI-fAkLmI4n9gRsW-gd3yEqkWlMQ6xC31_1-9Nd2k6ndGjl3B-bNEB7Mz71woFLdMIcri-mW1JoY,&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,iqPx5APOqk8ps_tICya5AObCLHaL4O6IJdgIwPZurlM00WbIaD1afEOERSaO7tpCaxWNJqP1ifru3oRsb93LIMpB5qMuwfqhwNwonI2JJg,,&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
>>>> Clark University
>>>> nthompson at clarku.edu <mailto:nthompson at clarku.edu>
>>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwordpress.clarku.edu%2fnthompson&c=E,1,B4gPLlr5beqhv4OyjqxMM3P3OFCDrjdYkAYo7hPU51oRLJZLiZ2CkJ-QkwWpUhC4fhMUdd53lVoRx0P6kf9_bTqacL757WKqrKf720GtSTAeR-EhDmNJnA,,&typo=1>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,XOzoeAKrbpzQ-q-OKi9GK1FVhjikiEgUfqe1aMC-KjconrW0uxdvPPVjeKLQqCbFVkMLKM_FqPwnx90V5tatCBWBh6UlwWx6WSjxUmWIkJvwVPmkwiNLDNa2xw,,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,L3vlHfPichfHhI5IpJj-7teCAJNZOPvFvwU6EA2UFWfj93a5Dr4wKQIDsH3RAGeIi07UlsEhLfdDS82hgoT7KXYDJ-qzd-GYzsC47JQrgy16EcuCH69D&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,OJJ6RhCnTJ77UE8UHwF0_uP--tH9AA4ltLLFZTHpOt1Iohcaw0cFDN5JjqWPxtPWLuKrmNeuDRQI4rzr4WqtSLg8CWTzUq07cCNhqOdmFbrg0b-Rke-a&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,hwGTVebF-5oD5ja7pU5oJk0QywRu9lZ7mh6Lsd4keJ8UyxLTpK1v5MHEVHaX8r4tO4mRkyr6MFoPrQ1s9v8Hqb9oQvuuO9fBkJlbLIPrw1iQvQKB9w4jQlsFbUw,&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,U-Hh5pOXj8fT3q7IvqU2exRlLcp-lCCxyDB3Jcf33m4IfaIMSYl1Qd7dwFQIMX5gIa351gENwdij5HOK55W5mrWe5uzO3RH1Fo1RxN7eZybguH2AtA,,&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,XbYlZANtdXAoU6vP9ixleZ2TdfhtOC1SSyWyPwqVaQ22rkoaO9QnQ4s0cR1KAqbePTfZBGaEODm4sOuEczoc846y5wAvEvAWWgu2OCxq&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,yEfVmAgvD0eawpeBEPzso_KsVTQd3861ZCETkANILRb1TW95zmQNEMUCxX6JjJmZtwtzg7mWorujvMFGA3PLet9RLssgJlIclvIS9GgKftGA&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,uHkpDTuZjTzaAEAeyvDw5qwgK_OSWc4tCDZ6wYD49bSDtJknp4b4LCoMTxOMVzhuUztWqBPM1ma35cJLLvYKrZEv0UhrsFrxF08Rn2XD3MxPXxzOeTy2LQ,,&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,0OxCUNxGsWAoLA424rhVPdugE3Ldn5VyEBd4fBkCR_ukBIJdouh6vDuc2AJItz9YmZA-sPNbFcsiCU_C6NGevgEzQCbQS1VHGgOZe0ieGI5uiE4cjTH4&typo=1>
>>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,gvzW1KQvPwp3au1qLrY36FPrjLMeEFfU2Gt0biTR3aIIbzk9g1uwqRvXajEIAPTJj4g9g99ViHdhkcyoxtxGVGyZEnpxJpKZ2w8kjmIB1Vsl&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,IVL1GX4AHjTwypEGFZL_Q2ysJGZkoYptZ16mCUqfAkJ0k8ogkeRl6cblNlGhw7fRCtJWFufZkvIZMYuDQYz1G3hGvSSFj0OQbhejd8lA7nQ,&typo=1>
>>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,w7u1d_kURbmKSP99MTZmTT-PLo2P9sadYqO3hSwyDAZ6MjfQmxg8Oz2U2zedBgP99cPH3STqliNdltx4s2C9ZwkfKKfB74rDFupAu7P9leIJV9IVs2VX&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,P48UdvxVgBp4NpKuiyhm_tsXo7CfvZC8m9Jhr-oiFhfS9BupGcFhjPNCYpplih7oeGI1bnjOhAqWqHXT3t8lwEuf2bMcejNVIHfSbU6jDUA7nHANXnii66lAWvg,&typo=1
>>> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,ct0skrobaswDYcussfou45sCQ1T9bRXh3UHzrmIOKDj5C3MnneSWBhYelGkvjZ6nAK7zSfTTRbC1xIdx6Sd_46I1LoRzvyljNpigYtk1ZG3uEwHdTPNlF6KJ&typo=1
>>> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,_NAzNekwrrekkrsltAaK4l3rnXeSBTtPDKrPDN-jkluzHtIGN5wPHEifLJgmTt61RbZbzlMlupZnfqjwI_reJJlqemT98_XItH3ScjpG-RZZ7xgDtGI,&typo=1
>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,wugYgGzagPyraJFFsQ8SuhiA3tdfnT2_UENnO7BToFka1YriaTBBIRM3_tzTRNu2wDwFJ4BShureqLw6jwjuxgd-nEillkvaCyVkgOZD&typo=1
>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,4FCoWask2U4tOzjln3HDgR6BWkrIPBRQ6xM1fG7UOrZ0dQ6V6q_l9SJQjK5CXcjhc_shToV5dwdKuScpCu9LWrKUOnBOtfsLqSsrgryAfQ,,&typo=1>
>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,1UdsXRDQLhDlSHHwTbBjtyupNf_OyRvqy35Jacydf1_KhP8k06lCA0x2h32kz-bSliNQj1ms1z9N1ChH6I0REqiEBHRJr7NnIWpiPJvb8-ve5abxoC6Hfdot&typo=1>
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,4DISVJU5zMqXDRVJUvlUIoxC_ZdojpILJQsBf39z1W1Xlt9WYdh48CGlDkbfsEgPk1gUduno4Zd6SrDu2f1c3SA3ki3r4z2adaQmD5tHju-Sz-g,&typo=1>
>> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,HaA3N66g3yN0g9VorSt5CbNS057OmsgFvsc_CkkQckzyuYFBVJSBJMQDKH1R4LNVg7gC47NCIuJ6qAMfEX2w4WUJ23MsWnleautJmNHm7yI,&typo=1>
>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,v9lpb_cq1DA8XDJNqLZUIvh8GyokO6Yj4QHmBsBIl0rC2sm-GIk6KEProQ7nxQivCESiBwyiYydRppw4Fx4lwopM3BLIPsLf4TwnLCzoxo3p-f3qxE4_NV81&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,8zC3UgNFoozGRn8aUfB5bCgB6Br-AfoxMJ3_S50PGvqoWYIeNg9ByxJF9GnTJhlzG7iJNd2XZlkb_Ethm_tOICThm-6dLr7Tgfomq9dymfjkajvZvj6dbvjXZiU8&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,ZZVfXQCSliFg7E05mfPh5Nu3WXGR7u-N8IrDN4ZiWAIWaFF2iFGIb3CCjCiFhsSVnPU8mKVrlLwsGb7dglME8lmTNqAl1-ruNuVdSfMFRp0aIPIBh9cYdI699LlJ&typo=1
> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,8la4z5ZPBT-xm-8hMpsmxduQqnLzxKbXtMcN1xip0jFZ9HqGl2jKxqm8Gxmev7UDlsmzaMuqUJYS6GzOT56tQshMz2Tg6H_8uG3I5MJhh60BSyXGAydaHHW4VFXu&typo=1
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250811/5e9625f2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pnas.2025.123.issue-23.largecover.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1069683 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250811/5e9625f2/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 239_2024_10163_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 309132 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250811/5e9625f2/attachment.jpg>
More information about the Friam
mailing list