Responding on LinkedIn Global Foresight thread… on changes in the economic rules. The idea that economic change develops from local innovation, like biological evolution, is also a general rule for all other environmental processes. Change is distributed and developmental in general, and *does not actually follow formulas*. The traditional natural science paradigm has tried to
Comment on Dot Earth2/14/09 regarding Darwin, “On the origin and fate of species“ — One of the more curious omissions in the neo-Darwinian interpretation of evolution, still, is to account for learning. Every kind of ‘foraging’ and ‘risk avoidance’ behavior is clear evidence of an individual complex system engaged in learning essential to its wellbeing.
re: Feb 14 2009 Science News – editor’s comment Editor Tom Siegfried’s comment emphasizes that the main subject of science is understanding a world of change, but one might not know that from asking scientists. Scientists have built their whole culture around finding fixed rules for things. We call it “determinism” and the whole community
Charlie, You asked: > Actually is entropy the right word for you? In a way you are asking > about anti entropy, about the ability to construct structure, how that > increases, plateaus then decreases. THat might make it clearer ?? > Charlie > I think the energy consumed by an energy flow process (entropy)
Stan, Approximation sweeps away ‘fuzziness’, and one thing your and my conceptions are completely consistent on is “any system during its development moves from being more vague to becoming more definitely embodied”. There are issues in differentiating descriptive, explanatory, and organizational/behavioral ‘fuzziness’, but it’s those “fuzzy bits” that are the main thing approximation sweeps away.
I’ve been meaning to do some new digging on Einstein’s enigmatic complaint. In a recent program on Channel 13 (I think, but I can’t locate it now) a recognized physicist portrayed Einstein as unable to accept uncertainty in nature, and that view seems to be becoming one of the prevalent understandings of the issue (see
What remains hidden in the hot debate over “intelligent design” and Darwin’s evolution, miraculously, is the strategic location of the odd gaps in the fossil record. Where those gaps are located is rather embarrassing to both sides. I think if you’re thinking clearly about the problem, not defending one side or the other, the answer