Re: [xmca] "Inner Form" of Word, Symmetry, Ivanov Bateson?

[Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>]

On 31 May 2011 02:35, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:

> The epigenetic inheritance we talked about here a year or so ago would be
> similar. Ok, now how does this relate to word meaning and brain asymmetry?
>

One relation is the abstraction of process of change with respect to the
correspondence between genotype with innerform and phenotype with meaning.
Other than in localised * settings, we do not use arbitrary words to express
meaning, there are constraints about acceptable usage and re-employment for
further meaning.  Similarly genetic codes will only provide discrete forms
of viability.  In another experiment (Waddington again, IIRC) flies with
genetic changes that (IIRC) disabled their ability to fly were able to
'discover' flight through further reproduction.  In other words, the
function of competent flight and its accompanying morphology of wings etc
(two pairs in this case, IIRC), was achieved through different genetic
starting points.  We could say that it is the other (stable) systems that
make up the fly in its environment that lead to the added-valueness of
competent flight.

The asymmetry quote from Bateson relates, I believe, to inter-subsystem
communication and their regulatory relation and participation in the larger
system, particularly in the sense that each comprises part of the
environment of the other.  The organic changes that are required in order to
relate to particular environments, e.g. lifting weights or speaking french,
require incremental changes that are, I believe, governed by the same
organic constraints that lead to these forms of symmetry and asymmetry.

Re left/right brain and other physical distinctions, let us note that these
are primarily architecturally stable rather than, necessarily, functionally
so.

Hope this helps,
Huw

* When my wife asks me to Niffenegger the window, I understand this to mean
to prop the window open with a particular book.



>
> Martin
>
> On May 30, 2011, at 7:11 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote:
>
> > On 31 May 2011 00:03, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Huw,
> >>
> >> I think you win the prize for maximal name-dropping in a single
> sentence.
> >> How about you now unpack that, serially, for those of us operating with
> only
> >> half a brain?
> >>
> >>
> > Here's a quick first go at unpacking it.  :)
> >
> > In 'Steps to An Ecology of Mind', Bateson described processes of
> biological
> > adaption in terms of an example of a giraffe and, in particular, it's
> > heart.  Part of this interest appears to have been notions of plasticity.
> > Of being able to reach beyond a 'comfort zone' and being predisposed to
> this
> > kind of plasticity.  If I remember correctly, the example given was of a
> > modestly sized giraffe that was able to mate with, or compete for a mate
> > with, stronger giraffes (stronger in the sense of a given genetic
> > predisposition to strength).  The plasticity effectively allows the
> giraffe
> > to adapt his/her biology ontogenetically (through, say, increased muscle
> > mass by exercise).  Now we have a situation where a humble sized giraffe
> > with good potential is able to mate with a range of giraffes including
> the
> > super-sized variant.
> >
> > The strong Lamarkian assertion is that things we learn ontogenetically
> can
> > be passed on to off spring.  Traditional Darwinian theory doesn't allow
> for
> > this, the evolution is in one direction, and the adaption is achieved
> > through mutation and "random" cross-seeding.
> >
> > However, in the same way that Waddington demonstrated with fruit fly
> > ontogenetic change/adaption that is carried over into offspring, we can
> > follow the thread of this feedback using these concepts.  Waddington
> showed
> > that by intervening in fruit fly pupae development, and thereby
> encouraging
> > particular wing formation changes to arise, that later generational
> > offspring 'inherited' this change in wing construction.
> >
> > We can conceive, logically, of the possibility of this occurring with the
> > aid of the concept of variety.  An organism can be conceived of an
> unfolding
> > variety, starting from its genetic code, which we can take as expressing
> its
> > phylogeny.  The interpretation of this genetic code, the unfolding
> process
> > of a living organism, comprises its ontogeny.
> >
> > Now, the genetic code, in addition to the environment in which it is
> > interpreted, expresses the organism's developmental variety, the
> different
> > ways in which the codes can be made sense of.  So in order to see an
> > 'inherited' ontogenetic attribute it is not necessary to change the
> genetic
> > code, rather it may suffice to change the interpretation of the code
> > provided that the code has sufficient expressive variety to encapsulate
> the
> > adaption.
> >
> > Hence the idea of the plasticity of the giraffe, and its increased
> potential
> > to pass on ontogenetically derived 'tips' to its offspring.  This
> comprises
> > of a more directed form of evolution which, I believe, is missing from
> the
> > classic Darwinian formulation (although I'm guessing that this is all par
> > for course in biological/DNA research etc).
> >
> > There is more logic to this Lamarkian-like process, which I could
> describe a
> > bit more (it's a bit late here).  Though this may elaborate sufficiently?
> >
> > Huw
> >
> >
> >> Martin
> >>
> >> On May 30, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote:
> >>
> >>> With respect to inner form, the pieces that I find intriguing are
> >> Bateson's
> >>> take on Lamarkian-like development in conjunction with Waddington's
> >>> discoveries and Beer's approach to requisite variety.
> >>
> >> __________________________________________
> >> _____
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca