604 Unity and diversity
604 Unity and diversity
603 Conservative blockage of learning and innovation.
In social systems we need laws and regulations to keep
people in line with the goals of the community, and to satisfy needs. These, in
turn, need controls to prevent fraud and errors. In a democracy, it is hard not
to satisfy needs and wishes, and institutional crowding results, the more when
there is diversity of needs. People get spoiled by the regulations, and lose
the ability to cope with problems.
A familiar phenomenon is that a couple of young
entrepreneurs make an invention and set up a business to exploit it., with own
capital or crowd funding. That is a good side of capitalism. Next. if it is a
success and enjoys a breakthrough in the market, they seek capital to finance
their expansion. Then they become dependent on the board of shareholders, who are
often not themselves entrepreneurs, accept only incremental, not radical
innovation, smother the entrepreneurial spirit of the founders, and enforce customary
policies for shareholder value, that economise on labour, and reduce service to
customers, in the drive for efficiency and profit, which reduce the social value
of the company, and often the service on which sales depend. Shareholders thus
often have a conservative effect..
602 Change of knowledge
I offer a new service on my
website www.bartnooteboom.nl: If you
are interested in on of the items on the blog, and you want to know more, I can
send you any book on the website, free of charge, in an electronic version, if
you send me an email, at bart.nooteboom@gmail.com, with the
title of the book and a few lines to tell me why you are interested.
601 Networks
Script networks are usually linear, with few side branches, indicating the sequence of some practice. Other networks are often wide, with many intersecting branches and are more volatile than a script. Human networks serve for the exchange of capital of different sorts: Economic, social, cultural (including knowledge, information) and symbolic. Symbolic capital is prestige, reputation, fame, and the like.
Networks vary in their density, i.e. number of direct ties between nodes, and the strength of those ties. Maximum density is n(n-1)/2 , where n is the number of nodes. With n=3, density is 3. High density yields much exchange of resources, but the corresponding communication may crowd out activities in a node. That is why hierarchy was invented, to limit communication to the next level up or down the hierarchy. Strength of a tie is the number of activities involved in it, duration and frequency of the exchange, and the degree to which it carries ‘specific investments’, dedicated to the tie and useless elsewhere. Examples are machines or instruments or training dedicated to a relation. When the relation breaks, the investment becomes useless.
For a node it matters how many direct ties it has, and where in the network it is located. If it has many direct ties, this is called ‘network centrality’. It yields the benefit of direct access to many resources, and being popular to have a tie with, but the drawback of getting locked in. ‘Network centrality’ is that many indirect ties between nodes run through it. The advantage is to have many contacts, direct near and indirect afar, with varied resources and information, but it can lead to an overload that exceeds its absorptive capacity. An ideal structure is that of ‘small worlds’, with dense patches of strong ties, mutually connected by weak ties. The dense patches yield the advantage of a ‘buzz’ of intense exchange with reputation mechanisms, and weak external ties to widen access to resources and prevent stagnation of an ‘in-crowd’. A ‘peripheral position’ yields the benefit of dense local ties, with weak ties to other communities yielding wider variety of resources. This is the position of an ambassador or ‘boundary spanner’, but the risk of losing trust because of the ties with ‘outsiders’.
Networks arise spontaneously, to exchange capital. They carry the risk of exclusion: you are accepted as a member only if you have some worthwhile capital to contribute: economic, intellectual, cultural or symbolic. Those who are low on education, intellectual capital, and on prestige, symbolic capital, are excluded. They also lack acquaintances who can act as ‘wheelbarrows’ into networks, They feel neglected and ignored, and this is one of the causes of the present discontent of the poor and low educated. They feel left out, denigrated, scoffed at. But they are free to enter social media, and they do so, to excesses of rancour, grudges, expressed in invective that takes revenge on the well-connected ‘elite’, and retaliate with being ‘influencers’ who crack unfounded firecrackers.
In the book ‘Process Philosophy’, I discussed change,
distinguishing gradual, incremental change, treated as the realisation of
potential, and radical, structural change, treated as the breakthrough to new
potential. An example of the realisation of potential is how an oak grows from
an acorn. I formalised the subject with the notion of a ‘script’. A script is a
network of nodes that model component activities of the whole, each node with a
repertoire of ‘subscripts’. The subscripts are connected by sequence in time,
causality, or shared resources. Minor change is the selection of a different
subscript from the repertoire, in response to what happens in the environment.
A situation can arise where this change is not adequate, usually in a new
environment, and attempts at adaptation are made by adopting subscripts or
entire nodes from other local scripts, which succeed where the focal script
fails, and threatens to collapse. The script as a whole is subscript in some
encompassing ‘superscript’. Transformation, radical change, then is a new
script with familiar and new nodes in a new structure.
A stone is a structure of atoms that move with
temperature, and above a critical temperature I will break apart. In thawing
frost, water molecules break loose from the crystal structure of ice, and when
the water cooks, they break loose from the water and evaporate in steam. That
belongs to the potential of H2O. Oxygen feeds fires and metabolism in animals
and plants, and in the process is transformed into CO2 In electromotors,
electrons are transformed into kinetic
energy, or vice versa. .
599 Design of a society
598. Do plants have intelligence?
It has been written that plants have intelligence. I think that is misguided.
Plants do have an impressive ability to adapt. Green plants grow upward to the light. Their roots grow downwards. Flowers open at daybreak and close at night. They have colours that change, and spread odours and offer honey to attract insects for pollination. They are adaptive in many ways, but this does not prove intelligence. I have proposed to use the notions of ‘assimilation’, absorption of features of the environment, into existing frames of response, and ‘accommodation’ of those frames. Intelligence requires both, but plants only have assimilation.
How do programs of action arise? Adaptive capabilities arose from evolution. In animals DNA does not directly yield properties, but recipes for the production of proteins, which are distributed by RNA. DNA yields a variety of recipes for making proteins, in a repertoire of response. The environment determines which recipe is triggered. This has been called ‘gene expression’, which yields ‘plasticity’ Plants also have this adaptive ability. In contrast with plants, people, and to a lesser extent animals, in addition have the ability to generate new recipes in response to their environment, in other words accommodation, reconstituting recipes of conduct. Plants cannot do that. For them, repertoires of recipes change only in evolution.
Operating recipes that were developed in evolution, is ‘instinctive’, inborn. Human beings, and to some extent animals, can go beyond instinct In other words, change of response can be ‘ontogenetic’, in the life of the individual, while with plants it is only ‘phylogenetic’.
Plants have also been said to ‘communicate’, but interaction is not yet communication. Intelligence is strongly connected to the use of language, where new sentences can be constructed almost infinitely, with words that can change meaning. Some animals have that in some form, such as whales, tunas, and some birds. Plants don’t.
People and some animals have self-consciousness. Elephants do, and even some fish. This has been proven by painting a stain on their skin and putting them in front of a mirror. They move a bit to better inspect the stain, and try to remove it. My cat does not have a clue, and claws the mirror to try and enter the space reflected in it.