EVOLUTION AND DESIGN
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
NATURAL AND CONSCIOUS EVOLUTION
TOWARD A THEORETICAL AND APPLIED METAPHYSICS
ANIL MITRA PHD, © 1987, 2ND
ED. 1999, REV. 2004
Retrospect 2007, Reformatted 2010
SOME RETROSPECTIVE COMMENTS, SEPTEMBER 2007
This essay was written in the period autumn 1986 to spring 1987, over twenty years ago. The idea—a range of ideas—had been percolating for a while. I had become familiar with the basic ideas of Darwin’s theory of evolution it about 1961, continued to maintain an interest in it, and found it capable of shedding light on many aspects of the world. I had come to seek, among other goals, to found a metaphysics from the basic ideas—perhaps in analogy to the manner in which Karl Popper, in the Logic of Scientific Discovery, 1934, and other writings had found some foundation for epistemology in evolutionary ideas. Naturally, there was no thought that the actual evolution of the universe is that of a living organism, evolving in the way in which organisms evolve—individual organisms do not evolve. Rather, it is the species and, perhaps, other collections that evolve by variation of factors of inheritance and selection of adapted variations
This work is deficient in many respects. The primary deficit is that while the ideas of evolution are employed to explain cosmological variety, there is no explicit formulation of a metaphysics of objects but only an implicit metaphysics of process which acts in the world
The world is not taken to be material in principle but material things form the bulk of the cosmological variety considered in this essay. Even if the world is not all matter, this is not a bad idea because the introduction of non-material objects is often an excuse to not be concerned with explanation or theory at all. The problem with an absence of explanation is not that what is written is invalid but that it is accessible at most to privileged persons and is accepted by others without understanding. There is also a deficit in the idea of materialism but it is not that the universe is not made of matter. It is, rather, the idea that what we know matter to be, i.e. our concept of matter, is final and universal. It is entirely conceivable and perhaps even likely that any ‘final’ physical theory of matter shall be quite different from the present theories. A second deficiency, then, is not in making any mistake of materialism but in tacitly excluding cosmological variety at the outset of investigation. A similar deficiency revealed by my recent thought—e.g., in Journey in Being—is that while process explanation is useful it is by no means the only or the most powerful explanation. Some philosophers insist on explanation that transcends both time and object, preferring these kinds and their explanatory aspects to fall out of, e.g., a metaphysics that is not based in temporal or material nature. That objective is achieved in Journey in Being and the reader is reviewed to that essay for the development itself
The present work has further deficiencies and these include (1) organization and style and (2) content that is often in the form of rough notes
After writing this essay, I became dissatisfied with its approach, its effective basis in materialism and temporality. Years before writing this essay, I had been a materialist—the result of an education in science and engineering. The subsequent years and the thought involved in writing this essay cured me of that but provided no real substitute. In about 1990, I explicitly set out to find an alternative. In the process, my background in science and mathematics, years of reading and reflection, the writing of this essay were extremely useful but not fully adequate—I continued to read, to reflect and to write
I turned to the idea of the absolute—in a metaphysical rather than in any formally religious sense
I considered idealism. In contrast to the typical modern materialist, I found that there is no essential distinction between idealism and materialism unless the nature of mind and matter are taken to be very specific. If some very specific notions of mind and matter are adopted and if it is thought that matter is nothing but the notion adopted and that mind is nothing but its notion, then idealism and materialism are both absurd from the contrary point of view. What is more, mind is not atoms, not buildings, not the cosmos in the standard view and therefore, idealism is absurd (on the assumed view of mind and matter.) Further, while materialism is not patently absurd, it becomes impossible to see how mind could arise in the material world. However, if the notions of mind and matter are not regarded as final, and not regarded in the ‘nothing but’ sense, then there is no reason that the universe can be seen, equivalently, as mind andor matter. That is, the concepts of mind and matter may converge. Perhaps, more accurately, while the sense of the concepts may remain different, the ranges of reference will converge
I studied consciousness—I was initially motivated by John Searle’s essay, The Mystery of Consciousness, that appeared in the New York Review of Books in 1995. I read Searle’s The Rediscovery of Mind published in 1992. I was impressed by the thought of many writers in the field, especially that of Searle, but I was not persuaded by Searle’s commitment to evolution and atomism as a basis of—an understanding of—all being
I wrote a number of essays—see essays on being and essays on mind. In the process, I sharpened my conceptions of a number of fundamental ideas including being, mind, matter, consciousness, substance, and read much including the writing of Heidegger and Wittgenstein
Starting around 1997 till 2002, I had been thinking that the void, i.e. nothingness, might form the basis of a metaphysics. It was a somewhat mystical position. Even hard nosed scientists will agree that mysticism is acceptable as inspiration though not of proof. However, it was not entirely mystical for, even in fundamental physical science, it is known that the emergence of a cosmos from the void does not violate the principles of physics when the positive energy of matter cancels the negative energy of the gravitational field. I was also encouraged by some reflections of Heidegger and Robert Nozick. (I was disappointed to find nothing of worth regarding metaphysics in the thought of Sartre.) However, I was unable to prove the equivalence of the void and the universe and I did not get very far with use of the idea as a working hypothesis
However, in 2002, I saw how to show the equivalence of the void and all being. I had been trying to show that the—known—world is equivalent to the void. The key idea of 2002 was to focus on the void, its properties, rather than, first, on the universe. This was the essential idea that made it possible to show the equivalence of the void and all being and, encouraged by this development, was able, incrementally over the five years since 2002, to develop the ultimate metaphysics of Journey in Being and its implications for the theory of objects, for logic and meaning, for mind, for cosmology and for a study of the human world
It seems that the new development is infinitely advanced beyond where I was at the completion of the present essay on evolution and design. Yet this essay remains of interest to me primarily as a way station in the journey to the present and especially as a source of ideas, later much refined, on the emergence of mind and the capacities of mind from a state that does not—appear to—involve mind and, more generally, as a source of ideas on the equivalence of manifest being from the void state. The essay is also of interest in that it is my first system—it attempts to be systematic and it attempts to write down, to formulate, a comprehensive set of categories of kinds of being
Section and Paragraph Numbering
1 INTRODUCTION, OBJECTIVES, STRUCTURE
EVOLUTION AND DESIGN - LEVELS AND RELATIONS - ORIGINS OF OBJECTIVES
1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF DESIGN
1.1.1.1 Level I - Problem solving and objective design
1.1.1.2 Level II - Social and human process
1.1.1.3 Level III - Evolutionary design
1.1.1.4 Level IV - Design is evolution
1.2.1.1 Objective 1 - Design as fundamental in society and universe
1.2.1.1.1 Idea A - Practical and objective design
1.2.1.1.2 Idea B - Social process as design
1.2.1.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in design
1.2.1.1.4 Idea D - General evolution
1.2.1.2 Objective 2 - Use of design
1.2.1.3 Objective 3 - Design as universal process
1.2.2 DISCUSSION AND FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS
1.2.2.1 Objective 1 - objective design
1.2.2.1.1 Idea A - Objective design is a fundamental human and social process
1.2.2.1.2 Idea B: Objective design generalizes to social process
1.2.2.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in Design
1.2.2.1.4 Idea D - General Evolution
1.2.2.2 Objective 2 - Use of Design
1.2.2.3 Objective 3 - Design As Universal Process
1.3 BASIC THESES AND POSTULATES
1.3.1 There is a human motive to the universal
1.3.2 This resolution requires vision
1.3.3 DESIGN, AS PROBLEM SOLVING IS AN ESSENTIAL ACTIVITY AT ALL LEVELS
1.3.4 objective design must include holistic values
1.3.5 Generalization of the basic design leads to more inclusive and universal processes
1.3.6 The idea evolution = design [Level IV] universalizes and hierarchizes design
1.4.3 WHERE ARE THE OBJECTIVES TREATED?
2.1 REASONS TO STUDY EVOLUTION
2.1.1 As the universal process of unfolding reality
2.1.2 To show levels of understanding:
2.1.2.1 [A] Knowledge As Static
2.1.2.2 [B] Knowledge as evolving
2.1.2.3 [C] Knowledge As An Element Of Evolution
2.1.2.4 [D] Evolution Of The Processes Of Knowledge
2.1.3 To establish “the” dimensions of being
2.1.4 Provides learning for design
2.1.6 To understand relation of universal to human Being
2.1.7 Relation to objectives of the present work
2.1.8 Provides insight into culture and human institutions
2.1.9 As a foundation for design
2.1.9.1 [1] Design is within evolution
2.1.9.2 [2] Design is analogous to evolution
2.1.9.3 [3] Design is part of evolution
2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF EVOLUTION
2.2.2 Processes of evolution are not different than ordinary processes
2.2.3 Evolution need not be distinguished from or equated with creation, guidance, or destruction
2.2.6 Evolution does refer to specific set of mechanisms or theories
2.2.7 Evolution is not a social or political program
2.2.8 Evolution is not a philosophical program
2.2.9 Evolution includes emergence of order by natural processes
2.3 ABSTRACT EVOLUTION WITH EXAMPLES
2.3.3 Mathematical - a special case of the symbolic
2.5 ORGANIC ACCOUNTS OF CREATION, GUIDANCE AND DESTRUCTION
2.5.1 Reasons for studying organic accounts of creation, guidance and destruction
2.5.1.1 [1] As archetypes of origins
2.5.1.2 [2] As archetypes of psyche
2.5.1.3 [3] Continuity with the past
2.5.1.4 [4] Some functions are still valid
2.5.1.5 [5] Organic knowledge of human origins
2.5.1.6 [6] Symbolic-organic knowledge is valuable
2.5.1.7 [7] If science should decay
2.5.1.8 [8] Insight organic knowledge
2.6 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS OF EVOLUTION
2.6.1 Reasons for studying systematic accounts
2.6.1.2 [2] The Study Itself is Part of Human Evolution
2.6.1.3 [3] As a Source of Knowledge and Its Systematization
2.6.1.4 [4] Knowledge for Design
2.6.1.5 [5] Learning about the processes and meanings of design
2.6.1.6 [6]. A continuation of the organic accounts discussion of evolution
2.6.1.7 [7] Centering Humankind in Nature
2.6.1.8 [8] As a Framework for a Unified Concept of Evolution
2.6.2 General comments on evolution and mechanisms
2.6.4 Cosmological evolution. Known and speculative universe
2.6.5 Evolution of the phenomenal and physical objects of the known universe
2.6.8.1 Relation of biology and biological evolution to science and general evolution
2.6.8.1.1 Objectives of Science
2.6.8.1.2 Discovery and Method in Science
2.6.8.1.3 Special Features of Biology
2.6.8.1.4 The Problem of Teleology
2.6.8.1.5 Special Features of Life
2.6.8.1.6 Reduction in Biology
2.6.8.1.6.1 Constitutive Reductionism
2.6.8.1.6.2 Explanatory Reductionism
2.6.8.1.6.3 Theory Reductionism
2.6.8.1.7 Conceptual Structure of Biology
2.6.8.1.8 Philosophy of Biology
2.6.8.1.9 Some Principles of a Basis for Philosophy of Biology
2.6.8.1.10 Biology and Human Thought
2.6.8.1.11 Biology and Human Values
2.6.8.1.12 Philosophical Implications of Darwin's Theories
2.6.8.2 Theoretical and Empirical Problems of Biological Evolution
2.6.8.2.1.1 A Four-Kingdom Scheme based On the Notion of Common Tree-Like Descent
2.6.8.2.1.2 A Three Level, Five Kingdom Scheme based On Descent, Morphology and Ecology
2.6.8.2.2 [2] Provision of Evidence:
2.6.8.2.3 [3] Methodological Problems
2.6.8.3 Outline Treatment of the Problems
2.6.8.3.1 Darwin's Theory and it's Five Strands
2.6.8.3.2 Early Criticisms of Darwin's Theory
2.6.8.3.4 An Outline of the Theory of Evolution
2.6.8.3.4.3 [3] The Synthetic Theory of Evolution
2.6.8.3.4.4 [4] Major Stages of Evolution
2.6.8.3.4.4.1 [1] Origin of life
2.6.8.3.4.4.2 [2] Multi-cellular Organisms
2.6.8.3.4.4.3 [3] Colonization of Land
2.6.8.3.4.4.4 [4] Human Evolution
2.6.8.3.4.5 [5] Post Synthesis Development
2.6.8.3.4.5.1 [1] Population Genetics
2.6.8.3.4.5.2 [2] Molecular Biology
2.6.8.3.4.5.3 [3] Natural Selection - Evidence
2.6.8.3.4.5.4 [4] Modes of Speciation
2.6.8.3.4.5.5 [5] Macroevolution - the Subject of Paleontological Study
2.6.8.3.4.5.6 [6] Human Evolution
2.6.8.4 Outstanding Problems of Biological Evolution
2.6.8.4.1 [1] The Problem of Mechanisms
2.6.8.4.2 [2] Questions of Interaction
2.6.8.4.3 [3] Genetic Variability in Populations
2.6.8.4.4 [4] Rates of Evolution
2.6.8.4.6 [6] Relationship and Phylogeny of Major Types of Plants and Invertebrates
2.6.8.4.7 [7] Interaction among Fields and Levels of Evolution
2.6.8.4.8 [8] Specialist Questions
2.6.8.4.9 [9] The Question of Gradual Change
2.6.9 Evolution or emergence of levels of organization and interactions
2.6.10 Human and psychosocial evolution: descent and development
2.6.11 Evolution of human society
2.6.12 Evolution of individuation and independence
2.6.13 Possibilities and speculations: universal again
2.6.14 Open and fundamental problems of evolution
2.7 EQUILIBRIUM, DECAY AND GROWTH IN EVOLUTION
2.7.1 Why study these aspects of evolution?
2.7.2 Evidence for origin and growth, equilibrium, decline and death
2.8 EVOLUTION AND CREATION: CONFLICTS, ANALOGIES, SYNTHESES
2.8.1 Conflicts and resolutions
2.8.2 The ultimate nature of things
2.8.3 Analogies and conceptual synthesis
2.9 PROBLEM OF EVOLUTION OF ORDER: A SCIENCE OF ORDER
2.9.1 Generalized characteristics models of systems undergoing evolutionary CYCLES
2.9.4 Relation with type of causation
2.10 EVOLUTIONARY DETERMINISM AND INDETERMINISM
2.10.3 Does evolution approach perfection?
3.1 REASONS FOR INCLUSION OF PHILOSOPHY
3.1.1 NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF ASPECTS OF DESIGN AT DIFFERENT LEVELS
3.1.2 FOUNDATIONS OF THE OBJECTIVES AND BASIC POSTULATES
3.1.3 APPLICATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO DESIGN VALUES
3.1.4 TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESSES OF HUMANKIND, SOCIETY, AND NATURE AS A UNITY
3.1.5 AS AN OUTLINE or FRAMEWORK FOR STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY, BASED IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGN
3.2.1 SOME ASPECTS BASED IN DESIGN
3.2.2 PHILOSOPHY AS A METHOD VS. PHILOSOPHY AS KNOWLEDGE
3.2.3 GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION
3.3.2 EPISTEMOLOGY - the THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE
3.3.2.1 The Nature of Knowledge...and of Truth, Logic and Reason
3.3.2.2 The Universe of Being, Action and Thought
3.3.2.3 Perception, Reason and Knowledge...and their Modes
3.3.2.4 Issues in Epistemology
3.3.3 PHILOSOPHICAL METHOD. CRITICAL AND SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY
3.3.4 PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY: AN OUTLINE
3.3.4.1 Speculative Philosophy
3.4 FURTHER CHARACTERIZATION OF PHILOSOPHY: ITS OBJECTIVES, VALUE AND METHOD
3.4.2.1 Comments From Whitehead's Process and Reality
3.4.2.2 An Advertisement for Philosophy by Bertrand Russell in relation to the eternal questions
3.4.2.3 Social Change and Creative Personality
3.4.3.1 Brief Criticism of Invalidation Theory
3.4.3.2 Whitehead on Speculative Philosophy. The following quotation is from Process and Reality:
3.4.3.3 Speculative Method - An Outline
3.5 SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY...AND ITS APPLICATIONS
3.5.1 PHILOSOPHY OF THE SPECIAL DISCIPLINES AND ACTIVITIES: OUTLINE
3.5.2 ETERNAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
3.5.3 VALUE: AXIOLOGY, ETHICS AND AESTHETICS
3.5.3.1 Types of Ethics and Ethical Study
3.5.3.1.3 Deontological ethics
3.5.3.2 General Foundations of Value
3.5.4.1 Philosophical Anthropology
3.5.4.2 Philosophy of cultural institutions - Art, Religion, Learning and Discovery, Education
3.5.4.3 Philosophy of social organization and relation of individual to the group
3.5.4.3.1 Political philosophy
3.5.5 PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE...As distinct from “academic” philosophy
3.5.5.3 Religion and the Philosophy of Religion
3.5.5.5 Role of instinct, mind, spirit
3.5.5.7 Relationship to psychology
3.5.6 PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN MATERIALISM, MECHANISM, CHOICE
3.5.6.1 Evolution as a Framework for Knowledge...and Method
3.5.6.1.1 Value of such a framework
3.5.6.1.2 Nature and evolution of knowledge
3.5.6.1.2.1 Role of knowledge in culture
3.5.6.1.2.1.1 Level I: Mythic Cultures
3.5.6.1.2.1.2 Level II: Post-mythic Cultures
3.5.6.1.2.2 Further comments on evolution of knowledge. Models of change
3.5.6.1.2.2.1 Origins of knowledge
3.5.6.1.2.2.2 Changes in the process or mechanism of knowledge at the socio-cultural level
3.5.6.1.2.2.3 Changes in socio-cultural knowledge
3.5.6.1.2.2.3.1 Models of change at level I - mythic thought
3.5.6.1.2.2.3.2 Models of change at level II - post-mythic thought
3.5.6.1.3 Further comments on the selection or evolutionary theory of knowledge and science
3.5.6.1.5 Relation of evolution to other aspects of knowledge
3.5.6.1.5.1 [1] Accidental knowledge
3.5.6.1.5.2 [2] Social theory of knowledge
3.5.6.1.5.3 [3] Relation between cognition and emotion
3.5.6.1.5.4 [4] Science and religion
3.5.6.2 Evolution as a Framework for Social Process and institutions of society
3.5.6.3 Evolution as a Framework for Consciousness
3.5.6.4 Evolution as a Framework for Design
3.5.6.4.1 Evolution in designs
3.5.6.4.2 Evolution in design methods and capabilities
3.5.6.5 Evolution as a Framework for the Universal
3.5.6.6 Consistency among the Frameworks and Points of View
3.5.7 THE OPEN PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
3.5.7.1 Problems and Problem Areas in Metaphysics, Epistemology, Design, Motivation and Action
3.5.7.2 Problems and Problem Areas for Philosophy and Human Enterprise as a Whole
3.5.7.2.1 Problems relating to unity
3.5.7.2.1.1 [1] Foundation in physical cosmology
3.5.7.2.1.2 [2] Synthesis of all modes of knowledge
3.5.7.2.1.3 [3] Motivation, value, psychology and religion
3.5.7.2.1.4 [4] Design and action
3.5.7.2.1.5 [5] A study of unity and diversity
3.5.7.2.1.6 [6] Equivalence of metaphysical and epistemological systems
3.5.7.2.1.7 [7] Structure of knowledge
3.5.7.2.2 Problems relating to evolutionary origin
3.5.7.2.2.1 [8] The philosophic, open outlook
3.5.7.2.2.2 [9] The universal in the particular and the symbolic
3.5.7.2.2.3 [10] Evolutionary foundations of philosophy
3.5.7.2.2.4 [11] Development of a philosophy of evolution and design
3.5.7.2.2.5 [12] Foundation for a sequence of philosophies
3.5.7.3 The Fundamental Problems of Humankind; the Value of Philosophical Perspectives
3.5.7.3.1 On Problems and Solutions
3.5.7.3.1.1 [1] The human situation must be seen and felt in its full context
3.5.7.3.1.2 [2] On choice of values
3.5.7.3.1.3 [3] Humankind and environment in balance in relation to a full spectrum of needs
3.6.1 Emergence of a new naturalistic view of cognition, emotion, philosophy, knowledge and design
3.6.2 TRANSITION to the Realm of Knowledge
3.6.3 FUTURE work for the Realm of Philosophy
4.1 ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGN
4.2.1 PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION
4.2.1.1 Concepts of the Nature of Knowledge
4.2.1.1.1 System Theory of Knowledge
4.2.1.1.2 Adaptive-Evolutionary Theory of Knowledge
4.2.1.2 An Ideal Organization of the Object of Knowledge
4.2.1.3 Conventional, Practical and Cultural Factors
4.2.1.4 General Principles of Classification
4.2.1.4.3 Dependence on domain
4.2.2 PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC and POETIC EXPRESSION and of ART
4.2.2.1 Modes of Human Experience with Preliminary Discussion of Art
4.2.2.1.1 [1] Levels of existence
4.2.2.1.2 [2] Levels of experience
4.2.2.1.3 [3] Levels of consciousness and levels of cognition:
4.2.2.1.4 [4] Symbolic modes of representation:
4.2.2.1.5 [5] Modes of coding, expression, communication:
4.2.2.2.1 Art is expression of experience
4.2.2.2.2 Art contains existential elements of experience
4.2.2.2.3 Art is a form of knowledge
4.2.2.2.4 Art integrates the modes of human being
4.2.2.4 Analysis of Language and Logic and Relation to Art
4.2.3 AN EXTENDED CLASSIFICATION OF PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE WITH EXAMPLES
4.2.3.1 Natural and Chronological Classifications
4.2.3.1.2 Aristotle [384-322BC]
4.2.3.1.3 Francis Bacon [1561-1626]
4.2.3.1.4 French Encyclopaedists: Diderot and d'Alembert
4.2.3.1.5 Immanuel Kant [1724-1804]
4.2.3.1.6 Samuel Taylor Coleridge [1772-1834] and the Encyclopaedia Metropolitana
4.2.3.1.7 Andrė Marie Ampere [1775-1836]
4.2.3.1.8 Auguste Comte [1798-1857]
4.2.3.1.9 Wilhem Dilthey [1833-1911]
4.2.3.1.10 Twentieth-Century Efforts
4.2.3.1.10.1 Fifteenth Edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica
4.2.3.1.10.1.1 Propaedia - A Detailed Topical Outline of Knowledge
4.2.3.1.10.1.2.1 An arrangement in super-divisions
4.2.3.1.10.1.3 Great Books of the Western World; Syntopicon
4.2.3.1.11 Comments on Knowledge and Design
4.2.3.2 Classifications Based on Practical, Design, and Special Considerations
4.2.3.2.3 Knowledge for Design
4.2.3.3 Actual Classifications
4.2.3.3.1 [1] Universities and academies
4.2.3.4 Design of a Knowledge Base
4.2.3.4.2 Functional Considerations, Problem Definition, Decisions
4.2.3.4.2.1 [1] General function and economics
4.2.3.4.2.2 [2] General vs. Special Purpose
4.2.3.4.2.3 [3] Levels of treatments
4.2.3.4.3 Performance or Design Specifications - Including Format; Synthesis: Decisions
4.2.3.4.3.1 [4] Length - Estimate
4.2.3.4.3.2 [5] Principals of organization
4.2.3.4.3.2.1 Natural vs. Practical
4.2.3.4.3.2.2 Single or multiple principles of organization
4.2.3.4.3.2.2.1 Hybrid-matrix organization is one approach
4.2.3.4.4 Analysis and optimization
4.2.3.4.4.1 General or general and specialized base?
4.2.3.4.4.2 Dual levels or multiple index systems - table of contents system?
4.2.3.4.4.2.1 Information level
4.2.3.4.4.3 Systematic [natural vs. logical-material] vs. Alphabetic arrangement of knowledge level
4.2.3.4.4.5 The Systematic Outline
4.2.3.4.4.6 Encyclopaedia Britannica - 15th Edition as a model
4.2.3.4.5 Cross reference systems
4.2.3.4.8 Principles of generation
4.2.3.4.9 Evaluation and feedback: Presentation
4.2.4 MAJOR DIVISIONS OF SYMBOLIC KNOWLEDGE
4.2.4.1 Concepts from Evolution. Effect of Culture
4.2.4.2 Main Divisions of Knowledge
4.2.4.2.1 Main Divisions of Knowledge - 1
4.2.4.2.1.1.1 [1] General purpose; descriptive metaphysics
4.2.4.2.1.1.2 [2] Natural systems: for art
4.2.4.2.1.1.3 [3] Special purpose: for science and technology
4.2.4.2.1.2 Symbolically coded knowledge
4.2.4.2.1.2.1 [1] Philosophy; symbolic systems
4.2.4.2.1.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts
4.2.4.2.1.2.3 [3] Sciences; technology
4.2.4.2.2 The Main Divisions of Knowledge - 2
4.2.4.2.2.2 Symbolically Coded Knowledge
4.2.4.2.2.2.1 [1] Philosophy; knowledge of symbolic systems
4.2.4.2.2.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts
4.2.4.2.2.2.3 [3] Science; technology
4.3 A BRIEF OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGE
4.3.1.2 Language and Related Systems
4.3.1.3 Special Purpose Symbolic Systems
4.3.2 KNOWLEDGE - SYMBOLICALLY CODED KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLD
4.4 DETAILED OUTLINES OF KNOWLEDGE
4.5 OPEN PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE
4.5.2 STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION
4.5.3 PROBLEMS OF THE DISCIPLINES
4.6 THE ESSENTIALS OF KNOWLEDGE - A BRIEF TREATMENT
4.7 AN ENCYCLOPEDIC COMPILATION
4.7.1 A general plan of approach:
5.1 ROLE OF DESIGN AND PLANNING
5.1.1 ROLE OF DESIGN IN SOCIETY
5.1.1.2 Social and Global Design. Design for Diversity. Social Process as Design
5.2.1 MANAGEMENT. Role of Management in Design
5.2.7 OUTLINE OF A VOLUME ON PRACTICAL DESIGN
5.3 FORMAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN: PLANNING AND DESIGN
5.3.2 MANAGEMENT OF DESIGN. PLANNING
5.3.3 TOP ® DOWN DESIGN: DESIGN AND PLANNING LEVELS. PRIORITIES DESIGN
5.3.3.1 A Set of Global Design and Planning Levels
5.3.4 Outline of Methodologies
5.3.4.1 Component Design - The Basic Procedure
5.3.4.2 System and Subsystem Design
5.3.4.4 Business Organization, Planning and Management
5.3.4.5 Technology and Technological Systems
5.3.4.6.1 Levels of global-social planning
5.3.5.1 Area A. Modes of Analysis
5.3.5.2 Area B Analysis of Systems
5.3.5.4 Area D. Problem Solution
5.3.5.4.1 Area D.1 Search for and Generation of Alternatives
5.3.5.4.2 Area D.2 Problem Solving for Complex Systems
5.3.5.5 Area E. Open problems in science of design
5.3.5.5.1 Problems outlined in 5.3.5
5.3.5.5.2 Transformation of General Problems of Design to Science
5.3.6 A Classification of Application Areas
5.3.6.1 Planning Levels - Constraints
5.3.6.2 Planning Levels - Constraints and interactions for which control is possible
5.3.7 Examples of Design and Planning Activities...Towards a Complete and Structured Set
5.3.7.1 Global Planning and Design
5.3.7.2 Social Planning and Design
5.3.7.3 Engineering and Technology. Professions
5.3.7.5 Educational and Learning Systems
5.3.7.6 Individuals and Groups
5.4 Some Application Areas: Detailed Considerations
5.4.1 GLOBAL, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AND PLANNING
5.4.2 ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN. PROFESSIONS
5.4.2.1 History of Engineering
5.4.2.3 Engineering Activities
5.4.2.4.1 The process of design and its context
5.4.2.4.3 Tools knowledge, and language for design
5.4.3 PERSONAL DESIGN. APOLLO AND DIONYSIUS
5.4.4 DESIGN FOR KNOWLEDGE AND INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNING
5.4.4.1 What are the fundamental problems of knowledge?
5.4.4.2 Design of a Knowledge Base
5.5 AN OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGE FOR GENERAL DESIGN
5.6 TOWARDS GENERAL AND UNIVERSAL DESIGN
5.6.2 PROBLEMS IN SPECIFIC LEVELS OF DESIGN
5.6.3 SIGNIFICANT MODERN AND EMERGING DESIGN PROBLEMS
6.1.1 Philosophies and psychologies of action
6.3 SYNTHESIS OF BEING, ACTION, MOTIVATION
7 LEARNING...AND TRANSFORMATION
7.1 EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND DESIGNS
7.1.1 Was the design or plan implemented?
7.1.2 Is design or planning effective?
7.1.3 Is the design efficient?
7.2 PERSONAL EVALUATION: DIMENSIONS OF BEING OR GROWTH
7.3 ENGINEERING EVALUATION: OTHER PROFESSIONAL SYSTEMS
7.4 EVALUATION OF GLOBAL SYSTEMS
8 DESTINATIONS: THE FUTURE OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN
8.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT
8.2.2 General outline of considerations and priorities for planning
8.2.3 Detailed outline of considerations
8.2.3.3 Leadership, Administration and Management for an Effective Research Environment
8.2.3.3.1 Effective research environment on individual, institutional and large scales
8.4 FURTHER SPECIALIZED INFORMATION ON FUNDING INSTITUTIONS
8.4.1 A listing of some grant and contract sources
8.4.2 Plan for research and related funding
8.5 IDEAS TOWARD A RESEARCH GROUP OR INSTITUTE
8.5.1 The idea of a research group
8.5.2 Background work towards forming a group
8.5.3 Outline of budget - an example
8.5.4 Further sources of information and special problems
8.5.5 Further possibilities for a group or institute
8.6 PERSUASION AND PRESENTATION
8.6.1 Introduction: old and new rhetoric
8.6.2 Practical rhetoric: the art of persuasion and communication
April 2003
Evolution and Design began with the observation that an evolutionary perspective – fact and theory – is vastly simplifying for understanding the world and therefore also in planning and design. The text outlines the sources and foundations and provides some details of that understanding and some of its applications
I used to say that Evolution and Design is about the relations between blind and conscious evolution
Some people regard natural evolution as something like the most important fact about the world and there are others who think that it is not a fact at all. I find it reasonable to hold that life emerged from the physical world; that all known forms of life have a common origin and that theories that originated with Darwin satisfactorily explain much of the qualitative and some of the quantitative features of the natural world. I think that the explanatory power of natural evolution carries over, to some extent, to the social world which is not distinct from the natural world. The possibilities that and the ways in which evolution may occur at the physical level is not treated to a significant degree in Evolution and Design
Naturally, evolutionary explanation and functional explanation must complement one another
For those who hold that evolution is not a fact, it is still possible to view evolutionary explanation introducing economy into understanding
Despite my enthusiasm for material explanation – evolutionary and functional – I have not found it to be the end of even scientific understanding. After I wrote Evolution and Design in 1987, I spent many years looking for a more comprehensive but still universal and unifying view. That has culminated, now, in 2003 search culminated in Journey in Being
June 1998: From the Revised Original Introduction
Evolution and Design is, first, an open vision of my world. It is a view - and a record of my experience, learning and entry into a dynamics - of my being, my vision and my process in the universe of being, vision and process. Being, knowledge and action are not seen as separate and part of the origin of Evolution and Design is in my own drives to knowledge, knowing and action
The first philosophy of Evolution and Design is evolutionary
It has a view - or metaphysics - that sees the world in an evolutionary process
Its epistemology, the text itself, and the concept of text are informed by the metaphysics
As knowledge and its instruments are part of the world, so are its processes within the processes of evolution. That does not imply that the nature of knowledge is fully determined by any a priori specified evolutionary base
Imagination and discrimination - hypothesis, deduction and criticism...experiment and testing...i.e., proper criteria - must be applied in drawing conclusions from evolutionary - or any - considerations. But the criteria are the means to the ends of validity, truth, pragmatics, groundedness, relatedness, being in
The criteria of epistemology are applied to epistemology. This generalizes: in grounding knowledge, we are required to ground epistemology, metaphysics, knowledge and its disciplines - which include evolution - and the nature of our being. Knowledge is of the world - not alien or impressed. We are required to consider the elements also in totality and in their relations
Evolution is not employed as a doctrine. Concepts and science of evolution are critiqued. This starts with biology and is extended to the realm of the universe and the mind. In metaphysics, or knowledge of the universe or of being as a whole, evolution - that is origins - is used to show relations among the elements of the universe, being and knowing
Evolution and Design writes this philosophy and seeks to elaborate it in all spheres
As an open account it is not limited to one paradigm. The first emphasized paradigm was evolutionary. Other trends - existential, idealistic... - appear. It is not limited to paradigmatic knowledge and seeks grounding in being and action. These trends, begun in Evolution and Design, continue in my thought and life and especially in the natural consequences of my life and thought as expressed in the tentatively titled Evolution, Design and the Absolute. The latter work - in progress - takes Evolution and Design and the alternate and perhaps inclusive principles to natural and logical conclusions
If it were possible for me to provide a full meaning, with implications, origins and sources of my thought in a brief preface then the text that follows this preface might be unnecessary. Brief elaboration of sources and contents...follow
Evolution and Design
Entertains issues of value, choice and action...and therefore, while not an axiological, ethical, social, political, legal, or educational philosophy per se it cannot and does not seek to avoid implications for meaning and action in these spheres...and therefore it is...A philosophy of and an approach to understanding, action, change and choice, values, planning, organization, and design...At all levels of material, social-cultural, human, and universal processes and institutions
Derives from and informs my life, attitudes and action, from my experience, thought and learning, in the worlds of nature, society, mind and learning, and the universal
Derives from and informs science...primarily biology, then physics, cosmology, geology, and the sciences of mind
Derives from and informs philosophy and humanities
[The language of dialog may be preferred to that of derivation, information, and instruction. But to force a view of relationship on the disciplines is a prior sin...]
Sees and derives from the elements of being as intimately related, the elements of process - knowing, design and action - as being intimately interactive...and develops, deploys and generalizes these relationships
This process is reflected in the outline of the contents: 1. Origins, 2. Evolution, 3. Philosophy, 4. Knowledge, 5. Design, 6. Action, 7. Learning, 8. The Future
The same process informs ontology and epistemology. Ontology finds being as diverse, structured, related and in process between equilibria and transition. Epistemology finds the unity of knowledge to be multi-modal and possessed of degrees rather than polarizations in the mode of truth
That the work is evolutionary implies that it is open. The openness also derives from my attitudes. Complementary and alternate paradigms are sought, integration is sought but contradiction - where resolution is not known - is allowed, all modes, levels, categorizations of being, process, knowing - implicit and formal - are sought for impact, inclusion, instruction, juxtaposition in harmony or in opposition and contradiction
Paradox may shake our foundations of knowledge but can only illuminate being
For the future I seek...discovery, learning: alternative paradigms...experience and study of and action within all disciplines, cultures, modes of being and process and through all modes and means of knowing, action...including exploration of dissolution of the distinction - whether apparent or real - between the subject and the object, or between knower and known, or between consciousness-awareness and their contents
Related work appears in the following articles and essays
Reflections on Metaphysics and the Problems of Consciousness,
Assist - on a design for uses of computer systems in my conceptual work, its organization and application,
Dynamic Uses of Computers in Universal, Global and Personal Process - and ongoing work on the uses of a computer in conceptual and related work which investigates some aspects of the computer as a dynamic link in these processes...and reflect on the issue of “What is machine intelligence and consciousness?”...”If possible can such intelligence be fabricated or will evolution be necessary?”...”Can intelligence or consciousness be transferred from human to machine?”
Evolution and Design contains extended analysis of the processes of knowledge, design and planning. Some projected applications:
A support group for work on the different aspects of the Evolution and Design Project as an ongoing work. Establishment as an institute with programs and funding
Publication
Work on the concept of knowledge resources. Work on an encyclopedia along the lines of the evolutionary or open text. Incorporation of modern computer information storage, processing, and networking
Expansion of the institute to a self-supporting enterprise
Knowledge, design, planning, and government consulting, application and support
...from the individual to national and world levels, from technical to personal, social, global and universal dimensions
Evolution and Design was written November 1986 to March 1987. This was an intense period of study, reflection and writing. The work has eight parts. I called the parts “Areas” since they were each ambitious in scope and relatively independent. Each Area had its own foci, emphases and problems or issues. My thought has traveled far since the original writing. However, except proofing, some minor changes to the section on an evolutionary analysis and extension of Kant's treatment of the synthetic a priori, a new title for Area 7 and addition of a introductory section to Area 8 there are as of this date no changes in the text. This new preface incorporates the essence of the original one and begins to supplement it with information, further elaborated in §8.1, on the trends of my thought since 1987 and on plans for further work and application
Before writing the work had been incubating for a long period. This happened originally and without intent - except a call to fullness of being that would later become a principle - or explicit plan in my studies and reflections in a wide variety of fields. This is detailed in Area 1. By 1984 many of the elements were present - engineering, evolution, experience of the natural world at first hand through living in it, philosophy, and feeling of a need for a universal perspective on knowledge and human and social processes. Summer of 1985 to summer 1986 was a period of study on a wide variety of topics on evolution, planning and design in engineering, other professions, government and human and social process
The inspiration for the structure and contents of the work came during two weeks at an isolated lake cirqued by ridges and peaks two thousand feet above, in the Trinity Alps Wilderness in Northwestern California, September 1986. I have returned to this place of magic many times and sought and received renewal and inspiration. I am in awe of and yet at home in such places
Upon return to my home - shared with good friends - in a shaded green place just off Dow's Prairie Road in McKinleyville, California I felt ready to write a brief synoptic essay. That was October 1986. Then, in November, I began the work of research, extensive library study, reflection, synthesis and writing. What was planned as short, preparatory essay manifested itself as Evolution and Design
Anil Mitra
Arcata, California
June 20, 1998
The current version is essentially the original manuscript, word-processed by my friend Joan Elk on a Mac 512K, then imported to my Pentium PC and word processed with Microsoft Word 97 - with the minor changes noted above in “origins.” Conversion to HTML was accomplished by custom macros and conversion to HTML by Microsoft Word 97. It was then necessary to make a number of fine adjustments manually
There are two sets of page numbers:
Normal page numbering for the word-processed version - the numerals are on the lower margins of the pages. Arabic numerals begin with the first page of Area 1, which is page 1. Pages before page 1 are assigned lower case Roman numerals. This system of numbering is unnecessary in the HTML version - the document you are now reading - and is, therefore, currently omitted
The page numbering of the original hand manuscript is retained. These allow the use of the original page number references without need for update. Update is a possible task for the future and would be part of major revision. Since I plan a successor, Evolution, Design and the Absolute, that revision may never be done by me. The successor text would include the entire essential and what I see as valid ideas of Evolution and Design - with appropriate revision. Portions of text may also be incorporated- again with possible revision
The original page numbers are placed at the right margin of the text at the locations of the original page breaks. The form is as follows:
3-25
In the original hand manuscript the text was divided into Areas and sub-areas or sections. The section numbering has been retained except that some of the lower level section identifiers were alphabetic. An example of an old section “number” is 3.5.6.B. The alphabetic marking has been replaced by numeric marking thus the new number for the same section would be 3.5.6.2
Some paragraphs and low-level sections were marked by single numbers or letters. These have been replaced by section numbering that is consistent with the higher level numbering. The single letters have been replaced by numbers and then single numbers replaced by the multiple numeral format so that the section number identifies all the higher level sections to which the sub-section belongs. An attempt has been made to update all cross-references but this may not be complete and therefore the old numbering has been retained along with the new. Thus if a paragraph or low level section within 3.5.6.1 was B, then the new number would normally be 3.5.6.1.2. However, in order to also retain the old numbering, it would be 3.5.6.1.2 [B]. Reference to this would then be either 3.5.6.1.2 or 3.5.6.1.2 B or, within 3.5.6.1, just B
While the sequential section numbering was consistent, a number of variants were used in the individually numbered paragraphs. Therefore the previous paragraph is a guide rather than a complete map
1-4
GENERAL ORIGINS AND OBJECTIVES… AND ORIGINS IN MY LIFE AND COMMITMENTS
I have always enjoyed understanding at deep and broad levels, and I have enjoyed the effort related to understanding. As a child, I had an unusual curiosity. In high school, I preferred to study the material directly from the sources over listening to instruction. My main interests were chemistry, poetry, and avid reading, in addition to sports and outdoor activities
In college, my propensities led to a sequence of nonsystematic, but enjoyable and valuable excursions into engineering, mathematics, physics, and evolutionary biology, into the foundations of these topics and into logic and philosophy. My interest in philosophy was quite general. In graduate school, I was able to significantly further my technical skills in mathematics, physics, and the applied sciences of engineering - including computer implementation of modeling approaches. I continued to browse in the literature of biology, logic, philosophy and foundations
As a member of the research and instructional faculty at a number of universities, I continued to develop these interests, and to do original studies in the development and application of mathematical
1-5
and computer methods in physical science. I came, through other associations, to develop interests in individual development and psychology, social sciences and sociology, and in the nature and values of religious experience. At this time, I also began to concern myself with the modes of perception and the ways in which knowledge is formulated and incorporated in the organism. Throughout this development, my favorite subjective experiences in art have been in music, literature and poetry, theatre and cinema. I have had occasional creative experiences in theatre, poetry and writing. Related to these were my direct experiences with mystery and beauty in nature and cosmos, and the manner in which the organism, that is, my body attunes itself to the rough and primitive natural environments into which I enter
To this point, my development was formally nonsystematic in the sense that I never had a perfectly complete and well-defined program. The level of my achievement in the different disciplines was uneven. However, my development has been characterized by the following. [1] An informal and evolving rational and intuitive sense of coherence and purpose. This is undoubtedly derived, in part, from culture. [2] A continued interest in the use and meaning of my studies and researches. [3] A diffuse sense of beauty and mystery in the enterprise. [4] An emphasis, to a significant degree, on breadth, logic, foundations and synthesis, and fundamental problems in the nature and
1-6
limitations of mind [“mind”]. [5] Undoubtedly the items use, meaning, aesthetics and logic are related. I originally felt this idea to be true, but later developed it as a formal thesis. This means that function, value, beauty and consistency are not competing values when each is truly understood in relation to the whole picture. [6] A broad understanding of the methods and foundations of science. The emphasis has been on physics, but a well-developed outline in evolutionary biology is also included. Such an outline should refer to physical, cosmological, geological, and social evolution. [7] The emphasis of my first serious understanding - beginning at college - was in the area of natural science and mathematics. This understanding was later broadened through my interest in psychology, sociology, philosophy - east and west, and religion. [8] Development of original ideas, systems of ideas, synthesis and anticipation in the areas of interest
In 1984, I decided that a clear statement of the fundamental issues, with which I was dealing, was essential to full development. I felt that it would also be valuable to make a careful assessment of the fundamental problems of humankind. Such feelings were not new, except for the essential way in which I now felt them. At this point, I was working at Humboldt State University and the prevailing environment there has a valuable influence on this development. Unfortunately, the mode of operation and the expectation at Humboldt was to import ideas from elsewhere. I found this stifling. In June 1985, my connection with Humboldt was severed, and this offered me an opportunity for careful and systematic development of my ideas and interests
1-7
This did not begin immediately. Further assembly of the constituent concepts was essential. I did not realize this explicitly and formally at the time - but, although I felt a need for organization, I must have felt that I had the full system of concepts and the organizing principles for which I was looking. These principles would synthesize the different parts
It turned out that, in addition to the very general concepts of philosophy, value and knowledge, which, to that point, represented the dimensions of my development, including planning and anticipation, the additional concepts of design, action, and evaluation, were necessary
I found two organizing principles. The first is social process or problem solving which organizes and displays value, knowledge [and philosophy], design both formal and reflective, action, evaluation, and feed back as a unity
The second is evolution which organizes and displays [1] social process as a method of adaptation involving elements of conscious foresight, intelligence and choice, and of blind trial and error; and [2] social process as coming out of and a unity with physical, cosmological, geophysical, geo-chemical, biological and human evolution
Before turning to a description of these developments, I should point out that unity does not imply identity. Each level of abstraction omits some facts of experience. Nor does the truth of a system of abstraction imply completeness. It is thus absurd to say that life is completely physical - even if the physical level of description were true and exact. It could turn out that biology is completely founded in physics but that
1-8
foundation might involve some new biology and some new physics. Until the foundation is performed, we have neither need nor reason to believe it to be true, or untrue. This is the essential reason for not subscribing to materialism - determination of biology and sociology by physical science, or to biological determinism - determinism of social structure or behavior by biology. Choice and potential are among the primary facts of experience. It would not be inconsistent for social behavior to be completely based in material behavior but only partially based in biology of organism. The fact of the partial basis could be explained as the interaction of biology with a complex environment, and the fact of choice could be explained by incompleteness of “mind” or of biology or, perhaps, by an intrinsic indeterminism at the material level
The development and synthesis of my ideas as an organic system will now be described. In this system of my ideas, no indication of finality is intended
[1] In June 1985, I decided to formulate an outline of the modern engineering disciplines and to form an estimate of basic or essential activities of engineering. This would provide a basis of my further development in engineering and match my interest in the foundations of the knowledge-oriented disciplines. Engineering is more directly oriented toward action than are the humanities and sciences. I decided that the essence of engineering is design - the transitional process between knowledge and action. This was the first step, the recognition that the central process and problem of engineering is design
[2] I decided to study the
1-9
process of design. As I did this, I came to recognize that the application of the design process is of much more general than I had previously thought. This becomes clear when design is viewed as problem solving. The fundamental process is equally applied to personal situations, technical problems, social, global and environmental problems - to design, planning, and policy analysis. The idea of problem solving is not new. It goes back, undoubtedly, to the origins of humans. However, there is an array of modern techniques that can be used in design. First is our knowledge and knowledge in general, of system behavior - the sciences, modeling and experiment. Second is a collection of methods for determining maximal performance according to criteria. Third, is the management of the design process; this involves determination of the criteria, streamlining the steps in design - optimality of the design process, and enhancing the creative response through psychology. I found that there have been deep studies of the problem solving process in the literature of cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence. I decided to collect information on the design process, on application. I decided to think carefully about the nature of the design process
[3] I also began to reflect on the role of design in the total social future. I recognized the existence of a fundamental social process that begins with value formation and knowledge, which lead into design and is completed by action and feed back. I recognized the fundamental unity of these processes: design links thought and action, design completes what knowledge begins, knowledge is potential design, knowledge is a process of design applied to states of knowledge. I continued to
1-10
collect information and to reflect - and as I did, so my concept of design deepened and evolved. That is, in addition to new areas of application as outlined above, my concept of design came to include new spheres of human and non-human activity. The sequence of concepts of design is discussed below
The first meaning of design is the process of coming up with a plan to solve a problem. It involves seeing and creating viable alternatives and in making choices from among the alternatives. Related means of design are the completed plan, the completed implementation, the relationship - in the senses of function, value, aesthetics - of the parts to each other and to the completed whole. My focus is on the process of design. This is the creative process; it includes the formal and informal techniques of problem solving and aesthetics and, in its full sense, the ideas of dance and of destruction. Dance, in this sense, includes action - especially action in the face of ignorance and despair. To have full meaning for humans, design must balance the ways of Apollo and Dionysius, and the ways of Vishnu and Shiva. Design, the process, includes being. What we learn about the process from various designs can be generalized and used in other designs. One of the aims of this work is to display the common elements of design - some of the models of design - and their application in a variety of situations, including definition and resolution of the fundamental problems. At the same time, one of the ideas of dance is the intrinsic value of each situation - we will not always find formal design appropriate. This is the first meaning of design
Design uses knowledge, is used to act toward solution, and thus integrates human and social institutions in the composite and looping or repetitive process: thought-value-knowledge --> design --> action --> reflection and learning. As I
1-11
made this realization, my formal interest in sociology, politics, technology, art, religion and philosophy deepened. These disciplines would provide a background to a careful definition of the problems of humans, and to a provision and evaluation of solutions. The unity of the processes of knowledge now becomes clear; in facing so complex a situation as the problems of humans, knowledge and design must condition each other - despite the value of their separation. The value of their separation includes division of labor - efficiency, division of power, creation of a fund of knowledge, and a method of design. There is also a unity of these cognitive processes with action; they are a type of internal action which anticipates the total process of humans and environment; they take the place of additional external action which would otherwise be required; this accomplishes the objectives of humans with minimal expense of resources. This unity has an existential value: against alienation. A second objective of this work is to study and display this unity and its value, and the elements of the unity. The total process knowledge --> design --> action is a more inclusive design: total process of society as a mode of negotiation and being in the environment. This is a second meaning of design
New designs [and knowledge] include new elements and new variations of successful ideas. The new aspect is often discovered through non-conscious factors. A new design must be implemented before we can be sure it will work. This is because knowledge and design processes are not “perfect” - they improve the chance of success but do not guarantee it. Some designs work, others fail. The information from success or failure can be used to improve designs through learning: knowledge --> design --> action --> learning, or, simply, design --> learning. Thus both variation and selection in design involve rational [conscious, choice of future] and blind [trial and selection] factors. The pace of change is sometimes slow [small modifications], and sometimes fast [new idea]. This is a third meaning of design: evolutionary design. A third objective of this work is to display evolution in design, and to show how an understanding of this factor can lead to better design
1-12
The idea of evolution that I will use is emergence of stable order by processes that are not improbable. This would rule out the chance formation of a complex structure through proximity of its constituents. It implies that we should demonstrate reasonable mechanisms of formation. This is an idea of evolution also includes more than the processes of a universe, an earth, and its life and society
There are three parts to this idea. [1] Stability means existence for a period greater than transience. [2] Emergence of ordered structures from an environment. This includes the import of order from the environment. If the environment is ordered or if it contains ordered structures, the emerging order of evolution must be new. There is nothing in the idea of evolution which implies slow change or increasing order; rapid change and decrease in order are also included; such as, catastrophe and devolution [e.g., DNA\RNA --> virus]. [3] The processes of evolution are not improbable. Stated positively this means that we should be able to demonstrate reasonable mechanisms for evolution, that the mechanisms of evolution are the known mechanisms of nature [whose natural rates are the rates of evolution]. This does not rule out indeterministic mechanisms or random descriptions of mechanisms, provided the probability is sufficient. Randomness is not a property of events or of processes although we do refer to random events and random processes. The word random refers to our knowledge of a situation and not of the situation itself. A random occurrence is one we would describe in terms of probabilities. In this discussion, I will not need to refer to the concepts of indeterminism or randomness. However, there must be some qualification on the extent to which it can be shown that emergence of a complex order proceeded by known mechanisms of nature. We do not know the facts of such evolution or the mechanisms of nature [especially in their detailed unfolding] sufficiently well. Hence, evolutionary theory must confine itself to a generalized description of mechanisms applied to an abstract of evolutionary history. For example, it would be useful to know that evolution of complex biological structure by natural processes acting over the history of earth is reasonable even if only in outline. It would be valuable to know if the principles of quantum or classical and other behavior of matter would be sufficient. In addition, since the elementary processes of nature show, apparently, no intrinsic orientation toward order, we would like to show that order is be produced despite this indifference. Success or failure in this will affect confidence in our understanding of the basic natural processes
1-13
The primary or driving mechanism of evolution is change or variation. Some systems have accessible ordered states through which they pass during evolution. Examples are [A] alignment of the planets, and [B] spontaneous separation of air into its constituent gasses. These examples of emergence of order do not constitute evolution. In either case the order is very transitory; the second case though possible “in principle” is too improbable to reasonably occur over the history of Earth; therefore, variation alone is insufficient for evolution. A second mechanism is preferential stability or selectivity. When the new ordered states are stable [for a period of time, in the environment which may contain other ordered structures], this increases the likelihood that a system which passes through such a state will stay there; or, in a large environment the population of ordered structures of the given type will be relatively high. Variation and selection explain a number of ordered structures in nature; on the cosmic scale: galaxies, stars, solar systems; on an intermediate scale: relaxation oscillations in nature, fluid convection patterns; on the microscopic level: elementary particles, atoms, molecules
Variation and selection are sufficient for evolution. Other mechanisms enhance the variation and selection. A third mechanism of evolution, one that enhances variation and delays selection, is reproduction. This is the mechanism by which an ordered structure can copy its structure into the elements of the environment and so, even though the physical entity which carries the order ceases to exist, the order itself is perpetuated in time and space. In order to be a factor in evolution, reproduction must copy variations. Reproduction enhances the ability of nature to access complex stable ordered states by enhancing the cumulative effect of variations. This does not rule out large individual variations: the idea of evolution includes that large changes can come about by combinations of large individual variations and cumulation of small variations. Thus, structures that reproduce are at an obvious advantage over those produced by raw variation
1-14
One of the basic questions of biology is the origin of reproduction. The mechanisms that produced reproduction must include raw variation and selection; these mechanisms are pre-biological and represent one area of interface between physical and biological science. With reproduction, individuals and populations are the bearers of order: individuals and populations are “units” of evolution. Without reproduction, the individual is the unit of evolution; this excepts “cooperative phenomena” - perhaps such phenomena are the origin of reproduction. In addition to biological systems, reproduction occurs in growth of crystals, societies, and ideas
A fourth mechanism of evolution, which enhances variations, is interaction between ordered structures of similar and different types. Such interactions produce complex and composite structures to produce new variations. Some examples are [1] symbiotic structures, [2] composite structures: very weak interactions - populations; weak interactions - societies; intermediate interactions - colonies; strong interactions - organisms1; [3] sex, [4] mapping of space-time and material structure of environment into organism - instinct, knowledge, consciousness, mind. [5] The complex of interacting organisms in an environment also moves toward a stable ordered state, thus giving environment the character of an organism [though not a biological one as usually understood]. This opens further possibilities for variation and selection; we could consider the sun in the same light or, since the sun is hardly affected by biological evolution, regard it as one of the drivers of variation
The mechanisms of evolution are nature traversing through complex, but natural, paths to nature's own complex, stable and ordered states. To those who seek natural explanations and theories, these mechanisms seem necessitated by the improbability of order in a neutral or chaotic universe. This improbability is the same as saying that most states in the universe are unordered. Perhaps, however, ordered states are more common than imagined and the explanation of evolution is to be found in a composite of [1] mechanisms that access the complex, stable, ordered states and [2] the frequency of such states
One of the objectives of this discussion of evolution has been to provide a general framework for the understanding of design, its different - but related - meanings, and its role in and relation to evolution. It has been implied, and it will be
1-15
seen, that the concepts are so close and interwoven that a full consideration of one must include the other. I will now summarize the general framework
The nature of evolutionary theory is to understand the existence of complex physical and biological structures as elements of nature, nature as understood by humans; hence, theory is a programmatic toward understanding. Evolution is the emergence of order by natural processes. We usually understand these natural processes to have no preference for the end product of order; however, there is a natural tendency2 of a system that comes close to an equilibrium state to go to that state. The evolutionary equivalent of this is the idea that variations have no preference for order: selection provides the preference; the process-equilibrium and variation-selection ideas are rough approximations to each other, and the separation into non-preferential variation and preferential selection is, perhaps, an approximate3 but useful idea which preserves the notion of “blind” nature. The fundamental mechanisms of evolution are then, variation and selection. In the standard version, variation shows no preference for order. Derived mechanisms are reproduction and interaction. The explanation of evolution is to be found in its mechanisms and in the distribution and density of stable ordered states. A fourth objective of this work is to develop evolution as a framework for understanding the different levels of design. Those levels identified so far are specific problem solving, social process, and evolutionary design
Evolution is emergence of stable order; the essential mechanisms are variation and selection; in the standard version, variations have no preference for order and selection is due to causes outside the organism. These statements are undoubtedly approximate: in addition to that pointed out above, the organism is composite [gene, DNA, cell, creature...] and “outside” is ambiguous; also, in a sense, organism is part of environment. On the account of the standard version, evolution is said to be “blind” to its destiny; this also being approximation. However, even if evolution is initially blind, it evolves rationality and design that modify subsequent evolution. Perhaps rationality
1-16
and design are an alternative description of some aspects of mechanism, or perhaps both rationality and mechanism are approximations to the same actual process and perhaps rationality and design are the evolved expression of [possible] small scale tendencies of variations toward order. What is being said amounts to this: If evolution and design are defined according to their standard meanings then, although the language of the definition makes them appear distinct, and if the above considerations are valid; the actual processes are not, in fact, distinct. For, in the standard version, [1] evolution is emergence of order by [blind] natural process, and [2] design is at least partial use of rationality in variation and selection; and rationality is consciousness, knowledge [perhaps symbolic knowledge], prediction of alternate futures [variation] and choice [selection] of viable, good. Better, or best ones. Now, evolution can evolve design - our evolution has - and universal evolution therefore involves design. Therefore, the idea of design at the universal level is not paradoxical. Even if we do not need this concept to explain our experience, these factors suggest the implicit and explicit presence of design in evolution. However, if we accept that “the separation of evolution into variations that have no preference for order and selections that prefer order” is an approximation, then evolution is design. At the same time real design is [rational] variation and selection which is [the essence of] evolution. Hence “design is evolution” - meaning that the two concepts are much closer than is commonly thought. I will make a thesis that they are identical. Of course, I do not present this as a definite conclusion because of questions about the premises and the language used in forming the conclusion
A fifth objective of this work is to consider carefully the meaning and truth of design is evolution; this is included in the fourth objective which can be restated: study the relationships of the different meanings of evolution and design. This naturally includes a study of evolution; and approximate meaning: evolution is emergence of order by natural process; design is use of rationality in variation and selection; and rationality includes knowledge and value choice. [Different interpretations are appropriate, as approximations, at different stages of evolution.]
Although design is evolution can be questioned, there are strong similarities of their fundamental meanings, and this provides a fourth meaning of design. A sixth objective of this work is to study this meaning of design in its most general and basic sense - it includes all the other senses, for design as problem solving grows out of human intelligence, grows out of evolutionary biology
1-17
as does design as social process. Also the basic mechanism evolution is variation and selection is a basic paradigm of problem solving4 [trial and error, better called trial and selection; induction and deduction; hypothetico-deductive; creativity and criticism; synthesis and analysis]. However, a fundamental meaning of design as evolution is as follows...design immersed in evolution...evolution immersed in design...history and evolution are intertwined...values have real sources
One of the ideas inherent in this discussion has been the unity of the human and universal processes. The seventh objective of this work is to study, understand, and experience5 and to display this unity. This is essentially the same as the sixth objective
I now realize what I have set out to do - synthesize all worldviews of being and action. I also realize the enormity of this. I want it. It will make me happy, but [a] I must approach it intelligently and [b] I need help. This is the eighth and final objective of this work. This is essentially the same as the sixth and seventh objectives. Eight objectives of this work and four concepts of design have been stated. Out of this synthesis, I hope something new comes. In addition to insight, it seems to me that I do have points of view that have originality and that are worth sharing
1-18
Introduction to the Concept of Design
DESIGN - Resource intensive tasks can be made efficient by defining the task to be design and implementation:
Process of coming up with a plan, planning
Important activity: industrial design, social design, planning and reconstruction, personal planning, policy analysis, strategic planning
Rational choice making and decision analysis
Transition from thought to action
As a verb, design is the characterizations above, the process, and as noun, is the completed plan or the structure of the implementation
As an element in process and change [in human activity] is variation and selection, design works by direction variation and selection, by rationalizing selection
Problem solving [objective design], search, information gathering [objective-free or general design]
Aspects are management, procedural, technical, psychological [creation, invention], analytical
The list of descriptions above suggests generalized concepts of design; example, the idea of a process “thought-knowledge --> design --> action” suggests a new meaning. Design is thought --> decision --> action. Such generalized meanings will provide insight for [and into] design. Generalized definitions are needed
Problem solving and objective design [objectives reasonably clear or can be clarified, that is, conscious design...This is the meaning above
Social and human process = knowledge and thought --> design --> action
Evolutionary design = Level I and learning or feedback and correction = dynamic design
Or, Level III = Level II and learning or feedback and correction = social change and evolution
1-19
Learning and correction are needed because of [1] imperfection in design and
Knowledge6 - the problem solving element, and [2] changing environment and circumstances - the dynamic element
Designs [Dionysian and Apollonian] are the fundamental social activity of
Levels I, II, and III
Design is evolution
Design as evolution [pp. 11 - 17]. Similar to choice as mechanism, or
design as evolution and... choice as mechanism and
Design and evolution as the essential action of the universe
Cosmological - physical - geophysical - chemical
Biological
Human - social - mind or mental - consciousness
Universal
Shows the origins of Levels I, II, III; provides lessons in value and method for these levels and indicates the essential nature of these levels of design
Provides meaning, for the unity is anti-alienating; shows unity [interaction] of all process
Meaning in process [Dionysius] vs. meaning in ends [Apollo]
Design is evolution as emergence of order
Levels I, II, III as localization, specialization
Variation and selection
1-20
The “General Statement” [pp. 4 - 17] is a narrative description of my objectives for this work, how my ideas evolved through different levels to include universal process, and how this grew out of my early interests. Here: an organized, more formal statement
OBJECTIVE 1. Design as fundamental in society and universe, and for the individual. Ideas of design, development of the ideas, uses; relations, unities and transitions among the ideas and characterization [Section 1.1], and use of these relations, etc., in elucidating the different ideas; evolution, process, interaction as unifiers
IDEA A: Practical and objective design; design as specific problem identification and solution; design as search, information gathering
IDEA B: Social process as design; design [noun and verb] and foundation [noun and verb] of society and social - group process
IDEA C: Evolution in design. From Idea A, dynamic design [dynamic due to incomplete adaptation and changing circumstance]. From Idea B, social evolution
The process of design evolves. This is analogous to “evolution of evolution.”
IDEA D:; unity of process; design as evolution, as variation and selection; resolution of the dualisms: matter vs. consciousness, materialism vs. choice
Evolution of the process of design is an example of “evolution of evolution.”
OBJECTIVE 2. Use of design: process; strategy; use of the relations among the levels: analogies, possibilities, values, alienation; applications
Focus on fundamental problems...the fundamental problems of humankind, of global process...material and existential problems. Focus on design in definition and resolution of these issues
1-21
OBJECTIVE 3. Design as universal process. Criticism, synthesis, continuing development and evolution of all personal and worldviews7, intrinsic and organismic attitudes of being, action and motivation. This includes ideal religion, “dance” - play, destruction - devolution
Unfolding of consequences, considerations on the fundamental problems of humankind
The objectives are equipotent development of design is not different from use; development is potential or generic use; development incorporates being, in full, where, previously, in technology material considerations dominated. Practical design is not apart from universal process
Design has many meanings - design as cosmic creation, design as day to day, bootstrap, hanging-on to existence. Design is responsible to the whole. Knowledge is [conceived as] responsible to itself. Therefore, knowledge can seem pure: hence its appeal as sophistication. But even in the halls of academic sophistication in the Western world, design has come of age - a return to the engineering curriculum; the development of problem solving [and its equivalence to concept formation] within cognitive science and artificial intelligence studies; the clamor within the towers of ivory to solve “practical” problems
OBJECTIVE 1. There is a need, from the limited point of view of objective design of different characterizations and generalizations. The unities and relations among the various levels provide insights. Some examples, [1] the generalization design --> social process provides perspective and value for
1-22
objective design and extends the range of applications of the objective design-problem solving process; shows a unity of the social processes, shows the mesh and to a degree shows each phase of social process as a model of the total process. [2] The relation objective design --> objective design implies a self-relation: what is the optimum sequencing and creative enhancement of design; what is the optimum level of resources to be allocated to design. This suggests an infinite regress and, indeed, this question must be handled dynamically as the character of the particular problem unfolds. Such questions are questions of management of design, or design of design
[3] Various aspects of knowledge impinge on design; this can be seen as an aspect of the relation design, « social process, since production of knowledge and knowledge are aspects of the process; the branches of technical science and mathematics are useful in modeling behavior of systems for design; aspects of management and cognitive science - artificial intelligence are useful in modeling - enhancing design itself. [4] The concept of evolutionary design provides a perspective on the further generalization objective design --> evolution = universal process; although not always explicitly recognized, evolution must always be a part of design for two reason: first, imperfections in design and knowledge, and, second, formal completion is not actual completion. Therefore, Idea C, below, should be a part of Ideas A and B - and in actuality, it is
[5] The equivalence design =? evolution gives insight in view of the meanings, evolution = emergence of order by natural processes and incorporation of rationality in variation and selection. This gives reciprocal insight into the problem-solving nature and search aspects of design and evolution. In addition, values for design are provided: e.g., variety and diversity. Others should be sought. These would include the meaning and value of a search for and cooperation among the levels of evolution and design. The relation shows the unity of the design, social process [for example, by demonstrating a common origin]
1-23
and provides new meaning for both design and evolution. Some of these meanings have been discussed in the General Statement, and in the essay “Life, Unity, Meaning”8. It is probable that we can never construct a single finite rational scheme of design that would match evolution [Gödel-type arguments]: I think not - at least in principle [considering evolutionary automata]. This means, first, evolution is “greater” than rational system [obviously]; second, organism is greater than rational system; but not, in itself, that organism is greater than rationality. Rationality = the faculty which produces rational systems _ a collection of rational systems
IDEA A: Objective design is a fundamental human and social process
IDEA B: Objective design generalizes to social process; since the world and universe is a web of connections, other parts of the social process could equally generalize. However, in various senses design is natural for this: it is a more flexible concept than knowledge or value. In its original form, it incorporates knowledge or elements of knowledge. It bridges knowledge-thought and action and this leads to the ideas of analysis and experiment
IDEA C: The idea evolution is intended to include non-rational and blind elements in variation and selection; incremental, new and large variations are included
IDEA D: I am concerned to see the unity9, the universal pervasions of the dimensions of being [inasmuch as these are not mere artifacts of language], the resolution of the dualisms directly [direct vision], but also to understand them rationally. There is a rational explanation of the dual approaches to “knowledge”: there are stages of information processing from perceptual to cognitive [central]; and levels of awareness from organismic to conscious. Mystic vision has to do with processes that are closer to automatic-autonomic-perceptual and whole-organismic rather primarily than fragmentary-conscious-rational; the emotional peak related to direct vision could be universal or a result of the temporary holism of a fragmented self10. These remarks are not in any way prejudicial to the character of direct or mystic vision
OBJECTIVE 2. Some applications include Objective design models, techniques, and use of paradigms developed in one field for critical use in others. In this sense, mathematics is a generalized design tool, and optimization and control theory are specific instances. There are many specific potential applications in product and process development, social and personal planning, and professions of engineering, economics, and medicine. Social process distinguished from objective design by greater multiplicity and ambiguity of objects and higher inclusivity of process. Application in unification of the multiplicity of social effort; special applications in social and global planning and policy, government and government agencies, health, economics, education and national policies for progress in knowledge. Evolutionary design is use of knowledge of evolutionary principles in development of “designs”, resource allocation for design. Design as evolution unification, synthesis, resolution of problems of alienation and inequity, values for more specific levels of design, long-range planning values and synthesis of possibilities and adventure, ideal motivational systems [as James: religion]
OBJECTIVE 3. Includes all dimensions of design, dimensions of being, modes and categories of knowledge and perception, methods of advance; application to fundamental problems of humans - practical and existential and motivational - balance in dimensions of being; incompleteness of
1-25
top --> down [T --> D], generic --> down [G --> D], self --> out [S --> O], path identification, rational systems, and open [objective free] design and process - evolution - devolution - dance as resolution
I realize the enormity of this – it is an adventure...there are adventures, holistic visions and unitary insights to be had to synthesize rational design-scapes. One of the objectives of the synthesis of Objective 3 is:
I felt it worthwhile to offer him [the individual] that his personal design for life should include designs, as far as his power permits for his wider system; and information, as far as his knowledge permits, of that wider system. I also felt it valuable to offer for his consideration the idea of search for the broadest and highest of all possible views.11
There is adventure and action in this search. The idea applies to society
1-26
There is in humankind a motive to know and resolve its fundamental practical and existential problems at all levels of organism, individual, society and universe
This resolution requires humankind to see, First, the actual unity of reality and of itself with reality; and to know the essential dimensions of [its] being and processes. This requires openness and flexibility
DESIGN, as problem solving is an essential activity in political process, social planning and various phases of global and local society and environment. This includes the professions, and individual life - civilized, primitive, organic
Such objective design can be performed as a rational activity, but must include holistic values. Good design includes arational approaches - intuitive, organismic, and direct approaches to knowing and creativity
Generalization of the basic design process by a clear recognition of its essential elements and context leads to more inclusive and universal processes that include universal evolution. The relationships among the levels of being have significance for the levels of design. This includes provision of truer values for the objective level. The process of inclusion is ongoing and essential and has value for all levels. Understood as design, all levels have application
1-27
The idea evolution = design [Level 4] universalizes and hierarchizes design. The universalization could start from any point in the cycle: awareness --> value --> knowledge --> design --> action --> learning or feedback --> awareness. THUS, all processes and activity are synthesized. A SYNTHESIS THAT STARTS FROM OBJECTIVE DESIGN THUS provides a perspective on design and a design perspective overall. Such a synthesis does not unduly exalt design. Alternative syntheses, such as provided in this WORK and perspectives could start from any point in the cycle since each element includes the whole in micro-process form - with different emphases. These “systems” provide approaches to value, knowledge, design, and action and to resolution of the fundamental problems of humankind
Area 1 and Area 8 are INTRODUCTION and CONCLUSION. Evolution is the genesis of design and social process, and so Area 2, EVOLUTION, is first in the body of the work...A model of social process is: awareness and perception --> reflection --> value --> knowledge --> design and planning --> action, observation, control and implementation --> learning or feedback, evaluation and correction. Contract the first three elements to philosophy to obtain the remaining areas in order: Areas 3 PHILOSOPHY, 4. KNOWLEDGE, 5 DESIGN, 6. ACTION, and 7 EVALUATION
There is one point of explanation that deserves further discussion. Philosophy includes universal, foundational and genetic aspects of knowledge and is, in this sense, logically before the specific disciplines of Area 4. However, it would be useful to consider the specific disciplines before philosophy to provide a base on which to build - to provide substance. This is provided in part by placing EVOLUTION before PHILOSOPHY. It is also logically desirable to have PHILOSOPHY before EVOLUTION; this need is partial resolved by placing a second on Abstract Evolution at the head of Area 1. This is an account of the linguistic elements of an outline of evolution and possibilities for basis of evolution in [what is assumed to be] mechanism. This is taken up again in a later sub-area on emergence of order
1-29
The contents, including discussion in this introduction, should provide a complete implementation of the objectives of this work [§1.2] and the General Statement - explicit and implicit, and a complete foundation of the theses and postulates [§1.5]
Examination of the detailed outline areas shows that the objectives have been incorporated. The work should do justice to the areas outlined, the stated objectives, and the theses and postulates of this work
A full treatment of the theses and postulates will include [1] their foundation; this is done specifically in the General Statement and in PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN [3.5.6]; and [2] their vitality to the objectives and to life. A general treatment of these two items is included throughout the work
Treatment is throughout the work. The indications below are a partial guide. In the current outline form, it is not the objective to present such solutions to the implied problems as are possible, but to provide a framework, an atlas, to such solutions
Objective 1. Identifying levels of design General Statement, Areas 1.1, 2, 5
Relations among the levels All areas
1-30
Using the relations 1.2.2
Item l 5.3.3, 5.4.1, 4, 7
Item 2 5.1.0.2, 5.2.1, 5.3.1, 5.3.4.3, 4, 5; 5.3.5.4.9; 5.3.6 - 7; 5.4.1 - 2
Item 3 4, 5.3.5, 5.4.1,2,4; 5.5
Item 4 2, 5, 7
Item 5 2, 3, 5
Objective 2. Applications of design 1.2.1 Objective 1
Idea A 5
Idea B 4.3.3, 5
Idea C 4, 5, 7
Idea D 2, 3, 6, 7
Fundamental problems Application to definition
Item 2.1, 2.5 - 6, 2.8, 3.1,3; 3.5.2,5 - 7; 4.1 - 2; 5.2 - 5; 6.1, 7
Objective 3. Synthesis 2.5 - 6, 3, 4.1 - 2, 5.3 - 4, 6.1,3
Fundamental problems- toward solution
See “Fundamental problems Objective 2” above
Item 5.3.1, 4, 7, 5.4.1,3,5; 6.1,3; 7
2-1
In this section, I review my reasons to study and to further the understanding of evolution, personal and social. These reasons are additional to those considered in the Introduction, the General Statement, and the remaining sub-areas under Evolution
As the universal process of unfolding reality12...evolution provides or can or could provide knowledge and understanding of the total picture; one of three or four ways to see unity and structure
Others are direct knowledge and vision, through identity, through homology and analogy or similarity, as part of a larger and total process, through the containing of the larger and total process in micro-process, and a putting back together of the initially separated categories of rational and other process. This discussion shows and gives insight into the bounded or limited nature of rationality and the resolution of this question. The true nature of rationality and knowledge = provision of adaptation [variation, selection and replication, interaction of individual and cultural ideas and solutions] and not certitude [though evaluation of certitude has its appropriate place], as well as resolution through synthesis; and the setting of rationality and knowledge in more comprehensive processes and structures - the existential foundation of rationality and knowing and knowledge
2-2
Knowledge as an element in a more general evolution - a connection between knowledge and knowledge and evolution
Evolution of the processes of knowledge and of the integration of modes of knowledge and perception; examples, the model: random association and natural selection against non-adapted cultures and groups --> systematic association and process applied to sub-process and elimination or abeyance [because an idea may be fruitful later] of non-adaptive ideas and knowledge; or the model: random association --> systematic association --> experimental association in the present --> historical and evolutionary associations...an approach to the foundations of the hypothetico-deductive method or method of speculative philosophy [Whitehead]
To establish “the” dimensions of being, the categories of language - innate, natural and artificial, the categories of thought - mental and organismic, and the relations among these. I believe there to be some evolutionary convergence and, therefore, provision of at least partial basis. Evolution integrated knowledge - science, history, life, and process
To what extent is there evolution in design, design in evolution; to study the evolution of design; to what extent can evolution tell us about the nature of design, the nature of creativity, the “true” nature of humans and value for design; mutual natures and interactions of design and evolution; need to know nature of evolution to use it and study, analyze, criticize its theory to advance it and improve adaptivity of knowledge of it
To understand relation of Universal to Human Being, the unity of humankind with nature and universe; to provide meaning; René Dubos' “transitions matter --> life --> consciousness are articles of faith and not scientific knowledge” is reasonable but discounts mystical awareness of universal pervasion of matter, life, mind and consciousness, design and choice. The religious motive in the sense of William James' “Religion is the total motivational system of men” in contrast to church, creed, dogma, or opium of the masses
Relation to objectives of the present work and theses, characterization of design as stated in the General Statement, and sub-areas Characterization, Objectives, and Theses; specific motives provided in the sub-areas of evolution; specific relations to all the other six Areas
Study of evolution provides insight into culture and human institutions. This includes tradition, values and morals, knowledge and art, language and so on, but this is not a substitute for cultural determinism
As a foundation for design
Design is analogous to evolution - its mechanism is variation and selection. Successful knowledge and design is reproduced. Foresight can be seen as reading the future from the past or, more accurately, an ability to predict repeating patterns from having adapted to them. Even knowledge can be interpreted this way: the repeating pattern is an ability to negotiate an unknown environment whether in space or in time. This leads us to ask, because it begs the question, what - therefore - are the limitations on such human knowledge? Alternatively, foresight is the repetition of dominant behavior
Higher design is evolutionary...and is part of general evolution
2-4
Origins, continuation and destination of all entities in our physical and speculative universes... The idea of an entity is something which on some scale of human awareness has existence13 or being. The idea of evolution is that on a longer scale these entities come into existence, maintain existence and have an indefinite-infinite or finite existence. Evolution includes origination, being and dissolution. Included in the idea of being is process. The processes of society have evolved - according to the idea of evolution
When distinguished from creation, guidance, and destruction ideas, evolution implies that the processes of origination, maintenance, and destination are, in ultimate nature, not different from the ordinary-everyday processes. Such ordinary-everyday processes may include [1] common sense, [2] the elementary processes of physics, and [3] the basic processes of biology. Any final notion of evolution in this sense, and clear and full distinction from creation, etc., must wait for completion of understanding of the ordinary processes. An example of a difficulty is that the ordinary processes as we understand them may themselves be actually evolving. As far as evolution is to be regarded as an open chapter in a dialogue among people committed to truth, it must be regarded as incomplete
2-5
In general, for various reasons, evolution need not be distinguished from or equated with creation, guidance and destruction. There are a number of reasons For this: [1] knowledge of ordinary processes is incomplete, [2] ordinary processes, because of incomplete knowledge either of their nature or their implications, may have extraordinary implications; e.g., mechanism, usually regarded as indifferent to order may be not so, [3] as a generalization a language of evolution and a language of creation are equivalent; it may be argued that a language of [indifferent] evolution is more economical but it could also be argued that this language is not complete, [4] even if biophysical mechanisms are indifferent to order and biophysical evolution was initially indifferent to direction then, if these mechanisms are complete, they have evolved design. Perhaps the elements of mechanism and design pervade all being. This applies equally to consciousness, choice, mind, etc. [whichever of these concepts are essential]; perhaps they are always there as unity or plurality - sometimes latent to our observation
Some of us associate ideas of creation, guidance, and destruction with dogmatism. As far as this is true, it is not essential but a function of present and recent history
2-6
Time and space are involved in evolution; that is, they evolve. One of the unifying ideas in science, religion and philosophy is that the ordinary processes, when properly understood, on earth and the neighboring parts of the universe, and at this time and over known history extend over all space and time. This idea was used in discussing evolution [2.2.2]. It is equally valid that what we learn from the far reaches should pervade here and now. The ultimate truth is a process of approximation and acceptance based on a balance of information from all places and times in physical and inner universes. We learn from relativity that our notions of space and time are modified; they lose their complete distinction in an accurate mapping of events of reality. Space-time evolves, too, and may have had an origin and may have a destination. The original singularity does not imply an original instant. It may be more mathematical, an artifact of description, than physical - so it does not even imply loss of information. Originations and destinations of the universe we know remain uncertain and ambiguous at the boundaries of its being and our knowledge. Space-time itself need not be a final entity of reality or description but it is currently appropriate [November 1986] to include evolution of space-time or quantum-field as elements of physical and universal evolution
The processes of evolution can be recognized on a number of levels. The “mechanisms” of the levels include greater and lesser degrees of universality
2-7
Detailed understanding of the mechanisms may be approximate. This may hide some universality. Mechanisms that seem to be distinct may be related - equivalent or reducible. Reductionism holds that the mechanisms of one level are reducible to those of “lower” levels. Partial reduction may be the case. Philosophically there need be no ultimate need for assignment of hierarchy and we may regard all mechanisms as universally pervasive until the contrary is demonstrated as necessary. In practice, we recognize the necessity of practical convenience. A set of possible levels:
Universal
Space-time-field and evolution of physics
Universe [“physical”]
Galaxy clusters, super galaxies, galaxies and interstellar matter
Star and planetary systems
Planetary evolution; geology
Geo-chemical evolution
Biology
Human and social evolution
Universal evolution
Cartesian-reductionist compositionist-holistic-synergistic and unitarian-reconstructed-hierarchy-mystic approaches are valid and complement one another. Approaches to composition include organization, and process-evolution
2-8
Evolution - understanding, fact, and theory - is not a specific set of mechanisms or theories...although understanding, mechanisms, and theories are important. It is not some specific hierarchy, although hierarchy may be employed. For example, if we say evolution = variation AND selection and that variation is indifferent to order or adaptation and that selection is without destiny, we mean to attempt an explanation of, say, biology on these grounds; and that this principle has had some degree of success. However, an affirmative extension to the completeness of this mechanism re universal evolution, or even biology, is not intended. Yet, evolution and theory provide mutual insight
Evolution [understanding, fact, and theory] is not a social or political program such as social Darwinism. Evolution is intended as a study of natural order and not as a justification of a social or socio-environmental order as natural or right. Undoubtedly we can learn from evolution. We can learn something about possibilities and limitations, about freedom and the use of freedom. However, this information is probably going to be incomplete and should, I believe, be used as input into our designs [and this includes morality and ethics], but not as a substitute for design. Evolution is not a theory of universal, biological, historical, social or human determinism. In the nineteenth century evolution [in the sense of Darwinism] was used as an unfounded justification for a wide variety of beliefs to the extent that “Darwinism came to mean all things to all men.” However, there is a social evolution; and this provides insight into social institutions and processes
2-9 and 2-10
Evolution [understanding, fact, and theory] is not a philosophical program such as emergent evolutions of C. Lloyd Morgan, creative evolution of Henri Bergson, or the evolutionary ideas of Herbert Spencer or George Santayana. The negating characteristics of emergent evolutionism are interesting: evolution is supposed to be not [1] mechanistic, [2] vitalist, [3] preformationist - actualization of pre-existing tendencies, [4] reductionist - reducible to the shuffling of a few elemental elements. Nor do I affirm the affirmative ideas of emergent evolutionism: [1] emergence, [2] levels, [3] novelty...which are, in effect, the affirmation of the process of evolution as an essential category. All of these ideas may be used in either affirmative or negative form, but I do not restrict evolution to any set of them until some completeness and its necessity be demonstrated or laid bare. Evolution and philosophy may enhance each other
Evolution includes emergence of order by natural or ordinary processes...processes that seem reasonable and non-exceptional. It is the emergence, continuation, and dissolution of the categories of nature and the dimensions, types and processes of being which on first sight seem static. It is implied that a full attempt at understanding of “ordinary” is required, and that the ordinary processes may be in evolution. This evolution includes an understanding of the long-time story of reality, of a record of the events of the human and universal past together. This evolution attempts to use that understanding of this record of reality
2-11
Blind mechanism or indifferent variation is not essential, nor is direction or directed mechanism. Mechanism, however, is the more efficient explanation - it is the weaker hypothesis!
It has been said that purpose is an illusion since matter, which underlies everything, is mechanistic in its processes. The argument is made in more and in less subtle ways
Grant the hypothesis of mechanistic materialism. It then follows that mechanism has given rise to design since animals including humans do design. In 2.6.8, there is much mention of the distinctions among the concepts of teleological, teleonomic and teleomatic processes. It remains that mechanistic matter has given rise to design. However while matter does not design [except when it manifests as certain animals, humans...] it must have something in it that permits it in certain combinations to design. Matter does design
Rethink this
Regardless, there is no refutation of cosmic teleology. Rather, Darwinism is shown the more efficient hypothesis relative to life. Combined with the success of the physical sciences, the argument is most persuasive and successful in explanatory, predictive, and pragmatic senses but not in an ultimate sense
Mechanism - physical and chemical
Description of change - variation and selection
Guidance - design as in social change and evolution
Creation
For further discussion of nature and mechanisms of evolution, see §1, especially pp. 10-17
2-12
In order to understand evolution, it will be useful to have a sequence or collection of modes of talking about it. None of these modes will be complete or final descriptions and models, but will be use vehicles, each at various levels of generality. This point is made [2.2.6-8, 1.4.2] and an abstract of evolution is provided in the General Statement [pp. 10-17]
Models and descriptions of evolution provide examples of evolution, though not “natural” ones...but rather symbolic ones
Creation and evolution as independent categories
Includes language and terminology of evolution and creation, and revisions of natural language to account for new learning regarding being, process and evolution
Continuous
Discrete - infinite or finite [von Neumann]
Symbolic
Simulative - approximations to infinite [continuous or other]; finite automata
Physical, chemical, biological, psychosocial
2-13
First, I must be clear about meaning. [1] This is an account of progression of facts from origins to present, of universes of being and discourse. [2] It is done with the bare minimum of philosophical, linguistic, mechanistic, scientific, etc. base to make the information intelligible. Deviations are permissible provided they are in addition to the minimally interpreted versions. In brief, I am referring to a minimally interpreted account of the universe and not an interpreted account of humankind
All levels are to be included: universal --> universal. The history of humankind is a chapter. The classic tables of universal, geologic, social, classical historical evolution are included
Before understanding, system and philosophy, comes assemblage15
Contemplation --> meditation --> action...followed by iteration and sub-iteration
The meaning of history here is described above [2.4, 2.4.1]. For reference, a discussion of classical history is attached
2-14
2-15
The ancients, living and evolving in the world, had powers of observation and body-Earth-knowledge [elsewhere I call this type of knowledge organic or organismic] and were capable of powerful and synthetic insight into cosmography and history - synthetic in its effect on action and social organization and interaction with nature, psyche and universe
Positive - Existential knowledge forms a motivational, existential, practical system: centering humankind in the universe, in being [i.e., making humankind feel at home, as in part of and with; not necessarily above or over]; taking care of all dimensions of human existence
Negative - incompleteness and dogma
An alternative title I had considered is “Mythic Accounts...” but I decided that title would have been prejudicial to an understanding and evaluation of the nature, origin, meaning and value of such accounts. Mythical is often construed as “false” and “irrational”. Of course, mythology does contain non-rational elements and this is precisely one of its values, provided we do not rationalize or make dogma
They are suggestive of the archetypes of originations and destinations. This is a valuable learning, for further development, and other reasons
They are suggestive of human archetypes and archetypes of psyche and imagination. This, too, is valuable
They provide continuity with the past
Some of the historical “functions” of the mythical-organic accounts are still valid - culturally speaking. The images of organic mythology still speak directly to men and women
They are sources of organic or organismic and cultural knowledge of human origins and environment expressed in organic symbols; nor are they devoid of rationality
Such symbolic-organic knowledge has been valuable to men and women in modern times of stress when the liberal and rational approach has failed. There are, it is true, misuses of the organic doctrines, but so are there of the rational. Perhaps we could develop a valuable synthesis. It has been claimed such syntheses have
2-17
been failures or, at best, disappointments. However, by synthesis I do not think of the organic added on to the rational; but, perhaps, the expression of the rational in an organic language or a conditioning of the organic accounts to be consistent with the essence of rational knowledge. In formulating this expression, it will be valuable to remember the limitations of rational synthesis at the boundaries of our universes of experience and knowledge
If science and the rational approach should decay, because of either inadequacy or incompleteness, disuse, or, perhaps, a failure of nerve, the organic myths would be of value
The study will be a source of insight into a form of organic knowledge
Function. First, as suggested [2.5.1], as a source of organic or implicit behavioral knowledge [self-knowledge, too] of the total system of humankind's exterior [includes physical, social] and interior [includes rational, emotional] universes. Second, and related to the first, as a motivational system in the interior and exterior worlds. The third function is related to the first two. It is a centering or placing humankind in its place and time - empirically and symbolically. Fourth, related to the second, as a source of cultural and individual archetypes. Fifth, related to the first, as an initial flowering of language and as a source of later development of language in a culture - this would explain a lot of the power of myth and language despite their inadequacies, adaptively or comparatively: they are based, partially, in pre-rational and organic development of individual and culture. There should be nothing essentially prejudicial
2-18
about the notion of pre-rationality. Do we control the function of each cell or origin in our bodies at a rational level? There are essential pre-rational processes. Sixth, and somewhat more specifically, as “narrative expressions of the basic valuations of a religious community”. Note William James' idea of religion as, essentially, the full motivational system of the individual, to which we can add society and culture
Religion; pre-religion18
Myth and mythology
Magic, witchcraft, shamanism, alchemy and astrology, ancestor, hero, nature worship
Folklore [George Frazier and others held that the myth of creation occurred at the “highest” stage of development of a culture. This was challenged by Scottish folklorist Andrew Lang, based on accounts of cultures classified as “most primitive”]
Art [includes symbolic, visual, tonal, sensual expression]
History [possibly - based on analyses of generalized historical accounts]
Philosophy and science [surely have organic and holistic elements, however rational]
In individuals - creative combination of experience, action, imagination and criticism
2-19, 2-20, 2-21
Creation by a Supreme Being [masculine type, usually]
Creation through emergence [feminine, Earth]
Creation by world parents [combined symbols of masculine and feminine]
Creation from the cosmic egg
Creation by Earth drivers
Note: Evolution could be interpreted as several of these creation types. Review major religions and mythical systems. Individuals form their own personal experiential, imaginative, and critical [separate or synthesized] accounts of creation, continuance and guidance, and dissolution
...The kinds are similar to the kinds of creation
...The kinds are similar to the kinds of creation. Also refer to “Religious Doctrines and Dogmas” including eschatology [the doctrine of last things]. This essay includes modern interpretations - utopian, Marxist, and Revived Christian eschatologies
Archetypes
Final dissolution
Transition
Cyclic
This area is divided into a number of sub-areas. These are of two types: [1] general [as 2.6.1-2] and specific treatments of “the” levels of evolution - according to mechanism or level of organization, from universal [2.6.3] through cosmological, geophysical, geo-chemical, biological and to universal [2.6.13] again. A break in the sequence of areas on levels is 2.6.9 on evolution [emergence] of levels of organization and interactions; this is of Type 1. Interactions are interactions between “individual” to form composite; this provides a key to interactions between levels
A general plan, not completely followed, for treatment of the specific levels is:
History... Sub-levels; special considerations... Mechanisms... Speculations
Connections to other levels
2-23
The study is a continuing process in evolution of humankind. Related aspects of the study are philosophy, knowledge, design, action, and evaluation; therefore, furthering of the study is relevant to the same purpose; this applies also to organic accounts of evolution
As a source of knowledge and its systematization in all fields, especially biology
Knowledge for design; design within the boundaries of bio-genetic and evolutionary potential in a more general sense; entering, using the evolutionary process; bio-genetic technology; evolutionary technology at other levels; “design with nature”; meaning and direction...value, ethics, morals, standards evolve, too
Centering humankind in nature; humankind comes from, is, is in, and goes to nature. Fear is natural. Time is a concept and the physical space-time-field levels may tell us about the dimensions of being that are behind the categories of space-time-etc
To provide a base or framework, along with organic accounts of evolution, for a unified concept or language of evolution... Such a language would probably be very general, and could not be used for specific results, at least as a generalization. Underlying physical mechanisms of various types could be incorporated. This includes any language that would emerge from a general science of order and evolution of order [2.9]
The use of unified concepts of evolution would be [1] learning, systematizing and synthesizing for the different levels of evolution and related disciplines of knowledge, and [2] learning for design and the different levels of design
2-24
Evolution is emergence, continuance and dissolution of recognizably, perhaps, stable and semi-stable structure[s] by non-exceptional processes...processes accessible to understanding20
General mechanisms = uniform language = variation [simple variation from nonbeing, replication, interaction - of some level of being or organization] and selection --> mutual adaptation or evolution of ordered structures and environment. I emphasize again, evolution cannot be understood without including continuance and dissolution, processes of varying rates; although generally we expect magnitude of change to be small compared to total order, and rate of change to be slow compared to intrinsic process and life of the structures. However, we remain open-minded and expect exceptions. We saw in the General Statement that aspects of physical evolution “ simple variation and selection of stable state and to improve the accuracy of the approximation, variation must, or probably should, [based in large-scale physics] include some preference for order [stability]
2-25
Chemical evolution = simple variation and reproduction and selection; and now, with quantum states and thermal, chemical, radiation noise as drivers of variation, non-preferential variation provides [probably] a good approximation. In this context, the theory of neutral variation is of interest. Because of the universal presence of thermal noise, perhaps the bearer of order should be [relatively, perhaps] insensitive to thermally driven variation. This carries over to biology: biological evolution = simple variation [and recombination] and reproduction and interaction [and recombination] and selection. The General Statement discusses implications of interaction
We see a trend: physical evolution = simple variation [in some cases replication, as crystals, convection cells] and selection; chemical evolution “=“ physical evolution and [later] reproduction; biological evolution “=“ chemical evolution and interaction. What of social and psychosocial evolution... We can see it as imposed on biological evolution:
Social evolution - loose interaction of organisms and variations
Arising in complexity of biosocial structure and environment and creative thought, plus possible weak effect of biological change as variation [weak because relatively slow], plus replication by memory and social institution, plus selection of stable groups and populations. Clearly there are many factors in social evolution besides bio-potential
2-26
Universal evolution; the unknown; the potential; a dimension of the sacred, in which good and evil remain undifferentiated; nature of being, including being behind categories: space-time-matter-field-life-consciousness
1. Evolution as a whole - based on modern knowledge and speculative physics and philosophy; evolution of space-time-field; large and small scale; arrays of universes; evolution of elementary particle or atomic structure, of laws of physics as known to us; questions of origins and destinations and before and after and beyond - meaning of the real mathematical singularities and boundaries of field theory - are they not physical? Nature of space-time-matter field
2. Evolution of the known universe as a whole; origins, destinations and large-scale structure
Origins, quantum fluctuations, punctuated equilibria, and “excess” matter
Super-galaxies and inter- [galactic and stellar] matter
Galaxies
Stars and other objects; star clusters
Star systems; planetary systems
Fundamental questions and speculations; stability; connections to geophysical evolution
2-27
Origin of the solar system
Origins and long-term evolution of Earth
Development of the layers; origin of Earth's magnetic field; developing nature of land, ocean, atmosphere and outer atmosphere
History of oceans, continents and land forms; drivers of continental drift, climate
Early and continued evolution of chemical forms in land, atmosphere and waters of the Earth
Origins of complex chemical environments
Origins of replicating molecules
Speculations; connection with biological evolution
2-28
This section is long because:
1. I need to learn some of the central ideas of philosophy of biology
2. Philosophy of biology contributes to philosophy of knowledge through a number of new “paradigms”
3. Physics, biology, science of humankind and society are three fundamental sciences. I am familiar with physics and have studied some of the basic aspects of social science, psychology, and anthropology
4. It will be a source of information
Some of the information is from Growth of Biological Thought by E. Mayr. Although his ideas are interesting, I do not endorse all, especially his notion of super-biological processes
An outline of biology may be useful
1. Variety of life and environment; class
2. Form, process and level of organization
3. Evolution of items 1-2
4. Class according to 1-3
Outline of biological evolution... origins and continuing evolution of the following:
Process [and complexity]: Life - biological environment and replicating molecules
Form: viruses, prokaryotes, autotrophs, and eukaryotes
Diversity: phylogenetic tree - species, kingdoms
Information processes: emotion, mind, and consciousness
Relations to human and social evolution; speculations
2-29
Biological Evolution: Main Discussion
The complex and varied life forms on Earth, of today or of earlier times, can be approximately classified by their observable characteristics into various groupings and sub-groupings. Of the levels22 of classification, some stand out as fundamental. One is the kingdom which represents in some basic and distinctive sense one of a few, usually two to five, major divisions of life; a second is the species which is a division of [similar] individuals forming a reproductively isolated group, isolated not in the sense of geographic barriers, but to biological barriers such as genetic, structural, and behavioral. Of course, all meaningful schemes are approximate. There are exceptions to rules, unclear cases, incomplete theoretical foundation and sometimes little theoretical foundation. Although the taxa in higher categories are well delimited, it is not possible to give a non-arbitrary [objective] definition. Even the distinction population between and individual is not always clear - being relative to some purposes; e.g., level of focus in a hierarchy with varying degrees of interaction and integration. Some of the major units of biology are individuals - [1] the fundamental chemical structures, [2] cells, [3] organisms as individuals, and populations - [4] species, and [5] kingdoms. These structures and affinities have an approximate [and evolving] basis in observation and are useful in studying, understanding and advancing the basis and range of life and its processes
2-30
The major thesis of biological evolution is that the life forms came about, over the life of the universe, from a few elementary forms; a standard version holds there to have been one fairly localized Earth-origin of replicating chemical molecules - perhaps one molecule. This strictest version is not obvious, nor is it essential to any concept and nature of evolution. However, one aspect of this version is essential to one of the prominent worldviews of science; i.e., philosophical materialism. The aspect in question is the origin in physico-chemistry. The appeal of this view is the provision toward a unitary structure to the universe - and the security that such a belief brings. So much of science is so neatly explained on this unitary basis. However, this specific unitary basis has not been demonstrated in “fact” [in this context fact cannot mean certainty], either in the origin of life [yet] or in unification of all categories of science and knowledge. Should the aim of biological theory relative to philosophical materialism, then, be one of confirmation and belief or one of openness to all possibilities? I find both attitudes acceptable, each being amiable to a group of personality types and each being productive of advance, provided not held as absolute dogma
The remaining discussion is divided into four parts:
1. Relation of biology and biological evolution to science and general evolution, and the nature of biology
2. Problems of biological evolution
3. Outline treatment of the problems
4. Outstanding problems of biological evolution
2-31
[1] Understand the world [provision: of explanations and predictions], [2] economic organization of understanding [patterns of relationship among phenomena and processes are organized into concepts and relations among concepts - includes law], [3] formulation of hierarchies of certitude [testability and falsifiability]: introspection ¬ reflection ¬ experiment ¬ historical evidence ¬ evolutionary interpretation; and of ambiguity: probability --> certainty; and authority --> independent verification]
Nothing was said about discovery and or method in science: the fundamental method [I recognize] is the reflective-speculative [2.6.8.2] approach. This is the method of speculative philosophy, extended by reflection. Speculative philosophy is the formulation of a speculative system, explanation [includes prediction] of a field of phenomena [biological, physical, general] and selection of the system which currently is “best”. This is augmented by a process in which a need to resolve understanding arises, questions are asked, information is assembled. This composite process is reflection. The separations are not perfect...there are inner iterations. Neither reflection nor speculation comes first. There is an iterative-interactive process: reflection « speculation
This includes as special cases the following methods and aspects of methods:
Deduction... Induction... Hypothetico-deductive... Creative... And many others
Special features of biology, biological science and biological evolution, according to Mayr:
Advance in understanding through concepts [e.g., in systematics - classification, species, category, and taxon; and in evolution - descent, selection, variation, fitness]
Importance of comparative method compared to the experimental: comparison [observe --> compare --> classify... iterate] is a powerful approach to dealing with uniqueness and diversity
The use of concepts and processes over mechanism, mathematics, and law... Concept and process is not mere classification and description
Population thinking...individuals are unique; means are constructs; variances are important] vs. essentialism ...identity of individuals, variance due to measurement
2-33
Problem of teleology - resolved by recognizing four different meanings: [1] teleonomic, or goal-directed activities...due to operation of a program; not found in inanimate nature, but in artifacts - computers, [2] teleomatic processes - in which a definite end is reached “through” the operation of time-local physical-chemical law, [3] adapted systems - due to selection, an example of which is Item 1 above, but not Item 2 as far as is known; [4] cosmic teleology - there is purpose in the universe, based [Aristotle] on the false dichotomy purpose vs. chance in relation to adaptation
Special features of life, according to Mayr:
Complexity - generally greater than inorganic species
Organization - the subsystems or parts of an organism function interdependently
Chemical uniqueness...many macromolecules are unique... that they occur in all life whenever their function is needed
Quality and qualitative reasoning and classification essential [though not exclusive]
Uniqueness and high variability of individuals in populations [from cells to ecosystems]
Possession of a genetic program which regulates cell and individual reproduction, function and process and growth... Unlike inanimate nature [analogy: artifact - computer program]. [Perhaps, therefore, some level of outline should be “regular”.]
2-34
Historical nature - of organisms, based on inheritance from primeval form[s]; taxa recognized by descent, biological classes supposedly distinct from logical classes
Selection - natural “and” sexual; unlike inanimate nature
Indeterminacy - temporal prediction rare; logical prediction possible; causality not disproved but not used as much as in physical science because of the following related factors: randomness24 and uniqueness of events and entities, magnitude of stochastic perturbations, complexity of organic systems - interrelations and feedback, emergence of new or “unpredictable” features at hierarchical levels
According to many philosophers of physical science and physical scientists, biology is “reducible” to physics25 and this restores the unity of science. This is reinforced by the claim that the only alternative to reductionism is vitalism. Mayr rejects all of these claims. He does so by identifying three types of reduction and confusion among them
[1] Constitutive reductionism asserts that the material composition of organisms is exactly as found in the inorganic world [it is not clear
2-35
this has a precise meaning]; further, none of the events and processes encountered in living organisms is in conflict with the physico-chemical phenomena at the level of atoms and molecules. These claims are accepted by modern biologists... and except for the vitalists, and all biologists for the last two hundred years or more. The difference between inorganic matter and living organisms does not consist in the substance of which they are composed but in the organization of biological systems. Constitutive reductionism is thus not controversial [Mayr's view]
[2] Explanatory reductionism is the idea that one cannot understand a whole except to reduce it to its parts and these parts into theirs and so on. This is often illuminative but there are severe limitations: where do we stop? Lower level units may be so completely integrated as to make high level function almost independent of the lower level [this seems to contradict Item 1, so what should be said is “...almost independent of the details or 'atoms' of the lower level[s]”. Extreme analytical reductionism is a failure because it cannot give proper weight to the [integrative] interaction of the components. Lower levels in systems or hierarchies can only supply a limited amount of information on characteristics and processes at the higher levels. It is misleading to apply the term reduction to an analytical method. How is analysis of complex biological systems facilitated? There are numerous ways. As an example, the study of genetics was speeded up by going to more numerous generations per year: large mammals --> fowl and rodents --> 1910 species of drosophila [especially melanogaster] --> 19302 neospora and other species of fungi [yeast] --> molecular genetics with bacteria --> viruses. Extrapolation to the higher species was successful except that the genetic system of prokaryotes and viruses is not fully comparable to that of eukaryotes
2-36
[3] Theory reductionism is showing that the laws and theories in one field of science are special cases of laws and processes of some other field. Clearly, explanatory and theory reductionism are related. Attempts to reduce biology to physics have been unsuccessful. As an example, discovery of the chemical structure of DNA, RNA, and certain enzymes fills in certain black boxes of the transmission theory of genetics [and this is illuminating and useful] but is not a reduction of genetics to chemistry. The essential concepts of genetics: gene, genotype, mutation, diploidy, heterozygosity, segregation, recombination, and so on, are not genetic concepts. Theory reductionism is a fallacy because it confuses processes and concepts: biological concepts such as meiosis and predation are also chemical and physical processes but they are only biological concepts and cannot be reduced to physical and chemical concepts. There are levels of meaning
Thus, Mayr refutes reductions. It is interesting that he denies the existence, or utility, of supra-biological categories “mind” and “consciousness” as indefinable and universally present. Are his motives parochial after all, or is he simply an inadequate philosopher?
Mayr claims reductionism to be futile, and this is exemplified by:
Emergence is the appearance of new, irreducible, characteristics in the whole. There are two interesting aspects of wholes: [1] Hierarchy - there are levels of wholes and explanation such as macromolecular, cellular, organelle, cell, tissue, organ, and so on, or “constitutional hierarchies” and such as species, genus...kingdom or “aggregational hierarchies”; and [2] holism-organicism [an alternative to vitalism]
2-37
Conceptual structure of biology - historically “for thousands of years”, biological phenomena were labeled physiology [medicine] and natural history; and this division was much more perceptive than later labels zoology, botany, mycology, cytology, genetics, and such. The historical distinction corresponds to the conceptual division into proximate causes [physiological science broadly conceived] and ultimate or evolutionary causes [the subject matter of natural history]. The same systems can be studied in both contexts. The basis of evolutionary biology is comparison and observation: observation --> description --> comparison...or “qualitative”. The transition from reduction and mathematical science to qualitative, historical science is incomplete
Supposedly, historical narratives, not theories, provide explanation in evolutionary biology. The ideas of central subject, and singular event are fundamental in historical narratives which are explanatory in the sense of showing causal connections [either in relation to mechanism; e.g., variation and selection, or singular events - relative to the discipline, such as extinction of the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous which vacated a large number of ecological niches and set the stage for the spectacular radiation of mammals in the Paleocene and Eocene]. Historical narratives have predictive value [in the sense of logical if not not-temporal prediction]. Some other sciences that are historical and employ observation and comparison are cosmogony, geology, paleontology [phylogeny], and biogeography. Mayr does not point out the rise of history in physics. In sciences that involve both theory and history, no aspect is understood completely until both aspects of causation have been elucidated
2-38
The two modes are [1] theoretical-essential-quantitative-cybernetic-functional-organizational, [2] historical-population-qualitative, and program-uniqueness-adaptedness... Philosophy of biology is more a manifesto rejecting logical positivism, essentialism, reductionism, physicalism, vitalism, but hesitant and inchoate in its major theses; e.g., acceptance and reception of emergentism
“Life”, “mind”, “consciousness” merely refer to reifications of activities and have no separate existence as activities. Consciousness cannot even be defined approximately. Avoidance of nouns that are nothing but reifications of processes greatly facilitates the analysis of the phenomena that are characteristic of biology. [Reification means to “make” or treat as “concrete”.] Biologists like Rensch, Waddington, Simpson, Bertalanffy, Medawar, Ayala, Mayr, and Ghiselin have made a far greater contribution to a philosophy of biology than an entire older generation of philosophers like Cassirer, Popper, Russell, Bloch, Bunge, Hempel and Nagel. Only the youngest philosophers, Beckner, Hull, Munson, Wimsatt, Beatty, and Brandon have been able to get away from the obsolete reifications and biological theories of vitalism, orthogenesis, macrogenesis, dualism, and positivist-reductionism
[1] A full understanding of organisms cannot be secured by the theories of physics and chemistry alone,
[2] The historical nature of organisms must be fully considered, in particular their possession of a historically acquired genetic program,
[3] That individuals at most hierarchical levels, from the cell up, are unique and form populations, the variance of which is one of their major characteristics
[4] There are two biologies: functional biology, which asks proximate questions; and evolutionary biology, which asks ultimate questions
[5] The history of biology has been dominated by establishment of concepts, by their modification, maturation and - sometimes - rejection
[6] The patterned complexity of living things is hierarchically organized and higher hierarchic levels are characterized by emergence of novelty
[7] That observation and comparison are methods in biological research that are as fully scientific and heuristic as experiment and theory
[8] An insistence on autonomy of biology does not mean an endorsement of vitalism, orthogenesis, or any theory that is in conflict with the laws of physics
[9] A philosophy of biology should include consideration of all major specifically biological concepts of molecular biology, physiology, development, and evolutionary biology [such as natural selection, inclusive fitness, adaptation, progress, and descent]. Systematics [species, category, classification], behavioral biology and ecology [competition, resource utilization, ecosystem]
[10] Do not: waste time on theory reduction, laws, vitalism and other unscientific ideologies
I will say again that Mayr is odd in including biology as a separate paradigm of science, making biology exclusive and rejecting meta-biology [e.g., “mind”]
In reference to C. P. Snow's two cultures, Mayr says Snow is right about the gap between physics and humanities; but there is a similar gap between physics and biology, and that biology being historical and closer to the nature of the human being is something of a bridge between the physical sciences and the social sciences and humanities26
Some of the supposed difference between history and science27 are [1] history deals exclusively with the unique, science with the general, [2] history teaches no lessons, [3] history is unable to predict [temporally]. [4] History is necessarily subjective, and [5] history, unlike science, involves issues of religion and morality. These claims are true only for physical science, says Mayr. Differences 1,3, 4 and 5 are largely true for evolutionary biology...and 2 is not even true for history. Therefore, says Mayr, the sharp break between science and the non-sciences does not exist
Copernicus, Darwin, Freud have profoundly altered human thinking; mathematical physicists Einstein, Bohr not so much - scientists must be read by lay people to affect popular thought. Probably, since biology, psychology, anthropology will have more impact on human thought than the physical sciences since they are of immediate concern
Mayr calls for a joining of biology and philosophy in a rekindling of the interest in the basic philosophical areas of metaphysics, ontology and epistemology. These areas had been abandoned in the English-speaking countries due to the Positivist influence of physical science and mathematics
Mayr's points are:
[1] Unlike physical science [he does not say this categorically], biology is not detached from humankind, objective, and therefore, affects human values, society and traditional belief. [Of course, physical science has affected belief - heliocentricity, etc. - and its conclusions are value laden, but biology is directly value related.]
[2] Socio-political thinking developed under the influence of essentialist thinking: essential identity of members of a class; “all men are created equal”, whereas biology says “no two individuals are created equal” and therefore social provision is necessary for equality of opportunity, rights, and before the law
[3] He regrets the condemnation of sociobiology over its divergence with “democratic thinking”. Mayr does not outright endorse sociobiology, but that is its thrust28. The scientific aspects of sociobiology are unresolved; but, to me, it does seem excessively in some arguments for biological determination of social behavior and anti-historical. The question is not whether biology determines behavior [homosexuality, altruism, male-female roles, violence, and such] at all, but to what extent is variation due to - and what is - individual potential, species variability and social and other input
[4] The individual is not “merely on animal”, but ego is not essential: instead consider humankind, the species or culture, and resolve issues of cultural inheritance [in addition to biological], inclusive fitness29 and ethics
2-42
Mayr lists:
[1] Replacement of a static by an evolving world [not original with Darwin]
[2] Implausibility of creationism
[3] Refutation of cosmic teleology
[4] Abolition of any justification for absolute anthropocentrism
[5] Explanation of “design” by non-directed variation and opportunistic reproductive success entirely outside Christian dogma
[6] Replacement of essentialism by population thinking
[7] Various philosophical-methodological innovations: consistent application of hypothetico-deductive method, a new evaluation of prediction. This brings study of ultimate [evolutionary] causation into science
[In several of the points above, biological evolution and its theories contribute - as opposed to independently imply.]
2-43
Nothing has yet been said about the course of and evidence for evolution and its mechanisms; these are the main conceptual problems:
[1] Outline of the course of evolution,
[2] Provision of evidence of evolution
The two problems are interdependent. In the content of the speculative method [hypothesis and deduction], evidence is empirical and theoretical: empirical - experimental, observational and experiential, theoretical - organization of data and information through comparison, concept, mechanism, law and theory so as to permit summary representation, interpretation of old and new data, and prediction of logical and or temporal types
These two problems are the main conceptual problems of biological evolution. There is another
[3] Methodological problems [2.6.8.1] of biological evolution
These, of course, touch upon other areas of evolution and knowledge. The three problems are elaborated further below. Although separated, the problems are interdependent
2-44
We will probably never know, nor need to know, the full details of evolution of biology and the universe - at least in our finite manifestations. Further, what knowledge we have will not be certain and it is because of this essential incompleteness and uncertainty that theory and concept30 formation is useful...so our knowledge of the course of evolution is necessarily, and should be, in outline. Of course, degree of certainty will improve; detail will expand. Here I mention some main points of this outline:
Evolution and Descent of the Major Biological Types: Remember that evolution includes origins, growth, maintenance or equilibrium, decay and death or extinction. The idea of descent refers to relations among origins of taxa. There are a number of possibilities for types of descent: [a] Common descent vs. creation or special creation - common descent is the idea that members of a taxon are descendents of a common ancestor. According to this “species descended from a single progenitor are grouped into genera; and genera are included in, or subordinate to, subfamilies, families, and orders all united into one class...” Creation is the violation of common descent through independent [and or special, that is not evolution] origin. [b] Tree like or more generalized descent - tree structure permits branching. A generalized version permits mixing of taxa. The types are:
Life: complex chemical processes, environments, and replicating molecules