Re: [asa] Nudging Evolution

Hi Gregory,

“So, you're modelling your view of 'nudging evolution' on human behaviour?!

This seems to be a gigantic problem with your approach, Mike. I find it wonderful, however, at the same time! : )”

Actually, my model was developed independently and prior to the nudging theories of Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein. I just recently became aware of their book and immediately noticed the vast similarities. I don't have to make any substantive changes in my model to incorporate their terminology ('nudge'; 'choice architecture'].

“You're not in danger, Mike, of becoming a neo-sociobiologist (LOL!), or at least it doesn't seem so. And so I hope not! But a new title for your view seems to be in order, one that could benefit from a clear and open dis-association with the IDM, which could be achieved by refusing to use the language categories of their choice. Get creative like your 'consilience of clues' once again! Why not create your own category/ies and wait for ID-friendly people (esp. those who are not advocates of ID = science, i.e. your position) to adopt it (along with non-dogmatic TEs) instead of their ideologically tainted concept duo of 'intelligent design' (or their religiously-disguised evolutionism)?”

As I noted in my response to Dave, I coined the term ‘front-loaded evolution’ many years ago back on the old ARN forum. But I hear ya. Is there something wrong with what I just laid on the table - Nudging Evolution?

“p.s. I like your use of the term 'artificial selectors'. We human-social scientists use a different language, of cours, such as 'agent' or 'causitive actors' or 'human makers (homo faber)' and other such things, depending on theoretical orientations and 'context'.”

Thanks.

“p.p.s. if 'nudging' is a "form of design," then what is 'design' a form of? Or are you suggesting it should be seen, as Cameron seems to do, as a primary or 'master category'? And if so, then what is this 'design' opposite to or theoretically against?”

I would say that design is a form of control. And control can be viewed as a form of intent coupled to understanding. Design would be opposite to noise, gibberish, static. Front-loading is thus about using nudges to navigate through the noise, even if it means you have to exploit the noise to reach an objective.

“p.p.p.s. how can 'evolution' be said to 'make choices'? Is 'evolution' somehow a 'conscious' entity or thing?”

I put the term “choice” is quotes to convey that I did not mean it literally. Let me try to re-word that part:

Front-loading would thus take this strategy of nudging, a form of design, and build it into the “choice architecture” of life – its form and composition – to steer subsequent evolution toward one trajectory rather than another without “forcing” it to do so.

“It seems to me that you always simply assume there is a 'first designer' without any 'biological' arugment to make a 'proof.' Perhaps the 'proof' is not important at all and there is a hovering 'apologetic' in your approach that is always ready to make its entry into the 'scientific' discussion...”

Of course I assume. It’s called a working assumption and it follows from the fact that the data do not mandate a non-teleological interpretation. In fact, they tease to be viewed from a telic perspective. It’s only the central metaphor behind my whole approach. :)

http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/the-central-metaphor/

Mike

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gregory Arago
  To: Nucacids ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 11:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Nudging Evolution

  Hi Mike,

  So, you're modelling your view of 'nudging evolution' on human behaviour?!

  This seems to be a gigantic problem with your approach, Mike. I find it wonderful, however, at the same time! : )

  You're not in danger, Mike, of becoming a neo-sociobiologist (LOL!), or at least it doesn't seem so. And so I hope not! But a new title for your view seems to be in order, one that could benefit from a clear and open dis-association with the IDM, which could be achieved by refusing to use the language categories of their choice. Get creative like your 'consilience of clues' once again! Why not create your own category/ies and wait for ID-friendly people (esp. those who are not advocates of ID = science, i.e. your position) to adopt it (along with non-dogmatic TEs) instead of their ideologically tainted concept duo of 'intelligent design' (or their religiously-disguised evolutionism)?

  Gregory

  p.s. I like your use of the term 'artificial selectors'. We human-social scientists use a different language, of cours, such as 'agent' or 'causitive actors' or 'human makers (homo faber)' and other such things, depending on theoretical orientations and 'context'.

  p.p.s. if 'nudging' is a "form of design," then what is 'design' a form of? Or are you suggesting it should be seen, as Cameron seems to do, as a primary or 'master category'? And if so, then what is this 'design' opposite to or theoretically against?

  p.p.p.s. how can 'evolution' be said to 'make choices'? Is 'evolution' somehow a 'conscious' entity or thing? It seems to me that you always simply assume there is a 'first designer' without any 'biological' arugment to make a 'proof.' Perhaps the 'proof' is not important at all and there is a hovering 'apologetic' in your approach that is always ready to make its entry into the 'scientific' discussion...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com>
  To: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 5:21:06 PM
  Subject: [asa] Nudging Evolution

  As I have been arguing for the hypothesis of front-loading evolution over the years, not too long ago, it has occurred to me that the term “front-load” has the ability to mislead people into thinking I have argued that evolution is a deterministic process, such that everything we currently see around us was programmed to be as it is as a consequence of the originally front-loaded state. This misperception then causes people to think front-loading is an old, discredited view of evolution. But that is not the case.

  To demonstrate this, I have just run across a design approach that is very, very similar to the approach I talk about and have labeled as “front-loading.” It’s a social engineering approach that is becoming increasingly popular known as “nudging.”

  I outline some of the similarities between nudging human behavior and front-loading evolution here:

  http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/nudge/

  Mike

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.95/2368 - Release Date: 09/13/09 17:50:00

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Sep 14 16:53:05 2009