Re: [asa] Nudging Evolution

Wouldn't a nudge look something like the anthropic principle, but not
like a multiverse.

bill

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Nucacids wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
>
>
> “I don't really think this is much different from what we all thought of
> front loading without "nudging." Can you be more specific?”
>
>
>
> Very good. So we are all clear that front-loading is not about determinism.
> It’s not about endowing a single-celled organism with all the genes for
> tigers, roses, and butterflies because natural processes cannot create those
> genes. It’s about setting up a ‘choice architecture’ that would
> function to nudge evolution into one trajectory vs. another. So the next
> place to get specific is to focus on the very things I have been focused on
> for years – where are the nudges? It would be best to begin modestly, so
> we might imagine where we might find the nudges inside a unicellular cell
> plan that would preadapt life such that multicellular life would be likely to
> emerge.
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "wjp" <wjp@swcp.com>
> To: "Nucacids" <nucacids@wowway.com>
> Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 11:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Nudging Evolution
>
>
>> Mike:
>>
>> As I understand your suggestion, we must consider conditional
>> probabilities. So that P(E|C1) may be much greater than P(E|C2).
>> Establishing a condition C1 would be considered a nudge, in that it moves
>> one closer to a given outcome relative to another, or perhaps to all other
>> possible conditions at the time.
>>
>> Since we are speaking here, not, as I understand it, of continual or
>> frequent interventions by God, but of a front loading, where it seems that
>> God only gets one chance, then what nudging appears to entail is that God
>> established initial conditions such that certain events are more likely, if
>> not much more likely, than others. In this way, e.g., we can say that God
>> nudged the universe toward life, and even man.
>>
>> I don't really think this is much different from what we all thought of
>> front loading without "nudging." Can you be more specific?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> bill
>>
>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 20:21:06 -0400, "Nucacids" <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> 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 Tue Sep 15 00:21:45 2009