The Cybernetic Animal and the Shortfall in Taxonomy

 The Cybernetic Animal and the Shortfall in Taxonomy 

Publisher: The Cybernetics Society

Author: Gihan Soliman

The Homocybernetica: A New Kingdom of Life; Revisiting Linnaeus’ Ragnum Lapideum

Justice between humans and animals

Nature [1] has been said to work for the best of each "creature" (using Darwin's words). “She” (naturally) destroys the maladaptive traits and preserves the adaptive ones, leading to the continuation and amazing complexification of life. Individual organisms (including micro-organisms) often produce costly common goods and are preferential on whom would benefit from such common goods. Most organisms would help relatives because that is likely to perpetuate the kindness traits, otherwise, the common good would get plundered by “cheats” and “free-riders” who would not (by definition) contribute to the perpetuation of the genome/kind/species of the donor. This discrimination in itself ensures a sort of "justice" which often benefit the whole community/species/kind*.

The success of any species is tied up, surprisingly, to such discriminatory kindness. West et al (2006), explains an interesting experiment conducted on microorganisms communicating for the purpose of cooperation - necessary to perform several essential multicellular processes such as nutrient acquisition and dispersal. Some individuals in this bacteria groups namely Pseudomonas aeruginoshe produce a common good for the benefit of the group (sidrophores scavenging iron in this example), however, such production might be open to plunder by cheats within the same group, who do not produce such organic product and who would use the plundered sidrophores to out-number the altruistic productive individuals. When selfish individuals (cheats/mutants) out-number the altruistic one beyond the capacity of the patch/colony to provide nutrition and other essential organic products, the group inevitably perishes. West et al (2006), then explain how the altruistic bacteria uses two mechanisms to insure the sidrophores will be utilised exclusively by relatives (who according to the Kin selection theory, must be carrying the same altruistic traits and are thus likely to keep producing beneficial products for the survival of the colony), which may in turn, result in a potential inclusive fitness for the whole group. Those two mechanisms are the limited dispersal", and kin discrimination (the repression of competition). Kin recognition and kin discrimination in this example occur beyond the perception of the individuals while in higher organisms occur consciously, through the sensory system (based on physical characteristics such as the smell, features or location, as relatives tend to live in the same vicinity) (West et al, 2006).

The success of kin discrimination would naturally lead to the growth in number of the connected group and a gradual advancement of the organisation (Darwin, 1854; 1999), leading in turn to more growth in population (inclusive fitness). Now! In case of humans, this happen the other way round. Humans tend to think of the purpose of their actions and are capable of weighing possibilities against contextual and situational factors, relating this to past experience. This is called the faculty of "steermanship" (Weiner, 1948) or Cybernetics.



So while we are doing the same thing - in principle, the results are pretty much different. Humans' contribution to the welfare of their community do not always take the form of economic activities or biological production. How often we exchange materialistic/economic possession (represented in money) for recreational, spiritual, humanistic or artistic values. How often we feel estranged to some family members and close to strangers. Due to the faculty of observation, education and the use of cognitive artifacts, the human behaviour - as Darwin affirmed, is no longer governed by instincts but is rather a blend of natural dispositions ("social instincts"), social learning ("imitation and reinforcement") and values (morals), resulting in the evolution of morals, religions, education, cultures, social contracts, game theories, etc.

Great lawgivers, the founders of beneficent religions **, great philosophers and discoverers in science, aid the progress of mankind in a far higher degree by their works than by leaving a numerous progeny
                                                                                                                              (Darwin, 1854-99)From this argument we can see that species tend to work, consciously or unconsciously for the benefit of their kind, as part of their struggle to survive. In this context, justice (defined in light of collective-survival values) can replace kin discrimination, and as man advance in civilisation….

 

As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races.

                                                                                                                            (Darwin, 1854-99)

---

[1]

Nature in a Darwinian sense is the aggregate of natural laws and process
addressed as a singularity (Darwin, 1849-1871;1999)
*
This does not imply pre determinism ( see Park, 2007)
Park, J.H.(2007) Persistent Misunderstandings of Inclusive Fitness and Kin Selection: Their Ubiquitous Appearance in Social Psychology textbooks. Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 5(4). 2007-861
**
Caution must be practiced as we address the meaning of "beneficial religion". Evolutionary-wise, any moral system (or religion) that imposes a fixed code of conduct rather than a set of values, is maladaptive and pathogenic on the long run. 


West et al (2006) Altruism, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences,
University of Edinburgh Current Biology, Vol 16 No 13 R482


Read more in the Conservation of the Homo sapiens; the survival of the Wise
All copyrights reserved.

Between the "Conservation of the Homo sapiens" 2014 & BBC 2015's best seller: Sapiens: A Brief History of Mankind

Review:

Although the general framework, findings and the titles of the two books appear to be amazingly close; The prize-winner, in his TV interview with the BBC  oversimplifies the issue of abstraction (what he calls "imagination"), and presents a couple of slightly distorted facts, such as that the difference between our species and the previous human species is not in the "brain"; stating that the most-recent previous human species (Neanderthals) had bigger brains, without any reference to areas of growth, shrinking or development. In all cases, it conflicts with his own findings: If the difference lies only in the faculty of "imagination", as he argues, or in "abstraction, conceptualization and strategic planning" (among other factors) as I argued, then it has - one way or another, to relate to the brain. Here is a quick comparison between the two arguments in six points, listed neatly in one table.

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”

~ Albert Einstein

Conservation of the Homo sapiens: The survival of the Wise; on the Cybernetics of education;

By

Gihan Sami Soliman

Published April 2014

 (284678811©1/3/2014 UK Copyright Registration Service)
 
&

BBC bestseller

Sapiens: A Brief History of Mankind

 
By

Yuval Noah Harari

Published 4 Sep 2014

 Based on a BBC interview with the author of the latter on what makes us human.

*****

*************

********     [[[[[[ (READ ONLINE) ]]]]]]  *********

**************

*******

For those interested in interdisciplinary perspectives. 

My argument on what makes us human.

From the Conservation of the Homo sapiens: The survival of the Wise; on the #Cybernetics of education.

We are not just another species!

#~#~#~# New Concepts #~#~#~#:

* The Real-living-system Theory.* The sociophysiobiological kingom.* The Cybernetic Phylogeny.

More Cybernetics designs and  illustrations on MY Own Education.

Copyrights 2011-2015.

Time Feminism evolved!

If feminism stands for gender equality, then I'm a radical feminist.


However, I'm not happy with the name of the movement(s). I, as a "gender-equalist", like to be categorised as a gender-equality activist rather than a feminist.



This is for two main reasons.

I'm using gender-equalism rather than the more generic "egalitarianism".

The first reason is the name itself: F-e-m-i-n-i-s-t. I don't see any equality in that! It seems to be all about women. But gender equality is not just about women, it is about the whole community benefiting from raising the profile of women and advocating their rights. Gender inequality is harming humanity, not just women. It affects nations, economies, and life as a whole.

The second reason is the lack of consensus over the definition of feminism. People define it (and use it) in many different ways and contexts.


While many women groups (and I'm a proud member of one) have gained a lot for the cause of gender equality throughout history, the term may also be used in other contexts conflicting with what gender equality is about.


1- It is used by oppressive groups to propose limitation and censorship on women's clothes and mobility, so as to "protect" her.



2- It may be used by some "male" feminists to lure "grateful" women into abusive relationships.



3- It may be used by some female trolls to incur unfair gains or abuse men just because they are protected by feminism.

When comparing a man that makes his money by hard work, creativity, and progress (while not being abusive to women) and a woman that makes her wealth by silicon-stuffed curves. I would take the side of the man, not the woman, in this particular case although pleasing men is normally the reason behind such cosmetic trends. I'd say that women need to rise up to the responsibility of gender equality.



4- There is a competency gap that feminism seems reluctant to acknowledge. Women have been conditioned for long not to compete in the job market. Witch hunt, lobotomy, theocracies, colonialism (including Arab colonialism in the Middle East) have pulled women down across generations. Women must empower themselves and each other more in science and technology as much as they demand "protection"; so that equal opportunities - when reached, would work out for them and the world. Ask yourself, if you call yourself a (female) feminist, and you're not living in a community where women are normally cut, denied basic education, or financial independence; have you ever learned to operate a power tool, write a programming code, or build a shed; Have you ever repaired an electric switch or replaced a damaged fuse, or do you always ask a man when it operating any machine other than a car, a dishwasher, and a hoover? If you haven't, now is the time for learning and gaining skills, go for it!



5- Many time feminism slips into man-hate speech and will never blame women for contributing to the current inequality, while the truth is that a great deal of such inequality - and sometimes violence, is nurtured by women themselves. Take Female Gentile Mutilation as an example. Inequality is an ecosystem.

Girls queuing helplessly to be cut - picture from It’s Time to End FGM - GirlsGlobe (link to GirlsGlobe website) /

6- The existence of such a biased expression (which was OK at a certain stage of history) defining those who work for gender equality seems like asking for "women care" rather than overall communal synergy based on gender equality. Again, this is all implied by the name, the lack of precise definition, then by the practices of some irresponsible, ignorant or misinformed individuals/groups.


I have to admit that I myself became a man-hater at a certain stage of my life, because of all the violence and brutality practiced by and for men against women in the Middle East, but when I looked closer, I was stunned at realising the massive role of many women in sustaining aggressive masculine cultures. Women think of themselves as trophies or candy bars to be covered and protected, women who would "snatch" men from each other, women who are happy to commodify their bodies and women who get violent against each other to please men. I finally came to the conclusion that gender-equality may need self-liberation and empowerment rather than self patronizing.

Shocking: What makes women settle for such fake pride; being the highest shareholder!

Just look at the amount of money and fame a distinguished female scientist makes, compared to the wealth and fame made by silicon-stuffed* female entertainers, to know that women should work harder on liberating themselves while they ask for justice. Justice is a double-edged sword!

Again, it is not what feminism stands for that is the problem, it is what it seems to be standing for due to the biased name and the lack of consensus over the definition. It is time the term feminism gets firmly and terminally replaced by gender-equality (perhaps gender-equalism) and still be advocating women's right for equality when and where necessary; for the whole community to prosper!

 Relevant articles:
FGM & Circumcision: Two different battles.
* This is not about cosmetic surgery, and is not about a certain profession. All are respected. This is rather about voluntary self-commercialisation for profit or power, and is also about what women are comfortable to pride themselves in, while men prefer making professional and developmental progress.

Conservation of the Homo sapiens: The survival of the Wise; on the Cybernetics of education

ON THE SURVIVAL OF HUMAN SPECIES BY MEANS OF CYBERNETIC SELECTION

This book harnesses natural sciences to humanities vigorously through cybernetics, to construct a holistic expression of the Real-living-systems which would work for educators and environmental ethicists

ON INTERNATIONAL_CURRICULA EDUCATORS WEBSITE

All copyrights reserved

Do NOTcopy from this blog without a prior written permission from the author

First published on 4/42014

هوموسيبيان هو الإسم العلمي للبشر كسلالة من ضمن سلالات الكائنات الحية على الأرض. كتاب "الحفاظ على البشرية" يبين أن الإنسان، وإن تشابه عضوياً مع باقي الكائنات، إلا أنه يتميز بالقدرة على السيبرنطيكا. الكتاب يشرح دور هذه القدرة في بناء الهوية البشرية وإعادة صياغة البيئة. وهو يشرح بشكل علمي دور التعليم في صياغة الضمير الإنساني وإعادة صياغة الأشياء. هذا الكتاب في تكامل العلوم والفلسفات.

Science and Theology - A book

This book is on the unity of sciences and people.


All copyrights reserved.
Do NOT copy from this blog without prior permission from the author.