Beyond Desartes and Newton: Recovering life and humanity

Attempts to ‘naturalize’ phenomenology challenge both traditional phenomenology and traditional approaches to cognitive science. They challenge Edmund Husserl’s rejection of naturalism and his attempt to establish phenomenology as a foundational transcendental discipline, and they challenge efforts to explain cognition through mainstream science. While appearing to be a retreat from the bold claims made for phenomenology, it is really its triumph. Naturalized phenomenology is spearheading a successful challenge to the heritage of Cartesian dualism. This converges with the reaction against Cartesian thought within science itself. Descartes divided the universe between res cogitans, thinking substances, and res extensa, the mechanical world. The latter won with Newton and we have, in most of objective science since, literally lost our mind, hence our humanity. Despite Darwin, biologists remain children of Newton, and dream of a grand theory that is epistemologically complete and would allow lawful entailment of the evolution of the biosphere. This dream is no longer tenable. We now have to recognize that science and scientists are within and part of the world we are striving to comprehend, as proponents of endophysics have argued, and that physics, biology and mathematics have to be reconceived accordingly. Interpreting quantum mechanics from this perspective is shown to both illuminate conscious experience and reveal new paths for its further development. In biology we must now justify the use of the word “function”. As we shall see, we cannot prestate the ever new biological functions that arise and constitute the very phase space of evolution. Hence, we cannot mathematize the detailed becoming of the biosphere, nor write differential equations for functional variables we do not know ahead of time, nor integrate those equations, so no laws “entail” evolution. The dream of a grand theory fails. In place of entailing laws, a post-entailing law explanatory framework is proposed in which Actuals arise in evolution that constitute new boundary conditions that are enabling constraints that create new, typically unprestatable, Adjacent Possible opportunities for further evolution, in which new Actuals arise, in a persistent becoming. Evolution flows into a typically unprestatable succession of Adjacent Possibles. Given the concept of function, the concept of functional closure of an organism making a living in its world, becomes central. Implications for patterns in evolution include historical reconstruction, and statistical laws such as the distribution of extinction events, or species per genus, and the use of formal cause, not efficient cause, laws

Dynamics of a birth-death process based on combinatorial innovation

A feature of human creativity is the ability to take a subset of existing items (e.g. objects, ideas, or techniques) and combine them in various ways to give rise to new items, which, in turn, fuel further growth. Occasionally, some of these items may also disappear (extinction). We model this process by a simple stochastic birth--death model, with non-linear combinatorial terms in the growth coefficients to capture the propensity of subsets of items to give rise to new items. In its simplest form, this model involves just two parameters $(P, \alpha)$. This process exhibits a characteristic 'hockey-stick' behaviour: a long period of relatively little growth followed by a relatively sudden 'explosive' increase. We provide exact expressions for the mean and variance of this time to explosion and compare the results with simulations. We then generalise our results to allow for more general parameter assignments, and consider possible applications to data involving human productivity and creativity.Comment: 21 pages, 4 figure

Adaptive walks in a gene network model of morphogenesis: insights into the Cambrian explosion

The emergence of complex patterns of organization close to the Cambrian boundary is known to have happened over a (geologically) short period of time. It involved the rapid diversification of body plans and stands as one of the major transitions in evolution. How it took place is a controversial issue. Here we explore this problem by considering a simple model of pattern formation in multicellular organisms. By modeling gene network-based morphogenesis and its evolution through adaptive walks, we explore the question of how combinatorial explosions might have been actually involved in the Cambrian event. Here we show that a small amount of genetic complexity including both gene regulation and cell-cell signaling allows one to generate an extraordinary repertoire of stable spatial patterns of gene expression compatible with observed anteroposterior patterns in early development of metazoans. The consequences for the understanding of the tempo and mode of the Cambrian event are outlined.Comment: to appear in International Journal of Developmental Biology, special issue on Evo-Devo (2003

The phase transition in random catalytic sets

The notion of (auto) catalytic networks has become a cornerstone in understanding the possibility of a sudden dramatic increase of diversity in biological evolution as well as in the evolution of social and economical systems. Here we study catalytic random networks with respect to the final outcome diversity of products. We show that an analytical treatment of this longstanding problem is possible by mapping the problem onto a set of non-linear recurrence equations. The solution of these equations show a crucial dependence of the final number of products on the initial number of products and the density of catalytic production rules. For a fixed density of rules we can demonstrate the existence of a phase transition from a practically unpopulated regime to a fully populated and diverse one. The order parameter is the number of final products. We are able to further understand the origin of this phase transition as a crossover from one set of solutions from a quadratic equation to the other.Comment: 7 pages, ugly eps files due to arxiv restriction

What is consciousness? Artificial intelligence, real intelligence, quantum mind and qualia

We approach the question ‘What is consciousness?’ in a new way, not as Descartes’ ‘systematic doubt’, but as how organisms find their way in their world. Finding one’s way involves finding possible uses of features of the world that might be beneficial or avoiding those that might be harmful. ‘Possible uses of X to accomplish Y’ are ‘affordances’. The number of uses of X is indefinite (or unknown), the different uses are unordered, are not listable, and are not deducible from one another. All biological adaptations are either affordances seized by heritable variation and selection or, far faster, by the organism acting in its world finding uses of X to accomplish Y. Based on this, we reach rather astonishing conclusions: 1. Artificial general intelligence based on universal Turing machines (UTMs) is not possible, since UTMs cannot ‘find’ novel affordances. 2. Brain-mind is not purely classical physics for no classical physics system can be an analogue computer whose dynamical behaviour can be isomorphic to ‘possible uses’. 3. Brain-mind must be partly quantum—supported by increasing evidence at 6.0 to 7.3 sigma. 4. Based on Heisenberg’s interpretation of the quantum state as ‘potentia’ converted to ‘actuals’ by measurement, where this interpretation is not a substance dualism, a natural hypothesis is that mind actualizes potentia. This is supported at 5.2 sigma. Then mind’s actualizations of entangled brain-mind-world states are experienced as qualia and allow ‘seeing’ or ‘perceiving’ of uses of X to accomplish Y. We can and do jury-rig. Computers cannot. 5. Beyond familiar quantum computers, we discuss the potentialities of trans-Turing systems

Emergence of Organisms.

Since early cybernetics studies by Wiener, Pask, and Ashby, the properties of living systems are subject to deep investigations. The goals of this endeavour are both understanding and building: abstract models and general principles are sought for describing organisms, their dynamics and their ability to produce adaptive behavior. This research has achieved prominent results in fields such as artificial intelligence and artificial life. For example, today we have robots capable of exploring hostile environments with high level of self-sufficiency, planning capabilities and able to learn. Nevertheless, the discrepancy between the emergence and evolution of life and artificial systems is still huge. In this paper, we identify the fundamental elements that characterize the evolution of the biosphere and open-ended evolution, and we illustrate their implications for the evolution of artificial systems. Subsequently, we discuss the most relevant issues and questions that this viewpoint poses both for biological and artificial systems

Beyond the Newtonian Paradigm: A Statistical Mechanics of Emergence

Since Newton, all classical and quantum physics depends upon the "Newtonian Paradigm". Here the relevant variables of the system are identified. The boundary conditions creating the phase space of all possible values of the variables are defined. Then, given any initial condition, the differential equations of motion are integrated to yield an entailed trajectory in the phase space. It is fundamental to the Newtonian Paradigm that the set of possibilities that constitute the phase space is always definable and fixed ahead of time. All of this fails for the diachronic evolution of ever new adaptations in any biosphere. The central reason is that living cells achieve Constraint Closure and construct themselves. Living cells, evolving via heritable variation and Natural selection, adaptively construct new in the universe possibilities. The new possibilities are opportunities for new adaptations thereafter seized by heritable variation and Natural Selection. Surprisingly, we can neither define nor deduce the evolving phase spaces ahead of time. We can use no mathematics based on Set Theory to do so. These ever-new adaptations with ever-new relevant variables constitute the ever-changing phase space of evolving biospheres. Because of this, evolving biospheres are entirely outside the Newtonian Paradigm. One consequence is that for any universe such as ours there can be no Final Theory that entails all that comes to exist. The implications are large. We face a third major transition in science beyond the Pythagorean dream that "All is Number". We must give up deducing the diachronic evolution of the biosphere. All of physics, classical and quantum, however, apply to the analysis of existing life, a synchronic analysis. We begin to better understand the emergent creativity of an evolving biosphere. Thus, we are on the edge of inventing a physics-like new statistical mechanics of emergence