Re: LS Power and the MOQ

From: Jonathan B. Marder (marder@agri.huji.ac.il)
Date: Fri Apr 09 1999 - 09:10:04 BST


Hi LilaQs,

John and Jason both responded to my comment that
cooperation is favoured by nature because it is more competitive.

JASON:
>Please qualify
>this. At a biological level, competition is something like dynamic
quality.
>Barring cetain symbiotic relationships though, I can't really think of
an
>example where cooperation exists in nature. Nature is almost
exclusively a
>competitive situation. Secondly, why and how does "nature favor
>cooperation"? Please, what are you talking about?
>

I am surprised I should need to explain this. A multicellular organism
is a cooperative assembly of individual cells, a colony is a cooperative
assembly of individuals, and an ecosystem is a cooperative interaction
of many different types of organisms. This last one is interesting
because it makes it clear that the interaction is both cooperative and
competitive at the same time.

In MoQ terms, we could take a good look at the biological and social
levels. I have periodically stated that conflicts which arise within one
of Pirsig's "levels" are mediated at a higher level, or even that the
higher level is DEFINED by the interactions at a lower level. This is
very clearly represented in human terms by the biological and social
levels. The social level is entirely composed of a set of patterns which
govern how individuals interact. The interactions may be competitive,
but they are also cooperative in creating society.

Jason continues:-
>Also, you say that through coop., the weak become strong.
>Hmmm.... who are "the weak"? And more importantly,
>cooperation towards what? If "the weak" are this way
>because of ignorance or stupidity, then how would they know
>"what" to work towards?

Well, I'd consider a single ant pretty weak and insignificant. But ants
have evolved and flourished as a species because of their colonial
organization. They can build large anthills and strip bare the carcass
of a large animal. I'd call that power!
They didn't "work towards" achieving this impressive cooperative
organization - the evolutionary process "selected" this strategy because
it was successful i.e. powerful.

I'm not sure what's objectionable in all this - Jason?

BTW, let me again advertise my essay on Causality in the Science
Philosophy part of my web page at
http://www.agri.huji.ac.il/~marder which I think is highly relevant to
this discussion.
(There have been some recent changes, notably an addition which deals
with evolution - thanks to those who provided their critical comments).

Jonathan

MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:40 GMT