Re: Social Fitness and Information (2)

To : Gottfried Stockinger
Sorry, the previous messsae was an error !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My answer is below.
>
> Werner Ebeling wrote:
>
> >Just a little remark from the side of a physicist:
> I cannot see that the concept of fitness is now "obsolete".
> In the opposite, I believe it is still of great actuality
> in spite of the fact that so far nobody is able to quantify it
> in a way we know from theoretical physics i.e. as Hamilton-principle.<
>
> [Stockinger]
>
> Do Hamilton functions (sorry I�m not very familiar with them) supply
> fitness quantification formulas? Maybe in the way we could use them or
> adapt them at a sociological level, in combination with info-theoretical
> aspects (?). Please, if possible, may you give a short explanation?
>
WEB: Hamilton function are definitely not an appropriate tool since
Hamiltonian systems are reversible. Evolution is always an irreversible
process, i.e. it cannot have an Hamiltonian. One has to look for
optimization principles with irreversible character.
These matters are discussed in our books
Ebeling/Engel/Feistel: Physik der Evolutionsprozesse, Berlin 1990
Feistel/Ebeling: Evolution of Complex systems, Dordrecht 1989
I still have a few exemplars which I could send to interested people
in exchange to any other interesting book.
Regards
W. Ebeling

> >I think we have to continue to work on the concept of fitness and in this
> sense I would support here the view of Stockinger about fitness.<
>
> [St]
> A (post- or neo-)darwinian view of fitness, as it has "survived" until
> today, seems realy still to be "fit" enough to continue to work with. In
> sociology, of course, one deals with a very complex value-landscape or
> value-systems, as Artigiani and others have already pointed out (naming it
> VEMs) . They tried to show its evolution by information-inputs coming from
> both, the environment and the social system itself, and did well.
> To go on, in the evolution of such a value-system (institutionalized in
> habits,
> roles, rituals...) certain values and roles etc. are selected because of
> their fitness (to deal with human problems in everyday life), others are
> not.
> But, what really matters is that social evolution historically led to a
> greater variety in the value-landscape. VEMs which have been repressed
> (declared non-fit) are now admitted (declared fit). So one may not talk
> only of the survival of the fittest, but of their (say geometrical)
> multiplication, .
> Of course, there are several theoretical considerations which guide the
> research on information society and its evolution. Only some of them,
> although important ones IMO, deal with the role of social fitness linked
> to
> social variety.
> Using certain analogies to biological transformations, important elements
> for the transformation of information-guided behaviour systems (cultures)
> may be observed. (Maybe Ebeling can come up with physical analogies?). A
> variety of elements respond for changes in the social value-system of all
> kinds of organisations like states, partys, enterprises, groups, clans,
> hords, insofar as these changes aim the optimation of functional
> effectivity in dependence of the variety and its use by the social system's
> elements (events, acts).
> Collectivities ("societies") are able to explore socio-cultural
> information variety to "cause" changes. They instruct and functionalise
> emerging information through feedback in such a way, that they get better
> chances to reach certain local values of "fitness" and get "selected". One
> may say, that they are fitter in the sense of "better instructed".
> If social change and variety are optimised, the replication of the system
> works close to a "treshold of error", that means that transformation
> processes are driven to a dynamic equilibrium between stabiliy and
> creativity A variety of new VEM-operators emerges. Former dominant VEMs
> are still reproducted, but a lot of other alternatives, stabilised by
> mutual separation are also represented in a survivable concentration and
> quantity.
> A more flexible society (a more "free" one?) emerges. And its IMO fitter to
> survive within the new circumstances (about which we may still talk about).
>
>
> Regards
>
> Gottfried Stockinger
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Prof. W. Ebeling ebeling@physik.hu-berlin.de
> Humboldt-Universitaet Berlin phone: +49/(0)30-2093 7636
> Institut fuer Physik fax: +49/(0)30-2093 7638
> Invalidenstrasse 110
> D-10115 Berlin
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. W. Ebeling ebeling@physik.hu-berlin.de
Humboldt-Universitaet Berlin phone: +49/(0)30-2093 7636
Institut fuer Physik fax: +49/(0)30-2093 7638
Invalidenstrasse 110
D-10115 Berlin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Mon Oct 26 13:20:48 1998