"think again of your biology as economic"

Vervaeke has done it again!!!

Episódio 30 - - Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Relevance Realization Meets Dynamical Systems Theory

A partir do minuto 32 já ouvi o vídeo três vezes!

A relação entre biologia e economia, tão cara a este blogue, expressa em toda a sua força.

A certa altura sorrio e percebo uma analogia que nunca tinha feito. A teoria da evolução não requer a existência de um Arquitecto Celeste capaz do design inteligente. E eu pensei nos que acreditam que um qualquer governo sabe qual é a melhor estratégia a seguir pelos negócios. 

O que se segue é poesia bio-económica:

"… what I want to argue is: there's no essential design on fitted ness.

Some things are fitted in this sense precisely because they are big, some because they are small, some because they are hard, some because they are soft, some because they're long-lived, some because they are short-lived, some because they proliferate greatly, others because they take care of a few young, some are fast, some are slow, some are singular cellular, some are multicellular. [Moi ici: Isto é sobre Mongo!!! Uma paisagem competitiva super enrugada. Cada vez me convenço mais que o modelo económico do século XX foi um fenómeno passageiro. BTW, os despedimentos em curso em organiações como a Meta fazem-me recordar o que escrevi sobre as plataformas e o "não é winner-take-all"]

Like nothing. Nothing because the answer for that of course is deep and profound because the environment is so complex and differentiated and dynamically changing that niches, ways in which you can fit into the environment in order to right promote your survival autopoietic, are varied and changing. See, this is Darwin's insight, there is no essence to design, and there is no essence to fitted ness. If you try and come up with a theory of how organisms have their design, I'm using this in quotation marks, in terms of trying to determine or derive it from the essence of design you are doomed because it doesn't exist.

Darwin realizes; he didn't need such a theory. He needed a theory about how what's relevant, in this biological sense, but a theory about how an organism is fitted. How it is constantly being designed, and redefined by a dynamic process. See, fitted ness is always redefining itself, reconstituting itself, it is something that is constantly within a process of self-organization because there is no essence, and there is no final design on fitted ness. [Moi ici: Isto é voltar ao meu Verão de 2007 e à leitura de Beinhocker - "So who was the winner? What was the best strategy in the end?"]  Fitted ness has to constantly be redesigning itself in a self-organizing fashion so it can constantly pick up on the way a in which the world is constantly varying and dynamically changing. [Moi ici: Se mais empresas percebessem isto ... se mais empresas percebessem a mensagem da Red Queen - Tem de se correr para ficar no mesmo sítio!!! Se mais empresas percebessem que a sobrevivência não é mandatória e que há que trabalhar para merecer um futuro. Um futuro que será necessariamente diferente do presente. Um futuro que sorrirá a quem melhor se preparou para ele. Se mais empresas percebessem que têm de correr como o Legolas da imagem acima, porque é mesmo isto que acontece, mesmo quando o "mar parece calmo"] 

There is no essence to fitted ness, but I don't need a theory of fitness all I need is a theory of how fitted ness is constantly being realized in a self-organizing fashion. That's exactly what the theory of evolution is."

Depois, próximo do minuto 43:

"think again of your biology as economic. This is again part of Darwin's great insight. Now you know, don't be confused. Here, when a lot of times when people hear economic they hear financial economy, but that's not what an economy is, an economy is a self-organization, a self-organizing system that is constantly dealing with the distribution of goods and services."