I think there is a metaphor to be made between the variation supplied by individual variation to the group and that supplied by cell variation of the immune system to the individual. Please see attached. Sorry if this is a reposting. Having trouble with the interface.
Sure, that's possible (and thanks for the paper!). We are (or I am, at least) very sympathetic to group selection arguments for human evolution (see attached for an example). The current project is specifically based on explaining not just the distribution of traits, but the characterization of their emergent, synergistic properties. This creates trouble for standard group selection model, but it's on the table.
Oh, that looks like a splendid paper. Thank you so much!
The paper I sent is not particularly easy, I fear and it's many pages ... near the conclusion in fact ... before it gets to the part that is relevant to yours. The basic argument is that the only way that selection can favor differentiation is by favoring differentiability. Eg, immune systems, bee hives, neurons, human development etc. Since retirement I have gotten lost in the philosophy of Charles Peirce, and nobody has paid much attention to the paper, which i thought was one of my best. I kind of FORCED Wilson and Sober to read it, but neither saw much in it, so I would love to have a critical reading of it, if you could spare the time. In the meantime, I will try to have some thoughts on yours. BBS. Very impressive.
All the best,
Nick Thompson
Genetic group selection is a very weak selective force because of migration between groups. Cultural group selection is potentially a much stronger force, as Smaldino's paper also indicates. One aspect of "personality" that is particularly important for group cohesion and group defense is authoritarianism. Authoritarianism was originally defined by psychologists as an aspect of personality, but later research has shown that it is better explained as a response to perceived group danger. My own research shows that war and other kinds of collective danger has a strong psychological effect. It makes people support a strong leader, strict discipline, and a hierarchical political structure. This psychological effect in individual members of a social group (tribe) has strong emergent effects for the culture and organization of the whole group. See https://www.openbookpublishers.com/product/657
Thanks Nicholas Simonds Thompson ! Your paper also looks very interesting -- I hadn't come across it. I've earmarked it for a read.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking