[MD] Social Ants?

[Horse]

Hi Arlo, Case, Steve and other interested parties

I'm still considering much of what follows so any comments would be 
enormously appreciated.

I've been following the recent discussions about individuals, ants, 
bee's and other related stuff and thinking about the way in which you've 
been looking at these ideas. The idea of apparent 'societies' of cells, 
ants etc. doesn't seem to make sense in terms of the MoQ.
I was thinking to myself "How can a group of similar entities working 
together which, apparently produces something greater than the sum of 
its parts not be a society?". Then a thought popped into my head - 
they're not societies of anything - they're networks!
I'm not sure if this will help in any way but it just seemed so obvious. 
A society is a particular form of network but a network isn't 
necessarily a society. Most of the things you've been discussing here 
might be explained in this way. And the other interesting thing about 
networks is that when you think in these terms you have to include the 
connections between them - i.e. a network is a set of nodes and their 
connections. Where you gents have been referring to 
atoms/cells/bees/ants/individuals etc in past posts you could insert the 
term 'node'. The relationships between atoms and cells and bodies etc. 
are the network connections. Nodes don't generally exist in isolation.

An atom is a collection of sub-atomic particles (nodes) and their 
relationships or ways in which they're connected. So an atom is (in 
simple terms) a connected network of protons, electrons and neutrons.

I'll use shorthand from here on. For 'connected network of X' read 
'collection of nodes of type A and/or B and/or C etc. and the way in 
which they're connected' - or something like that.

A molecule is a connected network of atoms.
A cell is a connected network of molecules (actually if you consider 
Lynn Margulis's - or maybe that should be Konstantin Mereschkowsky's - 
symbiogenesis idea then a cell is a symbiotic grouping of subnetworks of 
other items).
A body/organism is a connected network of cells.
A hive/nest is a connected network of bee/wasp/ant bodies.
A society is a connected network of primates/humans !!! .....

And so on - I assume you get the general drift of my thinking.

Complexity and emergent systems also come into this view as you can 
think in terms of multiply connected (complex) networks emerging from 
lower order or simpler networks.
Instead of thinking of atoms, molecules, cells, bodies etc. think of 
inorganic/organic/social/intellectual patterns of value and how each is 
more complex and emerges from the previous level.
Each of the MoQ's levels could be considered as networked patterns of 
values varying in complexity.
That may (or may not - assuming you're still with me) go some way to 
accounting for static patterns of value but I was also thinking about 
where DQ fits in?
Consider Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela's thesis on autopoiesis:

======================

from wikipedia

"...the term autopoiesis refers to the dynamics of a non-equilibrium ( 
or non-equilibrium thermodynamic (NET) (Dyke, Charles, 1988, ch. 9)) 
system; that is, organized states (sometimes also called dissipative 
structures) that remain stable for long periods of time despite matter 
and energy continually flowing through them."

"From this very general point of view, the notion of autopoiesis is 
often associated with that of self-organization."

=======================

A stable system in a state of non-equilibrium could well be thought of 
as static patterns of value within a dynamic system - which seems, to me 
anyway, similar to the way Pirsig describes the SQ/DQ relationship.

As you can probably tell from the disjointed state of the above this is 
just a brief outline/sketch of my thoughts. I'm still thinking about 
this, tossing various ideas about and reading various related items but 
this germ of an idea might possibly be useful. Anyone fancy trying to 
expand this idea into something workable or coherent? Let me know what 
you think.
Anyway, this post's getting far too long so I'll sign off, don my 
asbestos suit and await any replies that may be generated.

Cheers folks


Horse