首页> 外文期刊>Cybernetics & Human Knowing >Waddington, Bateson, Evolution, and Cybernetics
【24h】

Waddington, Bateson, Evolution, and Cybernetics

机译:Waddington,Bateson,Evolution和控制论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Both Waddington and Bateson, long term friends since student days, argued that genetic effectiveness was part of a more complex model than neo-Darwinian notions of natural selection plus mutation provide. Waddington urged an approach to evolution in which causal change is investigated at a whole range of different loci-an epigenetic landscape-including situations where patterns of learning in phenotypes evoke processes by which phenotypic response to the environment is overtaken by a genotype at a later point of time. Waddington called this genetic assimilation. It did not sit well with Bateson. Bateson acknowledged that Waddington's laboratory simulation of Baldwin processes (or genetic assimilation) was valid, but argued that this would not occur as a general process in the natural world since a single feedback of the same logical type could not carry both normal adjustments to environmental change, normal adaptation, and carry feedbacks about systemic change. At a later stage Bateson would reject Waddington's argument for a socio-genetics on the grounds that here too is a confusion of logical types. Cultural domains exhibit forms of feedback different from either the somatic or the genetic. "The Role of Somatic Change in Evolution" is all about this dispute but raises difficulties for the reader because its personal history is unexpressed. For a while their dispute became quite bitter, so in this article another developmental biologist, K. S. Thompson, is cited as an imaginary referee. Thompson shows that there is an ongoing circularity, in which processes occurring at one level contribute to constraints at another level, and recursive feedback between the genetic and epigenetic components is required in any complex system for it to anticipate how increasing information will affect its own future pattern.
机译:沃丁顿(Waddington)和贝特森(Bateson)都是学生时代以来的长期朋友,他们都认为,与新达尔文主义的自然选择加突变理论相比,遗传有效性是更复杂的模型的一部分。沃丁顿(Waddington)敦促采用一种进化方法,其中在整个不同的基因座范围(表观遗传景观)下研究因果变化,包括表型学习模式引发过程的过程,在此过程中,对环境的表型响应被稍后的基因型取代时间。沃丁顿称这种遗传同化。与贝特森的关系不佳。 Bateson承认Waddington对鲍德温过程(或遗传同化)的实验室模拟是有效的,但他认为这不会在自然界中作为一般过程发生,因为同一个逻辑类型的单个反馈不能同时对环境变化进行正常调整,正常适应并传达有关系统性变化的反馈。在稍后的阶段,贝特森会否定沃丁顿关于社会遗传学的观点,理由是这也是逻辑类型的混淆。文化领域表现出与体细胞或遗传学不同的反馈形式。 “躯体变化在进化中的作用”全都是关于这一争议的,但是由于它的个人历史没有表达出来,给读者带来了困难。一段时间以来,他们的争执变得十分痛苦,因此在本文中,另一位发育生物学家K. S. Thompson被引为假想的裁判。汤普森(Thompson)表明,存在一种持续的循环性,其中一个层次上发生的过程会在另一个层次上产生约束,并且在任何复杂系统中都需要遗传和表观遗传成分之间的递归反馈,以便它可以预测不断增加的信息将如何影响其自身的未来图案。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Cybernetics & Human Knowing》 |2016年第3期|9-27|共19页
  • 作者

    Peter Harries-Jones;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Anthropology, York University, Ontario;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:27:29

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号