You are describing culture and the problem of culture change - I am
reading into your post a description of culture and the problem of
culture change.
An extended metaphor:
Begin with Hopfield's topographic, metaphorical, explanation of
neural net function. The topography is shaped by the weights
assigned to each node in the network. Inputs are akin to rain
falling on a landscape, flowing downhill and collecting in low spots
which are the outputs of the system. Basic feedback mechanisms
allow for changing of weights based on "correct" correspondence
between inputs and outputs.
Consider the effect of making node weights dependent on the constancy
of inputs (constancy = consistency + frequency) and allow for outputs
to alter the context generating the inputs to increase or decrease
constancy. Now you have a continuous mult-directional information
flows - a model of co-evolution of context and agent. You see the
same kind of patterns as are evident in observation of the
interaction of individuals with their culture.
Every time an individual adopts a specific behavior (or dons a
particular form of clothing, or places a particular idol in her
household, or sings a particular jingle) constancy of inputs changes,
the topography changes, and the likelyhood of particular outputs is
altered.
"The high leverage interventions we can take to alter the system's
behavior" = anything that affects constancy - which is everything,
unfortunately. Interventions always arise from an individual act and
there is not way to determine in advance which individual act is
likely to be replicated by others in sufficient numbers to
precipitate a tipping point and a macro-change in culture (the
enveloping system).
You can observe some "tipping points" and predict general properties
of a resulting macro-change but not a lot. Some examples from
anthropology:
Individual farmers generate a storable food surplus (better
agronomy, better preservation, whatever) - tipping point is roughly
a years supply of stored food for the community - result is
invention of organized religion with specialist priests followed
shortly by some sort of "kingship" supported by the organized
church.
Individuals acquire rapid mobility (roughly one day's horseback ride
in less than an hour) - tipping point is roughly half the population
having this access - result is sexual revolution, breakdown of
nuclear extended family, and degeneration of "traditional values."
davew
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 11:15:50 -0600, "John Goekler"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Ah . . . the Zen of Complexity. (Or, is that the Complexity of Zen?)
>
>
>
> What about continuous multi-directionality of information flow as each
> agent
> / entity continuously scans its horizons, assigns meanings to identified
> patterns (accurately or not!), sends that out over its network(s) and
> adapts
> its behavior according to the degree of perturbation? (Thus also
> impacting
> the behavior of the larger systems within which it is nested, which may
> in
> turn engender pushback or other repressive adaptations.)
>
>
>
> Further, I would suggest that in Complex Adaptive Social Systems (the
> kind
> we all live and work in) structures generate patterns of behavior, but
> patterns can also be structures. (To complicate it further, structures
> can
> also be seen as the 'physical' manifestation of relationships among the
> agents, continually arising, being present and operational for a time,
> then
> condensing and dissolving to make way for new relationships and
> structures.)
>
>
>
> This aligns with the observation by Fontana and others that, initially,
> agents shape networks. Later, networks shape agents, often to the point
> that the agents can be exchanged in significant numbers without
> substantially altering the behavior of the system.
>
>
>
> The classic example of this is how change initiatives in organizations so
> often excite the organism's 'immune response' which then stamps out the
> invading idea / carrier.
>
>
>
> At that stage, the question (in my mind) becomes, 'If the system's
> reinforcement of its patterns have become the dominant initial condition,
> what then are the high leverage interventions we can take to alter the
> system's behavior?'
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/3/07, Tom Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Robert:
> >
> > It seems to me that there is usually (always?) bi-directionality involved
> > in a dynamic system, especially between the individual and the collective.
> > The collective often (Usually? Always?) provides a context that generates
> > and governs data flow, a time frame, rugged landscapes or not, etc. Such
> > data flows can hinder or enhance the individual's decisions and actions and,
> > possibly, those of the collective.
> >
> > -Tom
> >
> >
> > On 6/3/07, Robert Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Interesting paper!
> > >
> > > I do like seeing the phrase:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Individual-based models (IBMs) allow researchers to study how system
> > > level properties emerge from the adaptive behaviour of individuals
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The collective presupposes the individual.
> > >
> > > Information and properties of the part flow to the whole—not the
> > > other
> > > way around.
> > >
> > > The cause-and-effect arrow of implication is one-way.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Robert Howard
> > > Phoenix, Arizona
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
> > > Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts
> > > *Sent:* Friday, June 01, 2007 11:25 AM
> > > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> > > *Subject:* [FRIAM] Fwd: ABM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > FRIAMers,
> > >
> > > I received this today from several of my co-workers and thought I'd pass
> > > it on.
> > >
> > > I still can't help but feeling that in general, *way* too many words are
> > > being used to describe ABM (and IBM) methodologies. The underlying
> > > concept
> > > of object-oriented software design as the basis for ABM simulation
> > > architecture is just so straight forward and intuitive that I am
> > > repeatedly
> > > amazed at how people continue to make such a big, mysterious deal out of
> > > it.
> > >
> > >
> > > But, I suppose that's just me, and my opinion...
> > >
> > > --Doug
> > >
> > > --
> > > Doug Roberts, RTI International
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 505-455-7333 - Office
> > > 505-670-8195 - Cell
> > >
> > >
> > > ****************************************************
> > >
> > > This is a very interesting resource re: Agent Based Modeling.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.openabm.org/site/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Note also the current efforts re: ODD (Overview, Design Concepts and
> > > Details) –based descriptions (cf. attached manuscript).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ============================================================
> > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ==========================================
> > J. T. Johnson
> > Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> > www.analyticjournalism.com
> > 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> > http://www.jtjohnson.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
> > To change something, build a new model that makes the
> > existing model obsolete."
> > -- Buckminster Fuller
> > ==========================================
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> >
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
