Good point. Identifying the existence of a pattern is one thing. Determining whether the application of that pattern is, say, "good" or "bad" is something else. For example, people get ill. Identifying the pattern of SIR of various illnesses is a totally different than: "Is it good or bad that people get sick"? Or, is it better to treat illnesses than prevent them? Or, does the overuse of antibiotics create super bacteria?
It is apparent to me that I tend to focus on the former issues, while many in our group wrestle over issues of the latter kind. I'm comfortable with that division of labor. Ken > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels > Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 8:59 AM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The quintessence of complexity thinking > > Ken Lloyd wrote: > > Specifically, if an ANN can recognize a coupling pattern in > a network > > that gives rise to synergistic behavior which is congruent with > > similar coupling patterns in other networks - it has > abstracted a new > > patterned, second-order rule (meta-rule). > > > Sure, one could imagine using an ABM to study when meta-rules > increase synergistic interactions vs. the kinds of situations > where dropping them into a population only disrupts an > evolved ecology. The answer is > probably of the form `it depends'. An example that comes to > mind was > the damage done by bringing western agricultural practices to Bali.. > http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8186.html > > > ============================================================ > 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
