A Mechanism for Emergence of Cooperation, Complexity and Intelligence in Evolution. A Novel Perspective on the Ontology and Teleology of the Universe is Also Examined.

  • Initiative for Interstellar Studies
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.
To read the file of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.


Evolution, teleology, ontology, cosmogeny and cooperation, complexity and intelligence.

No file available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the file of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
Major Cooperative Evolutionary Transitions occur when smaller-scale entities cooperate together to give rise to larger-scale entities that evolve and adapt as coherent wholes. Key examples of cooperative transitions are the emergence of the complex eukaryote cell from communities of simpler cells, the transition from eukaryote cells to multicellular organisms, and the organization of humans into complex, modern societies. A number of attempts have been made to develop a general theory of the major cooperative transitions. This paper begins by critiquing key aspects of these previous attempts. Largely, these attempts comprise poorly-integrated collections of separate models that were each originally developed to explain particular transitions. In contrast, this paper sets out to identify processes that are common to all cooperative transitions. It develops an alternative theoretical framework known as Management Theory. This general framework suggests that all major cooperative transitions are the result of the emergence of powerful, evolvable ‘managers’ that derive benefit from using their power to organize smaller-scale entities into larger-scale cooperatives. Management Theory is a contribution to the development of a general, “all levels” understanding of major cooperative transitions that is capable of identifying those features that are level-specific, those that are common across levels and those that are involved in trends across levels.
Full-text available
The nature of the universe and the origin of life have always been the main questions of mankind. For many years, it has been asked whether life exists elsewhere in the universe, and if exists what is its structures and forms. However, more important question is that whether the universe itself is a living creature or just an inanimate space. To accept that we are living in an inanimate cosmos, it should be confirmed that the characteristics of living organisms are not appreciable for our universe. However, the problem is that exact definition of life is somewhat controversial in the scientific community. In terms of biology, there is a general agreement that the features growth, shape, system organization, and replication/reproduction are the minimum characteristics of a living system. Here, an overview of the characteristics of a living organism is given and then they will be compared to the universe features.
Full-text available This open access book offers comprehensive coverage on Ordered Fuzzy Numbers, providing readers with both the basic information and the necessary expertise to use them in a variety of real-world applications. The respective chapters, written by leading researchers, discuss the main techniques and applications, together with the advantages and shortcomings of these tools in comparison to other fuzzy number representation models. Primarily intended for engineers and researchers in the field of fuzzy arithmetic, the book also offers a valuable source of basic information on fuzzy models and an easy-to-understand reference guide to their applications for advanced undergraduate students, operations researchers, modelers and managers alike.
Full-text available
A model is presented to account for the natural selection of what is termed reciprocally altruistic behavior. The model shows how selection can operate against the cheater (non-reciprocator) in the system. Three instances of altruistic behavior are discussed, the evolution of which the model can explain: (1) behavior involved in cleaning symbioses; (2) warning cries in birds; and (3) human reciprocal altruism. Regarding human reciprocal altruism, it is shown that the details of the psychological system that regulates this altruism can be explained by the model. Specifically, friendship, dislike, moralistic aggression, gratitude, sympathy, trust, suspicion, trustworthiness, aspects of guilt, and some forms of dishonesty and hypocrisy can be explained as important adaptations to regulate the altruistic system. Each individual human is seen as possessing altruistic and cheating tendencies, the expression of which is sensitive to developmental variables that were selected to set the tendencies at a balance ap...
Conference Paper
Interoperation is the core of complex systems evolution: the science of complexity can provide useful hints for relevant characteristics of Enterprise Interoperability. An isolated system, according to the second law of thermodynamics, inevitably gets to state of maximum entropy, maximum homogeneity and minimum potential energy: it cannot evolve any more. Taking the universe as a system, cosmologists generally agree that as a whole it is running down this course. But there are “islands of complexity”, systems that instead of getting simpler and simpler find a way of interoperate and organize structures that decrease internal entropy, at the expense of their context. Living organisms are the best example of these interoperating systems. Their evolution is a story of competition for resources and of cooperation for the best exploitation of the context. Knowledge is the opposite of entropy, in the sense that to maintain or increase its internal order a system must “know” how to structure its components. Every organism operates on its environment by building and using models, so that modelling is the main tool for interoperation (each organism is part of the environment of all other ones). In this sense knowledge is this capability of building effective models. Some aspects of the way organisms use modelling to compete and to interoperate can be translated to systems interoperability process and tools.
A fuzzy restriction may be visualized as an elastic constraint on the values that may be assigned to a variable. In terms of such restrictions, the meaning of a proposition of the form “x is P,” where x is the name of an object and P is a fuzzy set, may be expressed as a relational assignment equation of the form R(A(x)) = P, where A(x) is an implied attribute of x, R is a fuzzy restriction on x, and P is the unary fuzzy relation which is assigned to R. For example, “Stella is young,” where young is a fuzzy subset of the real line, translates into R(Age(Stella))= young. The calculus of fuzzy restrictions is concerned, in the main, with (a) translation of propositions of various types into relational assignment equations, and (b) the study of transformations of fuzzy restrictions which are induced by linguistic modifiers, truth-functional modifiers, compositions, projections and other operations. An important application of the calculus of fuzzy restrictions relates to what might be called approximate reasoning, that is, a type of reasoning which is neither very exact nor very inexact. The main ideas behind this application are outlined and illustrated by examples.
Prototype theory construes membership in a concept's extension as graded, determined by similarity to the concept's “best” exemplar (or by some other measure of central tendency). The present paper is concerned with the compatibility of this view of concept membership with two criteria of adequacy for theories of concepts. The first criterion concerns the relationship between complex concepts and their conceptual constituents. The second concerns the truth conditions for thoughts corresponding to simple inclusions.RésuméLa théorie du prototype considère qu'il existe des degrés d'appartenance à l'extension d'un concept déterminés par la similitude avec le “meilleur” exemplaire de ce concept (ou par quelqu'autre mesure de tendance centrale). Cet article envisage la compatibilité de cette proposition avec deux critères d'adéquation concernant les théories des concepts. Le premier critére concerne la relation entre les concepts complexes et leurs contribuants conceptuels. La seconde a trait aux conditions de vérité pour les propositions portant sur les inclusions simples.
The psychology of concepts has been undergoing significant changes since the early 1970s, when the classical view of concepts was seriously challenged by convincing experimental evidence that conceptual categories never have sharp boundaries. Some researchers recognized already in the early 1970s that fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic were potentially suitable for modeling of concepts and obtained encouraging results. This positive attitude abruptly changed in the early 1980s, and since that time fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic have been portrayed as problematic and unsuitable for representing and dealing with concepts. Our aim in this paper is to identify some of the most notorious claims regarding fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic that have propagated through the literature on psychology of concepts and to show that they are, by and large, false. We trace the origin and propagation of these claims within the literature in this area. It is shown in detail that these claims are consistently erroneous and that they are based on various misunderstandings, misconceptions, and oversights. The ultimate purpose of this paper is to document these various erroneous claims.
A major scientific revolution has begun, a new paradigm that rivals Darwin's theory in importance. At its heart is the discovery of the order that lies deep within the most complex of systems, from the origin of life, to the workings of giant corporations, to the rise and fall of great civilizations. And more than anyone else, this revolution is the work of one man, Stuart Kauffman, a MacArthur Fellow and visionary pioneer of the new science of complexity. Now, in At Home in the Universe , Kauffman brilliantly weaves together the excitement of intellectual discovery and a fertile mix of insights to give the general reader a fascinating look at this new science--and at the forces for order that lie at the edge of chaos.We all know of instances of spontaneous order in nature--an oil droplet in water forms a sphere, snowflakes have a six-fold symmetry. What we are only now discovering, Kauffman says, is that the range of spontaneous order is enormously greater than we had supposed. Indeed, self-organization is a great undiscovered principle of nature. But how does this spontaneous order arise? Kauffman contends that complexity itself triggers self-organization, or what he calls "order for free," that if enough different molecules pass a certain threshold of complexity, they begin to self-organize into a new entity--a living cell. Kauffman uses the analogy of a thousand buttons on a rug--join two buttons randomly with thread, then another two, and so on. At first, you have isolated pairs; later, small clusters; but suddenly at around the 500th repetition, a remarkable transformation occurs--much like the phase transition when water abruptly turns to ice--and the buttons link up in one giant network. Likewise, life may have originated when the mix of different molecules in the primordial soup passed a certain level of complexity and self-organized into living entities (if so, then life is not a highly improbable chance event, but almost inevitable). Kauffman uses the basic insight of "order for free" to illuminate a staggering range of phenomena. We see how a single-celled embryo can grow to a highly complex organism with over two hundred different cell types. We learn how the science of complexity extends Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection: that self-organization, selection, and chance are the engines of the biosphere. And we gain insights into biotechnology, the stunning magic of the new frontier of genetic engineering--generating trillions of novel molecules to find new drugs, vaccines, enzymes, biosensors, and more. Indeed, Kauffman shows that ecosystems, economic systems, and even cultural systems may all evolve according to similar general laws, that tissues and terra cotta evolve in similar ways. And finally, there is a profoundly spiritual element to Kauffman's thought. If, as he argues, life were bound to arise, not as an incalculably improbable accident, but as an expected fulfillment of the natural order, then we truly are at home in the universe. Kauffman's earlier volume, The Origins of Order , written for specialists, received lavish praise. Stephen Jay Gould called it "a landmark and a classic." And Nobel Laureate Philip Anderson wrote that "there are few people in this world who ever ask the right questions of science, and they are the ones who affect its future most profoundly. Stuart Kauffman is one of these." In At Home in the Universe , this visionary thinker takes you along as he explores new insights into the nature of life.
Prevalence of cooperation within groups of selfish individuals is puzzling in that it contradicts with the basic premise of natural selection. Favoring players with higher fitness, the latter is key for understanding the challenges faced by cooperators when competing with defectors. Evolutionary game theory provides a competent theoretical framework for addressing the subtleties of cooperation in such situations, which are known as social dilemmas. Recent advances point towards the fact that the evolution of strategies alone may be insufficient to fully exploit the benefits offered by cooperative behavior. Indeed, while spatial structure and heterogeneity, for example, have been recognized as potent promoters of cooperation, coevolutionary rules can extend the potentials of such entities further, and even more importantly, lead to the understanding of their emergence. The introduction of coevolutionary rules to evolutionary games implies, that besides the evolution of strategies, another property may simultaneously be subject to evolution as well. Coevolutionary rules may affect the interaction network, the reproduction capability of players, their reputation, mobility or age. Here we review recent works on evolutionary games incorporating coevolutionary rules, as well as give a didactic description of potential pitfalls and misconceptions associated with the subject. In addition, we briefly outline directions for future research that we feel are promising, thereby particularly focusing on dynamical effects of coevolutionary rules on the evolution of cooperation, which are still widely open to research and thus hold promise of exciting new discoveries.
Individuals become functionally organized to survive and reproduce in their environments by the process of natural selection. The question of whether larger units such as groups and communities can possess similar properties of functional organization, and therefore be regarded as "superorganisms", has a long history in biological thought. Modern evolutionary biology has rejected the concept of superorganisms, explaining virtually all adaptations at the individual or gene level. We criticize the modern literature on three counts. First, individual selection in its strong form is founded on a logical contradiction, in which genes-in-individuals are treated differently than individuals-in-groups or species-in-communities. Imposing consistency clearly shows that groups and communities can be organisms in the same sense that individuals are. Furthermore, superorganisms are more than just a theoretical possibility and actually exist in nature. Second, the view that genes are the "ultimate" unit of selection is irrelevant to the question of functional organization. Third, modern evolutionary biology includes numerous conceptual frameworks for analyzing evolution in structured populations. These frameworks should be regarded as different ways of analyzing a common process which, to be correct, must converge on the same conclusions. Unfortunately, evolutionists frequently regard them as competing theories that invoke different mechanisms, such that if one is "right" the others must be "wrong". The problem of multiple frameworks is aggravated by the fact that major terms, such as "units of selection", are defined differently within each framework, yet many evolutionists who use one framework to argue against another assume shared meanings. We suggest that focusing on the concept of organism will help dispell this fog of semantic confusion, allowing all frameworks to converge on the same conclusions regarding units of functional organization.
Paramutation is a heritable change in gene expression induced by allele interactions. This review summarizes key experiments on three maize loci, which undergo paramutation. Similarities and differences between the phenomenology at the three loci are described. In spite of many differences with respect to the stability of the reduced expression states at each locus or whether paramutation correlates with DNA methylation and repeated sequences within the loci, recent experiments are consistent with a common mechanism underlying paramutation at all three loci. Most strikingly, trans-acting mutants have been isolated that prevent paramutation at all three loci and lead to the activation of silenced Mutator transposable elements. Models consistent with the hypothesis that paramutation involves heritable changes in chromatin structure are presented. Several potential roles for paramutation are discussed. These include localizing recombination to low-copy sequences within the genome, establishing and maintaining chromatin domain boundaries, and providing a mechanism for plants to transmit an environmentally influenced expression state to progeny.
Does Altruism Exist?
  • Wilson David Sloan
David Sloan Wilson, 2015, "Does Altruism Exist?", Yale University Press.
  • Christoph Adami
Christoph Adami, 2002, BioEssays:24, "What is complexity"
  • Andrei Linde
Andrei Linde 1994, Scientific American, "The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe"
  • Alexey V Melkikh
Alexey V. Melkikh, 2018, International Journal of Astrobiology & Aerospace Technology "The Universe as A Superorganism"
  • R C Lewontin
R.C. Lewontin, 1970, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, Vol 1, "The Units of Selection",