ROBERT ROSEN AND GEORGE LAKOFF: THE ROLE OF CAUSALITY IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS

1
ROBERT ROSEN AND GEORGE LAKOFFTHE ROLE OF
CAUSALITY IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS

• Donald C Mikulecky
• Professor emeritus and Senior Fellow in the VCU
  Center for the Study of Biological Complexity
• http//www.people.vcu.edu/mikuleck/

2
ROBERT ROSEN

• STUDENT OF NICHOLAS RASHEVSKY WHO WAS THE
  FOUNDER OF THE MATHEMATICAL BIOLOGY PROGRAM AT
  CHICAGO. WROTE BOOKS ON NEURAL NETWORKS AND
  OTHER ASPECTS OF COMPLEXITY IN THE 1930S. WROTE
  ABOUT COMPLEXITY IN THE 1950S.
• AUTHOR OF MANY IMPORTANT BOOKS ON COMPLEXITY
  INCLUDING ANTICIPATORY SYSTEMS, LIFE ITSELF, AND
  ESSAYS ON LIFE ITSELF

3
GEORGE LAKOFF

• COGNITIVE LINGUISTISTICS
• DEVELOPED THE CONCEPT OF FRAMING
• MANY BOOKS
• USES COMPLEXITY THEORY IN A VERY EFFECTIVE WAY
• LOOKS AT CAUSALITY AS A CENTRAL ISSUE IN HIS
  ANALYSIS OF DIFFEREING WOLD VIEWS
• HIS WORK HAS A DIRECT BEARING ON COMPLEXITY
  SCIENCE

4
TWO OF LAKOFFS RECENT BOOKS NEED OUR ATTENTION

• DONT THINK OF AN ELEPHANT KNOW YOUR VALUES AND
  FRAME THE DEBATE, CHELSEA GREEN, 2004.
• WHOSE FREEDOM THE BATTLE OVER AMERICAS MOST
  IMPORTANT IDEA, FARRAR,STRAUS AND GIROUX, 2006

5
WHAT IS FRAMING THE QUESTION?

• BASED ON THE WORK OF GEORGE LAKOFF
• COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS
• FRAMES ARE THE MENTAL STRUCTURES THAT SHAPE THE
  WAY WE SEE THE WORLD
• FACTS, DATA, MODELS, ETC. ONLY HAVE MEANING IN A
  CONTEXT
• LEADS US TO A SCIENTIFIC APPLICATION OF FRAMING
  ROSENS THEORY OF COMPLEXITY

6
THE MODELING RELATION THE ESSENCE OF SCIENCE

• ALLOWS US TO ASSIGN MEANING TO THE WORLD AROUND
  US
• STANDS FOR OUR THINKING PROCESS
• CAUSALITY IN THE NATURAL SYSTEM IS DEALT WITH
  THROUGH IMPLICATION IN A FORMAL SYSTEM
• THERE IS AN ENCODING OF THE NATURAL SYSTEM INTO
  THE FORMAL SYSTEM AND A DECODING BACK
• WHEN IT ALL HANGS TOGETHER WE HAVE A MODEL

7
THE MODELING RELATION A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE
MODELS, A SCIENCE OF FRAMING
8
WE HAVE A USEFUL MODEL WHEN
AND
ARE SATISFACTORY WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING THE
CHANGE IN THE WORLD OUT THERE
9
THE MODELING RELATION A MODEL OF HOW WE MAKE
MODELS
10
MORE ON THE MODELING RELATION

• THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT INCLUDE INFORMATION
  ABOUT ENCODING AND/OR DECODING
• THEREFORE MODELING WILL ALWAYS BE AN ART
• ONLY IN THE NEWTONIAN PARADIGM DOES THE FORMAL
  SYSTEM BECOME THE NATURAL SYSTEM (ENCODING AND
  DECODING ARE AUTOMATIC) AND ALL THAT IS LEFT TO
  DO IS TO MEASURE THINGS

11
WHY IS OBJECTIVITY A MYTH? (OR WHY IS SCIENCE
A BELIEF STRUCTURE)

• THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT AND CAN NOT TELL US
  HOW TO ENCODE AND DECODE. (MODELING IS AN ART!)
• THE FORMAL SYSTEM DOES NOT AND CAN NOT TELL US
  WHEN THE MODEL WORKS, THAT IS A JUDGEMENT CALL
  EVEN IF OTHER FORMALISMS ARE ENLISTED TO HELP
  (FOR EXAMPLE STATISTICS)
• MODELS EXIST IN A CONTEXT A FRAME

12
WHY WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO THE
MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION
INEVITABLE

• WE ARE TOO AFRAID OF BELIEFS (SCEPTICISM IS
  IN)
• WE DEVELOPED THE MYTH OF OBJECTIVITY

13
Reductionism has framed complexity theory

• Rather than change methods we have the changed
  names for what we do
• The consequences are significant
• It is impossible for you to believe what is being
  taught in this lecture and to then simply add it
  to your repertoire
• The reason is that in order to see the world in a
  new way you have to step out of the traditional
  frame and into a new one. Once done, you can
  never go back. The ability to reframe a question
  is the basis for change and broadening of ideas.

14
WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO FRAME THE
MODELING RELATION
15
WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO FRAME THE
MODELING RELATION
16
WHY WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO THE
MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION
INEVITABLE

• WE MORE OR LESS FORGOT THAT THERE WAS AN ENCODING
  AND DECODING

17
WHY WHAT TRADITIONAL SCIENCE DID TO THE
MODELING RELATION MADE THE PRESENT SITUATION
INEVITABLE IT FRAMED THE QUESTIN

• THE REAL WORLD REQUIRES MORE THAN ONE FORMAL
  SYSTEM TO MODEL IT (THERE IS NO UNIVERSAL
  MODEL)

18
Syntax vs Semantics

• The map is not the territory
• An equation is just an equation without
  interpretation
• This means we use formalisms in a context
• This context dependence also exists in nature
• This is one reason why there can never be a
  largest model

19
SOME CONSEQUENCES

• REDUCTIONISM DID SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THERMODYNAMICS
• THERMODYNAMICS IS MORE IN HARMONY WITH
  TOPOLOGICAL MATHEMATICS THAN IT IS WITH
  ANALYTICAL MATHEMATICS
• THUS TOPOLOGY AND NOT MOLECULAR STATISTICS IS THE
  FUNDAMENTAL TOOL

20
Context dependence necessarily introduces
circularity

• A process happens in a context
• The process usually changes that context
• If the context changes the process usually
  changes as a result.
• Living systems are replete with examples of this

21
SELF-REFERENCE, CIRCULARITY AND THE GENOME
REPLICATION
ENZYMES
DNA
PROTEINS
TRANSCRIPTION
22
HOMEOSTASIS
MILLEU FOR CELLS, TISSUES AND ORGANS
TISSUES AND ORGANS
CELLS
23
CAN WE GET RID OF SELF-REFERENCE, THAT IS,
CIRCULARITY?

• IT HAS BEEN TRIED
• IT FAILED
• THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO GO AROUND IT THAT IS TO
  IGNORE CASES WHERE IT POPS UP
• WHAT IF IT IS VERY COMMON?

24
WHAT IS COMPLEXITY?

• TOO MANY DEFINITIONS, SOME CONFLICTING
• OFTEN INTERCHANGED WITH COMPLICATED
• HAS A REAL MEANING BUT AFTER THE QUESTION IS
  REFRAMED
• THAT MEANING ITSELF IS COMPLEX(THIS IS
  SELF-REFERENTIAL HOW CAN WE DEFINE COMPLEX
  USING COMPLEX?)

25
ROSENS CONCEPT FOR COMPLEXITY A NEW FRAME

• Complexity is the property of a real world
  system that is manifest in the inability of any
  one formalism being adequate to capture all its
  properties. It requires that we find distinctly
  different ways of interacting with systems.
  Distinctly different in
• the sense that when we make successful
  models, the formal systems needed to describe
  each distinct aspect are NOT
• derivable from each other

26
The Mexican sierra fish has "XVII-15-IX" spines
in the dorsal fin. These can easily be counted
... We could, if we wished, describe the sierra
thus "D. XVII-15-IX A. II-15-IX," but we could
see the fish alive and swimming, feel it plunge
against the lines, drag it threshing over the
rail, and even finally eat it. And there is no
reason why either approach should be inaccurate.
Spine-count description need
not suffer because another approach is also used.
Perhaps, out of the two approaches we thought
there might emerge a picture more complete and
even more accurate that either alone could
produce. -- John Steinbeck,
novelist, with Edward Ricketts, marine biologist
(1941)
27
COMPLEX SYSTEMS VS SIMPLE MECHANISMS

• COMPLEX
• NO LARGEST MODEL
• WHOLE MORE THAN SUM OF PARTS
• CAUSAL RELATIONS RICH AND INTERTWINED
• GENERIC
• ANALYTIC ? SYNTHETIC
• NON-FRAGMENTABLE
• NON-COMPUTABLE
• REAL WORLD

• SIMPLE
• LARGEST MODEL
• WHOLE IS SUM OF PARTS
• CAUSAL RELATIONS DISTINCT
• N0N-GENERIC
• ANALYTIC SYNTHETIC
• FRAGMENTABLE
• COMPUTABLE
• FORMAL SYSTEM

28
FRAMING THE QUESTION

• DONT THINK OF AN ELEPHANT
• IMPOSSIBILITY OF AVOIDING THE FRAME
• IN SCIENCE THE DOMINANT FRAME IS REDUCTIONISM AND
  THE ASSOCIATED MECHANICAL THINKING
• THE DOMINANT MODERN MANIFESTATIONS INCLUDE
  MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS

29
AN EXAMPLE OF REFRAMING THE QUESTION IN SCIENCE
TO GET AN ANSWER THE WORK OF ROBERT ROSEN

• WHAT IS LIFE (SCHROEDINGER)?
• WHY IS AN ORGANISM DIFFERENT FROM A MACHINE?

30
LAKOFF ON CAUSALITY TWO DISTINCT KINDS

• DIRECT CAUSATION (REDUCTIONISM)
• SYSTEMIC CAUSATION (COMPLEXITY)

31
ROSEN AND LAKOFF BOTH RECOGNIZED THAT DIRECT
CAUSALITY WAS THE WAY REDUCTIONISTS SAW CAUSALITY

• DIRECT CAUSALITY IS THE SIMPLEST KIND
• SINGLE AGENT EXERTS FORCE ON SOMETHING AND IT
  CHANGES OR MOVES AS A RESULT
• NO INTERMEDIATE CAUSE
• NO MULTIPLE AGENTS

32
THE RELATIONAL APPROACH TO A COMPLEX REALITY

• FOCUS ON THE ORGANIZATION
• DEVELOP A SET OF FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS WHICH
  CAPTURE THAT ORGANIZATION
• UTILIZE THE CAUSAL RELATIONS RESULTING FROM
  ANSWERING WHY?

33
FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS

• MUST POSSESS ENOUGH IDENTITY TO BE CONSIDERED A
  THING
• MUST BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES FROM LARGER
  SYSTEMS TO WHICH IT MAY BELONG
• ITS FORMAL IMAGE IS A MAPPING
  f A -----gt B
• THIS INTRODUCES A NEW KIND OF DYNAMICS
  RELATIONAL

34
ROSEN USED ARISTOTLE TO INTRODUCE A FORM OF
SYSTEMIC CAUSALITY THE FOUR BECAUSES WHY A HOUSE?

• MATERIAL THE STUFF ITS MADE OF
• EFFICIENT IT NEEDED A BUILDER
• FORMAL THERE WAS A BLUEPRINT
• FINAL IT HAS A PURPOSE

35
ROSENSRELATIONAL REPRESENTATION OF AN ORGANISM
IS SYSTEMIC

• INVOLVES MAPPINGS
• METABOLISM IS f A ? B
• A REPRESENTS METABOLITES WHICH CAN ALSO EXCHANGE
  WITH THE ENVIRONMENT
• B REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF METABOLISM
• f IS A MAPPING FROM A TO B
• MULTIPLE AND INTERMEDIATE CAUSES ARE MANDITORY

36
METABOLISM/REPAIR SYSTEMS

• BASED ON INPUT/OUTPUT REPRESENTATIONS OF SYSTEMS
• MORE ABSTRACT
• ALLOW CAUSALITY TO BE REPRESENTED
• LEAD TO NEW INFORMATION
• ARE BASED ON RECOGNITION THAT BUILDING UP AND
  TEARING DOWN ARE PART OF THE LIFE PROCESS

37
THE IMPORTANCE OF CATABOLISM AND ANABOLISM

• NO STRUCTURE IS PERMANENT
• ADAPTABILITY AND CHANGE INHERENT
• NEEDS SPECIAL TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
• IMPORTANT FOR UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION,
  DEVELOPMENT, AND HEALING

38
THE CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS

• A IS THE MATERIAL CAUSE OF B (DOTTED ARROW)
• f IS THE EFFICIENT CAUSE OF B
• OTHER COMPONENTS FOR REPAIR AND REPLICATION COME
  IN BECAUSE THESE COMPONENTS HAVE A FINITE
  LIFETIME CATABOLISM AND ANABOLISM OR TURNOVER

39
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
40
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
41
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
42
ROSENS RELATIONAL MODEL OF THE ORGANISM
43
ORGANISMS

• ARE COMPLEX SYSTEMS
• ARE CLOSED TO EFFICIENT CAUSE
• ARE AUTOPOIETIC UNITIES

44
HUMAN BEHAVIOR IS COMPLEX

• WE CAN APPLY THESE IDEAS TO HUMAN BEHAVIOR
• WE HAVE ALREADY USED THESE IDEAS TO EXAMINE THE
  FRAMING OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE BY
  REDUCTIONISTS
• WE CAN GO FURTHER AND IF WE DO THE RESULTS ARE
  VERY STRIKING

45
LAKOFF USES THESE IDEAS TO STUDY AMERICAN POLITICS

• HE FINDS THAT RADICAL CONSERVATIVES TEND TO RELY
  ONLY ON DIRECT CAUSALITY
• ON THE OTHER HAND PROGRESSIVES TEND TO RELY ON
  SYSTEMIC CAUSALITY
• HE TIES THIS IN WITH A MODEL OF THE COGNITIVE
  BEHAVIOR OF BOTH GROUPS

46
THE FAMILY AS A MODEL FOR SOCIETY

• THE STRICT FATHER FAMILY IS THE MODEL FOR RADICAL
  CONSERVATIVE BEHAVIOR
• THYE NURTURING MOTHER FAMILY IS THE MODEL FOR
  PROGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR
• THE TWO MODELS RESULT IN VERY DIFFERENT WORLD
  VIEWS AND EVEN THE DEFINITION OF WORDS LIKE
  FREEDOM ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN THE TWO WORLDVIEWS

47
THE CONSEQUENCES OF LAKOFFS ANALYSIS ARE
CONSISTENT WITH ROSENS VIEW OF SCIENCE

• REDUCTIONIST SCIENCE RELIES ON DIRECT CAUSALITY
  AS DOES RADICAL CONSERVATIVISM THE TWO ARE
  ASPECTS OF A SINGLE WORLD VIEW
• COMPLEXITY SCIENCE POSES A THREAT TO THIS
  WORLDVIEW AS DOES PROGRESSIVE THINKING IN POLITICS

48
THIS REVEALS A GREAT DEAL ABOUT CONTROVERSIES
INVOLVING SCIENCE AND RELIGION

• ROSEN SHOWED THAT REDUCTIONIST/MECHANIST THINKING
  RESULTED IN THE NEED FOR A GOD (MACHINES NEED AN
  INTELLEGENT DESIGNER
• COMPLEXITY THEORY SHOWS THAT ORGANISMS ARE
  DIFFERENT FROM MACHINES AND CLOSED TO EFFICIENT
  CAUSE (NO NEED FOR ANY OUTSIDE CAUSE)

49
PROBLEMS WITH THE USE OF DIRECT CAUSATION
(REDUCTIONISM)

• INTELLEGENT DESIGN IS THE ONLY USE OF ANY IDEA
  FROM COMPLEXITY AND IT IS MISUSED (IRREDUCEABLE
  COMPLEXITY IMPLIES AN INTELLEGENT DESIGNER)
• DIRECT CAUSATION HAS ALMOST NO USE IN
  EVOLUTIONARY THEORY
• DIRECT CAUSATION HAS ALMOST NO USE IN CLIMATOLOGY
• SYSTEMIC CAUSALITY IS DISMISSED BY PROPONENTS OD
  DIRECT CAUSALITY
• REAL COMPLEX SYSTEMS REQUIRE SYSTEMIC CAUSATION
  AND CAN NOT BE EXPLAINED USING DIRECT CAUSATION
  UNLESS A DIETY OR SOME OTHER SUERNATURAL AGENT IS
  INVOKED

50
TOWARDS A HOLISTIC THEORY OF COMPLEX HUMAN
BEHAVIOR

• SUCH A THEORY HAS TO REFRAME THE QUESTION FRAMED
  BY REDUCTIONISTS IN TERMS OF DIRECT CAUSATION
• IT MUST NOT PUT FORTH A SINGLE, LARGEST MODEL IF
  IT IS TO GO BEYOND THE MISTAKES SO DEEPLY
  ENTRENCHED BY REDUCTIONISM
• IT MUST BE BUILT ON CONCEPTS LIKE SYSTEMIC
  CAUSALITY, SELF REFERENCE, CONTEXT DEPENDENCE,
  AND THE OTHER ASPECTS OF COMPLEXITY THEORY
  PRESENTED BY LAKOFF AND ROSEN

51
New Book Into the Cool Energy Flow,
Thermodynamics and Life by Eric D. Schneider
and Dorion Sagan, University of Chicago Press,
2005

• THIS BOOK IS A GOOD INTRODUCTION TO HOW
  THERMODYNAMIC REASONING CAN BREAK OUT OF ITS
  REDUCTIONIST PRISON AND BEGIN TO BE USED IN THE
  STUDY OF COMPLEXITY SCIENCE
• IT ALSO GIVES INSIGHTS INTO MY ROLE IN THIS