It also seems important to recognize that unreliability or conflict within systems can be goods in themselves, not just ways of providing fault tolerance or adaptability. The example of subunits acting against the goals of the larger system can be destructive, as in cancer, but it can also be transformative. Sometimes misaligned actions are actually better actions. I’m thinking of conversion moments: a self-described selfish person experiencing an unpremeditated act of kindness. The larger organism’s goal (selfishness) is disrupted by the smaller unit’s behavior (kindness), but that misalignment creates the possibility of reflection and a new cohesion built on deeper values.
In fact, I think all moments of creativity, insight, grace, novelty, revelation, and transformation depend on something being introduced into the larger system that was not there before—something the system itself could not predict or control. At the limit, all learning, growth, and creativity require a new, “unpredictable” attitude arising to the larger system. If the world were entirely mechanized, predictable, and controllable, then there could be no more of those good things: no insight, no grace, no transformation, etc
This feels a lot like the difference between improvisational collaboration and choreographed collaboration! In choreographed collaboration, you focus on doing *your* part exactly as planned and you trust others to do theirs as well. In improvisational collaboration, you are constantly attuned to *others*, paying attention to what they need, or how you can do something to enhance or support what they're doing, or how you can be inspired to act based on the structure they've created for you
In "How Life Works' Philip Ball points out the problems with using metaphors (like machines) to describe biological processes & why this has proved to be a limitation.
We are taught that cells are machines, though no machine we have invented behaves like the simplest cell; that DNA is a code or blueprint, though it is neither; that the brain is a computer, though no computer behaves like a brain at all.
great post. I've been getting interested in the 'new school of biology' stuff after reading Philip Ball's book and listening to a podcast on Michael levin's research, but have only scratched the surface so far. Any people/books/blogs you recommend checking out?
This is a pithy banger of a piece. Really appreciate it as it helps me think through the biological underpinning of Internal Family Systems.
that's high praise, thank you!
It also seems important to recognize that unreliability or conflict within systems can be goods in themselves, not just ways of providing fault tolerance or adaptability. The example of subunits acting against the goals of the larger system can be destructive, as in cancer, but it can also be transformative. Sometimes misaligned actions are actually better actions. I’m thinking of conversion moments: a self-described selfish person experiencing an unpremeditated act of kindness. The larger organism’s goal (selfishness) is disrupted by the smaller unit’s behavior (kindness), but that misalignment creates the possibility of reflection and a new cohesion built on deeper values.
In fact, I think all moments of creativity, insight, grace, novelty, revelation, and transformation depend on something being introduced into the larger system that was not there before—something the system itself could not predict or control. At the limit, all learning, growth, and creativity require a new, “unpredictable” attitude arising to the larger system. If the world were entirely mechanized, predictable, and controllable, then there could be no more of those good things: no insight, no grace, no transformation, etc
well said
This feels a lot like the difference between improvisational collaboration and choreographed collaboration! In choreographed collaboration, you focus on doing *your* part exactly as planned and you trust others to do theirs as well. In improvisational collaboration, you are constantly attuned to *others*, paying attention to what they need, or how you can do something to enhance or support what they're doing, or how you can be inspired to act based on the structure they've created for you
Super interesting piece! It does a great job of outlining a key difference between organisms and machines.
In "How Life Works' Philip Ball points out the problems with using metaphors (like machines) to describe biological processes & why this has proved to be a limitation.
We are taught that cells are machines, though no machine we have invented behaves like the simplest cell; that DNA is a code or blueprint, though it is neither; that the brain is a computer, though no computer behaves like a brain at all.
I covered this is more detail over an year ago - maybe of interest to you: https://rajeshachanta.substack.com/p/more-than-a-box-of-chocolates
great post. I've been getting interested in the 'new school of biology' stuff after reading Philip Ball's book and listening to a podcast on Michael levin's research, but have only scratched the surface so far. Any people/books/blogs you recommend checking out?