Cumulative, Adaptive Change through Self-Other Reorganization

Resumen

Zachar et al.’s [61] critique of Self-Other Reorganization theory (SOR) stems from misunderstandings; it does not weaken the arguments in [27]. The formal framework of Reflexively Autocatalytic and foodset-derived sets (RAFs) enables us to model the process whereby, through their interactions, a set of elements become a ‘collective self’. SOR shows how the RAF setting provides a means of encompassing abiogenesis and cultural evolution under the same explanatory framework and provides a plausible explanation for the origins of both evolutionary processes. Although SOR allows for detrimental stimuli (and products), there is (naturally) limited opportunity for elements that do not contribute to or reinforce a RAF to become part of it. Replication and cumulative, adaptive change in RAFs is well-established in the literature. Contrary to Zachar et al., SOR is not a pure percolation model (such as SIR); it encompasses not only learning (modeled as assimilation of foodset elements) but also creative restructuring (modeled as generation of foodset-derived elements), as well as the emergence of new structures made possible by new foodset- and foodset-derived elements. Cultural SOR is robust to degradation, and imperfect replication. Zachar et al.’s simulation contains no RAFs, and does not model SOR.

Áreas y palabras clave

Cómo citar (APA 7)

Gabora, L., & Steel, M. (2024). Cumulative, Adaptive Change through Self-Other Reorganization. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/9cvnq