Features
Archive
|

Edge can
be read in the form of a Web publication or chronologically in
the form of the emails sent bi-monthly (usually) to the third culture
mail list (see Edge Editions). The emails are
posted to the Edge
Editions page in an easy-print form at the same time they are
mailed to the list and linked from the home page. The features,
posted on the home page in Web Publication form are archived on
these pages.
VENGEANCE IS OURS [4.21.08]
By Jared Diamond
THE NEW YORKER: ANNALS OF ANTHROPOLOGY
What can tribal societies tell us about our need to get even?
In 1992, when Daniel Wemp was about twenty-two years old, his beloved paternal uncle Soll was killed in a battle against the neighboring Ombal clan. In the New Guinea Highlands, where Daniel and his Handa clan live, uncles and aunts play a big role in raising children, so an uncle’s death represents a much heavier blow than it might to most Americans. Daniel often did not even distinguish between his biological father and other male clansmen of his father’s generation. And Soll had been very good to Daniel, who recalled him as a tall and handsome man, destined to become a leader. Soll’s death demanded vengeance.
Daniel told me that responsibility for arranging revenge usually falls on the victim’s firstborn son or, failing that, on one of his brothers. "Soll did have a son, but he was only six years old at the time of his father’s death, much too young to organize the revenge," Daniel said. "On the other hand, my father was felt to be too old and weak by then; the avenger should be a strong young man in his prime. So I was the one who became expected to avenge Soll." As it turned out, it took three years, twenty-nine more killings, and the sacrifice of three hundred pigs before Daniel succeeded in discharging this responsibility.
|
BREAKING THE GALILEAN SPELL [4.22.08]
By
Stuart A. Kauffman
Even deeper than emergence and its challenge to reductionism in this new scientific worldview is what I call breaking the Galilean spell. Galileo rolled balls down incline planes and showed that the distance traveled varied as the square of the time elapsed. From this he obtained a universal law of motion. Newton followed with his Principia, setting the stage for all of modern science. With these triumphs, the Western world came to the view that all that happens in the universe is governed by natural law. Indeed, this is the heart of reductionism. Another Nobel laureate physicist, Murray Gell-Mann, has defined a natural law as a compressed description, available beforehand, of the regularities of a phenomenon. The Galilean spell that has driven so much science is the faith that all aspects of the natural world can be described by such laws. Perhaps my most radical scientific claim is that we can and must break the Galilean spell. Evolution of the biosphere, human economic life, and human history are partially indescribable by natural law. This claim flies in the face of our settled convictions since Galileo, Newton, and the Enlightenment.
|
ARE HUMAN BRAINS UNIQUE? [4.10.08]
By Michael Gazzaniga
Scientists compared the genetic sequences of ethnically and geographically diverse people from around the world and found that the genes which code for the nervous systems, had some sequence differences (known as polymorphisms) among individuals. By analyzing human and chimpanzee polymorphism patterns, genetic probabilities and various other genetic tools, and geographical distributions, they found evidence that some of these genes are experiencing ongoing positive selection in humans. They calculated that one genetic variant of microcephalin arose approximately 37,000 years ago, which coincides with the emergence of culturally modern humans, and it increased in frequency too rapidly to be compatible with random genetic drift or population migration. This suggests that it underwent positive selection.[xxi] An ASPM variant arose about 5800 years ago, coincident with the spread of agriculture, cities and the first record of written language. It too is found in such high frequencies in the population, that it indicates strong positive selection.[xxii]
|
ELIZA'S WORLD [4.4.08]
By Nicholas Carr
The machine's influence shapes not only society's structures but the more intimate structures of the self. Under the sway of the ubiquitous, "indispensable" computer, we begin to take on its characteristics, to see the world, and ourselves, in the computer's (and its programmers') terms.
What is the compelling urgency of the machine that it can so intrude itself into the very stuff out of which man builds his world?
JOSEPH WEIZENBAUM
1923 – 2008 |
|
MODELING THE FUTURE [4.1.08]
A Talk with Stephen Schneider
Warming is unequivocal, that's true. But that's not a sophisticated question. A much more sophisticated question is how much of the climate Ma Earth, a perverse lady, gives us is from her, and how much is caused by us. That's a much more sophisticated, and much more difficult question.
|
ANTS HAVE ALGORITHMS [3.13.08]
A Talk with Iain Couzin
Another example that we've been investigating arehuge swarms of Mormon crickets. If you look at these swarms, all of the individuals are marching in the same direction, and it looks like cooperative behavior. Perhaps they have come to a collective decision to move from one place to another. We investigated this collective decision, and what really makes this system work in the case of the Mormon cricket is cannibalism.
|
SOCIAL
NETWORKS ARE LIKE THE EYE [2.25.08]
A Talk with Nicholas A. Christakis
It
is customary to think about fashions in things like clothes or
music as spreading in a social network. But it turns out that
all kinds of things, many of them quite unexpected, can flow
through social networks, and this process obeys certain rules
we are seeking to discover. We’ve been investigating
the spread of obesity through a network, the spread of smoking
cessation through a network, the spread of happiness through
a network, the spread of loneliness through a network, the spread
of altruism through a network. And we have been thinking
about these
kinds of things while also keeping an eye on the fact that networks
do not just arise from nothing or for nothing. Very interesting
rules determine their structure.
|
ENGINEERING
BIOLOGY [2.19.08]
A Talk with Drew Endy
The
only thing that hasn't been engineered are the living things,
ourselves. Again, what's the consequence of doing that at scale?
Biotechnology is 30 years old; it's a young adult. Most of the
work is still to come, but how do we actually do it? Let's not
talk about it, let's actually go do it, and then let's deal with
the consequences in terms of how this is going to change ourselves,
how the biosecurity framework needs to recognize that it's not
going to be nation-state driven work necessarily, how an ownership
sharing and innovation framework needs to be developed that moves
beyond patent-based intellectual property and recognizes that
the information defining the genetic material's going to be more
important than the stuff itself and so you might transition away
from patents to copyright and so on and so forth.
|
THE
IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST [2.12.08]
A
Talk with Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald
BANAJI:
What is remarkable about this test, which is called the Implicit
Association Test—the IAT—is that it allows you
to be a subject in your own experiment. Most scientists do
not have the remarkable experience of being the object of study
in their own research.
GREENWALD:
The IAT provides a useful window into some otherwise difficult-to-detect
contents of our minds. In some cases, we find things we did
not know were there. It may be "an inconvenient truth" that
what's there is not what we thought was there or want to be
there. But I think it is generally something we can come to
grips with. |
THE
IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST [2.12.08]
A
Talk with Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald
BANAJI:
What is remarkable about this test, which is called the Implicit
Association Test—the IAT—is that it allows you
to be a subject in your own experiment. Most scientists do
not have the remarkable experience of being the object of study
in their own research.
GREENWALD:
The IAT provides a useful window into some otherwise difficult-to-detect
contents of our minds. In some cases, we find things we did
not know were there. It may be "an inconvenient truth" that
what's there is not what we thought was there or want to be
there. But I think it is generally something we can come to
grips with.
|
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IAT [2.12.08]
We
at Project Implicit tested political preferences in the 2000
and 2004 elections, and we do so again this year.
|
LIFE: A GENE-CENTRIC VIEW
Craig
Venter & Richard Dawkins: A Conversation in Munich
(Moderator: John
Brockman)
CRAIG
VENTER: One of the exciting elements that people who are
interested in the digital world here may find is we can use
the genetic code to watermark chromosomes. You can use
it in a secret code, or you can—basically what we're
using is the three-letter triplet code that codes for amino
acids. There's 20 amino acids, and they use single letters
to denote those. Using the triplet code, we can write
words, sentences, we can say, "This genome was made
by Richard Dawkins on this date in 2008." A key
hallmark of man-made species, manmade chromosomes, is that
they will be very much denoted that way.
RICHARD
DAWKINS: What has happened is that genetics has become a
branch of information technology. It is pure information. It's
digital information. It's precisely the kind of information
that can be translated digit for digit, byte for byte, into
any other kind of information and then translated back again. This
is a major revolution. I suppose it's probably "the" major
revolution in the whole history of our understanding of ourselves. It's
something would have boggled the mind of Darwin, and Darwin
would have loved it, I'm absolutely sure.
|
BETTER THAN FREE
By Kevin Kelly
This
super-distribution system has become the foundation of our economy
and wealth. The instant reduplication of data, ideas, and media
underpins all the major economic sectors in our economy, particularly
those involved with exports — that is, those industries
where the US has a competitive advantage. Our wealth sits upon
a very large device that copies promiscuously and constantly.
|
EDGE
PUBLISHES "LIFE: WHAT A CONCEPT!"
TRANSCRIPT AS DOWNLOADABLE PDF BOOK [1.14.08]
"I
just read the Life transcript book and it is fantastic. One of
the better books I've read in a while. Super rich, high signal
to noise, great subject."
— Kevin
Kelly, Editor-At-Large, Wired
"The
more I think about it the more I'm convinced that Life: What A Concept was
one of those memorable events that people in years to come
will see as a crucial moment in history. After all, it's
where the dawning of the age of biology was officially announced."
— Andrian
Kreye, Süddeutsche
Zeitung
|
WHAT'S YOUR CONSUMPTION FACTOR?
By Jared Diamond
The population especially of the developing world is growing, and some people remain fixated on this. They note that populations of countries like Kenya are growing rapidly, and they say that's a big problem. Yes, it is a problem for Kenya's more than 30 million people, but it's not a burden on the whole world, because Kenyans consume so little. (Their relative per capita rate is 1.) A real problem for the world is that each of us 300 million Americans consumes as much as 32 Kenyans. With 10 times the population, the United States consumes 320 times more resources than Kenya does.
People in the third world are aware of this difference in per capita consumption, although most of them couldn't specify that it's by a factor of 32. When they believe their chances of catching up to be hopeless, they sometimes get frustrated and angry, and some become terrorists, or tolerate or support terrorists. Since Sept. 11, 2001, it has become clear that the oceans that once protected the United States no longer do so. There will be more terrorist attacks against us and Europe, and perhaps against Japan and Australia, as long as that factorial difference of 32 in consumption rates persists.
|
WORLD QUESTION CENTER
WHAT ARE YOU OPTIMISTIC ABOUT? WHY?
When
thinking changes your mind, that's philosophy.
When God changes your mind, that's faith.
When facts change your mind, that's science.
Science
is based on evidence. What happens when the
data change? How have scientific findings or
arguments changed your mind?"
|
|