Liveblogging the conference: Bill Wimsatt

Bill Wimsatt is somewhat of a hero around here and for good reason. He is perhaps one of the most influential under-published philosophers of biology. Today he’s talking about modularity in biological and cultural evolution.

Modularity is a recurrent theme in biology and culture. Evolved systems are usually modular. It’s easier to make a modular system, because there are fewer part types – polyfunctional parts.

They are easier to modify if you can adapt to local circumstances by changing one or a few parts rather than the whole system. Quasi-independent parts

A small number of parts can be recombined in many ways – an alphabet of parts. Combinatorial parts.

Systems with modules can arise in basically two ways: aggregating parts, and a coevolution of parts, a process that reduces the independence of the parts. Second; modules can arise by differentiation of of complex systems into dissimilar parts.

Modularity in culture is complex. Humans make offspring who are trained and differentiate roles. They can also aggregate or organise to perform more coordinated activities. Artifacts show massive modularity on multiple scales. This is crucial to the distribution, adaptability and efficiency of those artifacts. Entrenchment can happen massively and rapidly when parts become part of a combinatorial algebra for creating an ensemble of possible systems. Parts thus become standardised.

Dissecting the stages: early stage of non-interchangeable parts, although often made from the same patterns, cotuned for the assembly. With higher accuracy, more interchangeable parts. Often only at the population level – parts in a basket. Often proprietary. Standardised parts across manufacturers. Machine tools are crucial. [DNA evolution analogous.] Finally, distribution of standardised parts: right parts must be in the right place at the right time (like metabolism).

Polyfunctionality of basic parts. The discovery that a gene sequence crops up in all kinds of places doing different but related things. Bolts -> shear pins, etc.

Parts become more polyfunctional and more generatively entrenched. Different modulations of the same basic design become categorical (one or the other). Generatively entrenched they become narrowly specialised. Backwards compatibility becomes an issue. Remarkable text: Herkhimer’s Engineers Illustrated Parts taxonomy, 1952, organised by function. Types not parts. “Design alphabet”. [Such things often published by industry and theory is often scaffolded by it.]

Chunking and hierarchical modularity: kits. Leads to modular assembly stages (prefab), leading to specialised distribution. Needs for directories and coordination of assembly stages. Containerised shipping.

Finally, some assemblies may be black-boxed.

Then, given all this, we may redesign non-modular things for modular construction. Then competitive elimination for non-modular things and non-standard design. [Examples from Sears kit homes.]

Blackboxing, removing the possibility of dissassembly. [Latour’s term taken from electronics and aircraft industries.]

BBing in distribution: In manufacturing subassemblies; in foregoing expertise (mechanics and car subsystems).

Exploitation of combinatorial possibilities of modular design. Even the scaffolding for construction or repair is modular. Modularising may disentrench their components. Design of accessories for modularised things.

Training for modularity – autotelic folk models (lego, meccano). Buy your kid a tinkertoy set for Christmas and play with it yourself.

I am never going to liveblog Wimsatt again! Whew!