Systemically analogous patterns of functional mobility: biological and otherwise

Cognitive Navigation of the Elements as Indicative Strategic Metaphors (Part #5)

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

The emphasis here on technomimicry is presented as an extension of the well-recognized inspiration to innovation that is offered by biomimicry -- most notably with respect to the development of airplanes and controlled flight (Mostafa Hassanalian, et al, Wing shape design and kinematic optimization of bio-inspired nano air vehicles for hovering and forward flight purposes, December 2016). Biomimicry has also offered insights into the design of robot all-terrain vehicles. A summary in tabular form of the following patterns is presented separately (Patterns of N-foldness: misleading implications of cyclic comprehension? 2019).

Multi-limbed animals: Given the sub-division of many organizations into departments, it is appropriate to explore these as "limbs", "fins", or "wings". This raises the question of the number of limbs, fins or wings appropriate to engagement with the environment, whether understood as land, within water, or in the air -- given the viable examples offered by nature. Animals which could be considered multi-limbed include:

• bipeds: Several groups of modern species are habitual bipeds whose normal method of locomotion is two-legged.
• "tripeds": seemingly absent from nature (Tracy J. Thomson, Three-Legged Locomotion and the Constraints on Limb Number, BioEssays, 18 September 2019; Andy Fell, Why are there no animals with three legs? Phys.org, 2 October 2019). 3-legged "plants" have been a feature of science fiction portrayals (John Wyndham, The Day of the Triffids, 1951).
• quadrupeds
• "pentapeds": five-armed starfish; kangaroos, given its use of a tail (Meet the only animal with five legs, New Scientist, 2 July 2014)
• hexapods: comprising most species of arthropods, including the insects as well as three much smaller wingless groups. Robots have been designed with such a configuration (Volker Dürr, et al, Integrative Biomimetics of Autonomous Hexapedal Locomotion, Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 13, 2019)
• "heptapods": seemingly absent from nature, although extensively discussed with respect to the hypothetical language of heptapod aliens in a science fiction movie (Story of Your Life, 1988).
• octapods: Octopodiformes is a superorder, comprising the octopuses and the vampire squid. all with eight arms, either lacking the two tentacles of squid (as is the case in octopuses) or modifying the tentacles into thin filaments (as in vampire squid). Robots have been designed with such a configuration (Konstantinos Karydis, et al, A Switching Kinematic Model of an Octapedal Robot)
• "nonapods": seemingly absent from nature
• decapoda: an order of crustaceans, including many familiar groups, such as crabs, lobsters, crayfish, shrimp and prawns.
• millipedes: a group of arthropods that are characterised by having two pairs of jointed legs on most body segments; Each double-legged segment is a result of two single segments fused together.

As remarked above with respect to the kangaroos, the understanding of "limbs" may be extended to include a tail, thereby shifting the pattern of occurrences. Including wings and antennas has a similar consequence (notably in the case of 4-winged insects), as with inclusion of a beak in the case of birds. Such inclusions would also apply in the case of the arms of legged-robots. .

Multi-brained animals: More intriguing is any corresponding implications for brain organization of the animals in question, with the further implication for the institutional organization of any "global brain" charged with global strategic governance. Multi-brained animals include: leeches (32 brains), silkworm moth (11), octopus (8, plus one central brain), gastropods (3), squid (3), mosquitoes (3), cuttlefish (3), grasshoppers (3), bumblebee (3) (Patricia Greene, 10 Animals with Multiple Brains, Wildlife Informer).

The question has acquired new significance with the emerging challenges and possibilities of the role of (possibly "multi-modal") artificial intelligence in that regard -- as implied in the case of robots. Is unicameral organization to be understood as viable in the light of examples from nature? Is there a need for bicameral organization, as curiously replicated in some legislative assemblies? Does nature offer analogues to controversial proposals for tricameral organization? Recognized in terms of multicameralism, institutional examples have existed of four chambers and of five.

Multi-wheeled vehicles: Obvious examples include the transitions from monocycle, to bicycle, tricycle, quadbike, and to many-wheeled trucks. In metaphorical terms it might then be asked with how many "wheels" a strategy is endowed, and are they appropriately designed and configured, speculatively transcending vain hopes of squaring the circle in global decision-making (Reframing the Square Wheels of Global Governance, 2017).

Multi-cylinder engines: These range from the 2-stroke engine, through the V-8, to more complex configurations. Of relevance to this argument are the cognitive analogues which such design options imply (Cognitive analogues of mechanical transmission systems? 2022; Alternatives to "2-stroke democracy" suggested by 4-sided ball games, 2016).

Multi-rotor "copters": Whereas the abstract considerations above are distant from the preoccupations of many, it is extraordinary to note the widespread, "hands-on" familiarity with model drones, most notably in the form of accessibly-priced quadcopters. This follows from the familiarity of many with helicopters and the challenge of piloting them. The familiarity is evident in the following interrelated contexts:

• Flight simulation: Experience of the challenges of flying helicopters, and other multi-rotor systems, is offered by readily available simulators running on personal computers. Curiously, by contrast, few simulations are offered of governance of alternative strategic configurations -- their uptake, or their capacity to achieve "lift-off"
  
  
• Construction by hobbyists: In addition to extensive innovation of multi-rotor systems in institutional contexts, there is widespread engagement of hobbyists with readily available "make your own" construction kits. These encourage experimental adaptations to produce more complex multi-rotor systems. Again it is curious to note that little encouragement is offered to those who might otherwise experiment with alternative configurations of strategies. Any such consideration may well be deprecated or severely condemned.
  
  
• Recreational drone-flying: This is increasingly replacing earlier engagement with kite-flying. It is appropriate to ask how this may evoke new insights comparable to the influential role of kite-flying for the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, as presented by Susan G. Sterrett (Wittgenstein Flies a Kite: a story of models of wings and models of the world, ‎ 2005)
  
  
• Comparative exchanges between hobbyists: The engagement with this innovative process encourages development of fora through which hobbyists explore the possibility of alternative approaches to the design of multi-rotor systems -- and their various constraints. Again it is noteworthy that any such fora with respect to strategic governance are primarily preoccupied with promoting one alternative over any others..

It is appropriate to note (in passing) a degree of confusion  with respect to puzzles when searching for "multi-rotor" systems. This appears to derive from the technically related preoccupation with the design of "twisty puzzles". These are exemplified by Rubik's Cube and its many more complex variants, indicative of another approach to engaging otherwise with what people find meaningful (Interplay of Sustainable Development Goals through Rubik Cube Variations, 2017).

Symbols as "psychopters" of a kind? Patterns as value-carriers of considerable psycho-social significance may well take the form of symbolic stars, whether 3-, 4-, 5-, 6- pointed, or more. These are a common feature of national flags and other insignia (Symbolic Insignia Indicative of Global Health, 2021). They can be understood as effectively "raising" or "elevating" the focus of attention -- ensuring "lift-off" -- understood as a feature of psychopters (as discussed below).

Whilst the stars in their entirety may be appreciated as a focus -- effectively functioning as "psychopters" in elevating collective concern -- little attention is accorded to the distinctive significance of the individual points of which they are composed in doing so. This negligence extends to the relationship between the points -- problematically emphasized as static rather than dynamic. This invites reframing otherwise (Necessary cognitive twist: star symbols as bladed propellers -- for propulsion in 3D? 2018; Imagining the Flag of Europe otherwise? 2018).

Multiple ways of looking: As noted above, the 4-fold pattern of Earth, Air, Fire and Water has offered an influential framing in the past -- although now deprecated as naive and obsolete, despite their significance in a world of archetypal environmental crises to which governance is proving inadequate. It is indeed potentially intrinsic to the symbolic organization of any Rosetta Stone of meaning (as discussed below).

The suggestion here is that as classical categories they may be more fruitfully understood as subtle pointers to strategic modalities -- indications of cognitive modalities whose nature is conventionally obscured by misplaced concreteness. The argument might be usefully clarified by reference to the widely-cited 8-fold pattern presented by Gareth Morgan (Images of Organization, 1986), whose current relevance has been subsequently explored (Matthew J. Lambert III, A review of Images of Organization, Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 6, 2009, 2).

Morgan specifically distinguishes images of organization as (1) machines, (2) organisms, (3) brains, (4) cultures, (5) political systems, (6) psychic prisons, (7) flux and transformation, and (8) instruments of domination. The approach merits adaptation to the strategic lenses through which a crisis is framed and perceived (Interrelating Multiple Ways of Looking at a Crisis, 2021; Ways of looking at ways of looking -- in a period of invasive surveillance, 2014; Towards a Periodic Table of Ways of Knowing, 2009).

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]