Rotating the Necker cube: A bioeconomic approach to cooperation and the causal role of synergy in evolution

The evolution of division of labour: preconditions and evolutionary feedback

Division of Labour (DoL) among group members reflects the pinnacle of social complexity. The synergistic effects created by task specialization and the sharing of duties benefitting the group raise the efficiency of the acquisition, use, management and defence of resources by a fundamental step above the potential of individual agents. At the same time, it may stabilize societies because of the involved interdependence among collaborators. Here, I review the conditions associated with the emergence of DoL, which include the existence of (i) sizeable groups with enduring membership; (ii) individual specialization improving the efficiency of task performance; and (iii) low conflict of interest among group members owing to correlated payoffs. This results in (iv) a combination of intra-individual consistency with inter-individual variance in carrying out different tasks, which creates (v) some degree of mutual interdependence among group members. DoL typically evolves 'bottom-up' without external regulatory forces, but the latter may gain importance at a later stage of the evolution of social complexity. Owing to the involved feedback processes, cause and effect are often difficult to disentangle in the evolutionary trajectory towards structured societies with well-developed DoL among their members. Nevertheless, the emergence of task specialization and DoL may entail a one-way street towards social complexity, with retrogression getting increasingly difficult the more individual agents depend on each other at progressing stages of social evolution.This article is part of the theme issue 'Division of labour as key driver of social evolution'.

Cooperative genes in smart systems: Toward an inclusive new synthesis in evolution

For more than half a century, biologist Julian Huxley's term, the "Modern Synthesis", has been used as a label for a model of biological evolution where genetic influences are viewed as a principal source of creativity and change. Over the years, as evidence has accumulated that there are many other, far more important factors at work in evolution, theoretical "compromises," such as the so-called "Extended Synthesis", have been proposed. This is no longer tenable. It is time to abandon the Modern Synthesis, and its doppelganger "The Selfish Gene". Here is the case for a new, multi-faceted, open-ended, "inclusive" evolutionary synthesis, where living systems themselves are recognized as purposeful (teleonomic) "agents" and cooperative effects (synergies) of various kinds are seen as all-important influences.

"How" vs. "Why" questions in symbiogenesis, and the causal role of synergy

Mutualistic symbiosis, we now know, is a ubiquitous phenomenon in the natural world. And, in every case, there was an initial "genesis" - a "how" process that may have been at once unique to each situation and perhaps also shared a common set of facilitators. However, a full explanation of symbiogenesis also requires an answer to the "why" question, for natural selection is a stringent economizer. Something as contrarian as mutualistic cooperation between "differently named" organisms must also provide functional advantages for the participants that will be favored by natural selection (differential survival and reproduction). Enter the "Synergism Hypothesis" - the thesis that synergistic functional effects of various kinds are a common cause of cooperative relationships of all kinds in nature, including symbioses. When different organisms have complementary capabilities that are mutually beneficial and cannot otherwise be attained, the benefits derived from symbiotic cooperation will outweigh the costs. Among the many documented cases of symbiogenesis over time, lichens provide perhaps the most familiar, well-studied example, while the eukaryotes are often cited as a game-changer. The answer to the "why" question was, in each case, determinative for symbiogenesis.

Extended inclusive fitness theory: synergy and assortment drives the evolutionary dynamics in biology and economics

W.D. Hamilton's Inclusive Fitness Theory explains the conditions that favor the emergence and maintenance of social cooperation. Today we know that these include direct and indirect benefits an agent obtains by its actions, and through interactions with kin and with genetically unrelated individuals. That is, in addition to kin-selection, assortation or homophily, and social synergies drive the evolution of cooperation. An Extended Inclusive Fitness Theory (EIFT) synthesizes the natural selection forces acting on biological evolution and on human economic interactions by assuming that natural selection driven by inclusive fitness produces agents with utility functions that exploit assortation and synergistic opportunities. This formulation allows to estimate sustainable cost/benefit threshold ratios of cooperation among organisms and/or economic agents, using existent analytical tools, illuminating our understanding of the dynamic nature of society, the evolution of cooperation among kin and non-kin, inter-specific cooperation, co-evolution, symbioses, division of labor and social synergies. EIFT helps to promote an interdisciplinary cross fertilization of the understanding of synergy by, for example, allowing to describe the role for division of labor in the emergence of social synergies, providing an integrated framework for the study of both, biological evolution of social behavior and economic market dynamics. Another example is a bio-economic understanding of the motivations of terrorists, which identifies different forms of terrorism.

On the Self-Organizing Origins of Agency

The question of agency and directedness in living systems has puzzled philosophers and scientists for centuries. What principles and mechanisms underlie the emergence of agency? Analysis and dynamical modeling of experiments on human infants suggest that the birth of agency is due to a eureka-like, pattern-forming phase transition in which the infant suddenly realizes it can make things happen in the world. The main mechanism involves positive feedback: when the baby's initially spontaneous movements cause the world to change, their perceived consequences have a sudden and sustained amplifying effect on the baby's further actions. The baby discovers itself as a causal agent. Some implications of this theory are discussed.

"Synergistic selection": a Darwinian frame for the evolution of complexity

Non-Darwinian theories about the emergence and evolution of complexity date back at least to Lamarck, and include those of Herbert Spencer and the "emergent evolution" theorists of the later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In recent decades, this approach has mostly been espoused by various practitioners in biophysics and complexity theory. However, there is a Darwinian alternative - in essence, an economic theory of complexity - proposing that synergistic effects of various kinds have played an important causal role in the evolution of complexity, especially in the "major transitions". This theory is called the "synergism hypothesis". We posit that otherwise unattainable functional advantages arising from various cooperative phenomena have been favored over time in a dynamic that the late John Maynard Smith characterized and modeled as "synergistic selection". The term highlights the fact that synergistic "wholes" may become interdependent "units" of selection. We provide some historical perspective on this issue, as well as a brief explication of the underlying theory and the concept of synergistic selection, and we describe two relevant models.