An open letter to the IUCN World Park Congress, 2014 - Gihan Sami Soliman

Page 1

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014


Dear Sirs,

I have chosen to address your reverent professional gathering in such an unusual manner because your congress this year is “not just another conference” [34]. It is the ideal gathering of specialists capable of helping humanity at this stage of our evolution and influence upon the planet.

I plea to the IUCN congress as a teacher, independent researcher and a human being to take a stand now as we strive towards unity of goal and life equilibrium. Our unity as a human kind in the 21st century must begin with the reconciliation of sciences over the human identity! A call that has been around in different forms for quite a while [7][8][9][10][83]

I appeal to the IUCN conservation specialists to either reconsider the conservation status of the Homo sapiens in the Redlist of endangered Species currently categorised as of a “Least Concern ver 3.1” [76], so as to be “endangered”; as a social species of insufficient “social instincts” [12] with the consequential population annihilation probabilities, or otherwise to set us apart as a unique sociophysiobiological kingdom based on our unique “cybernetic phylogeny” encompassing other life systems and physical elements on the planet (as expressed in the research behind the call), especially with a new scientific finding [38] pointing to a uniqueness area in our brain structure and evident in the gap of civilisation between human beings and everyone else so

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

far. Such discovery is a marginal evidence compared to the unbridgeble gap of civilisation between us and all other species.

I propose that such a distinction in identity or status, can be a transformational step towards an era of collective self-awareness, equality and unity of selfreference as of a unique one kind (in addition to reserving healthy individualism) which all, as I propose, are essential for each one of us taking responsibility of the collective future actions towards our “species-success”/ our “system viability” [28][29][43][61]/ realisation of sustainable development [68]/ conservation of the Homo sapiens through population-self-organization, as we equally share the collective shame of the species’ harmful impact on the planet. THE RESEARCH BEHIND THE CALL:

he conservation status of Homo sapiens (or human beings) refers to our kind as a singularity: a species of mammals. It might go without saying that the “survival of the fittest” used by many as a slogan of legitimate selfishness, does not, and never has handled the “fitness” of an individual apart from a relevant population over a period of time exceeding the life span of that individual. That is that the evolutionary perspective of fitness has been always related to reproduction and accumulation of adaptive traits resulting in the continuation of life and the mazing variation of life forms [8][11][12].

A macro-organism which is an apparent singularity is evidently the perceivable total of an entire world of micro-organisms cooperating constructively to function as a whole while an aggregation of several hive-bees functions as a singular bee-caste [8], once “eusociality” [48][82] has evolved regardless of the natural selection mechanism which allowed such demeanour! In this respect, human beings are the unique species on earth that are eventually meant to survive through highly sophisticated social structures to which they

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

have no spontaneous access; unless by exploring, learning, educating, planning, organising, weighing preferences, creating and re-creating social systems [40][41][53][63][87]. In terms of species survival, the Natural Selection, or the “survival of the fittest” paradigm [11][12] has been considered as acting on the advantageous traits of an individual organism as far as they provide a survival advantage for a population of “organic beings” [11][12]. representing a given “genome” [8]. The struggle of survival thus is not a strive to lead a happy healthy prosperous life but to maintain existence long enough to pass on one’s own advantageous traits to new generations by producing “more offspring than can survive”. This has been the bottom-line for debating the dynamics of the selective helpingtendency observed in nature[39a][23]: i.e. Kin Selection, sex selection, the arguable group selection [6] and the controversial multi-level selection over decades. However, the evolutionary product has not been regarded by most scholars as deliberate or designed! If an “adaptive” random genetic mutation occurs and “passes on” to offspring under certain conditions, it naturally boosts survival rates among the next generations of the population in hand and thus such adaptive trait gets popular (selected), taking this population a grade “higher on the scale”. If the mutation is maladaptive, the population gets neutralized naturally for failure of adaptation [8][9][44][53][57]. That leads to variation and evolution. While the natural selection acts slowly but steadily hand in hand with other relevant laws of nature - on the phylogenetic traits of populations, it inevitably leads to the success of some species and the extinction of others.

The success of our species, on the other hand has been evidently, and for quite a long era, dependant on our intellectual productivity rather than the biological reproduction - although both are essential. Our mental powers and the creation of cognitive artifacts have enabled us to unveil the secrets of adaptation, explore Nature’s “preferences” [[73] “befriend” laws of nature and

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

manipulate nature's fundamentals. “...great philosophers and discoverers in science, aid the progress of mankind in a far higher degree by their works than by leaving a numerous progeny (Darwin, 1797, p106)

Most significantly to our survival, we have discovered the deterministic* circularity of life systems [8][20][24][25] where subsystems are subsumed within systems and systems are subsumed within suprasystems in deterministic structures and relationships till a totality has been reached (also called the ontology) [8].

And by our unique faculties of reflection [11]; conceptualisation [36], strategic planning, multi-tasking, and weighing probabilities against Preferences (reasoning) [17] we were able to extend our materialistic existence to encompass all the elements on the whole planet as inseparable of our survival mission and organic existence. This as I propose is an actual extension of our genotype-phenotype structure [86].

This, in a sense, has been highlighted in the IUCN report on the conservation status of Homo sapiens by stating that the “use of technology”[34] is a main reason behind the success of our species. However, we are not a mere user of technology: Human beings are the creator of technology! The relationship between our organic and cultural identities with the physical elements are real enough to have produced a cybernetic “divergence of character” [12] which set us way “higher-in-scale” from any alive species on this planet, where physical, chemical and biological elements interrelate through the capacity of observation to materialise a novel existence of our humanity through cybernetics.

Once upon a time, that little mutation occurred in Our brain and there we go!

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

Such little mutation might be the one recently identified by Franz-Xaver Neubert - Oxford University [38], namely the Lateral frontal pole prefrontal cortex in the Ventrolateral frontal cortex region of the brain, and seems, as the reported, to be “uniquely human": "does not seem to have an equivalent in the brains of monkeys at all, and which is involved with strategic planning, decision making and multitasking abilities”. Strategic planning certainly involves Cybernetics.

However, the same intellectual faculty which enabled us to consciously flourish in number and prosper in the quality of life - may also lead to our sudden fall and destruction if we don’t take guard right now and call seriously for self-awareness and unity towards the goal of reserving life! The sociophysiobiological kingdom:

The earliest popular man-made cybernetic device was the water clock, invented by the Greek physicist and inventor Ctesibius Of Alexandria (c. 270 bc). The clock was a self-contained device in which steady water dripping gave rise to a float holding a pointer to mark the course of time in hours [15]. This date may be an official inauguration for the new humanity but it actually goes back to 10,000 years ago, since mass-education has become essential for the development of our life on earth by the invention of agriculture [22], and since writing has been invented afterwards. Around then we began to give up on the Natural Selection as we ourselves were able to reserve knowledge on what we believed to be the most adaptive behavioural traits in codes/text using “cognitive artefacts” [35] to transmit to the next generations rather than submit to “Nature” for encoding them into their genes through the double process of random mutation and the Natural selection; and “distribute” [22] the knowledge through several teaching and social learning techniques which may begin with praise and reinforcement of the desirable behaviour and up to the recent “emancipation-education” trends [2][4][9a][11][22][50][59].

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

This could be best explained in light of the 'the law of requisite variety [1][32]; by which our potential responses to the environmental changes are less predetermined (by genetic traits), more flexible and more variable than those of any other organic groups on the planet (so far) and where previous experiences, patterns and personal perceptions link effectively to weighing current probabilities and preferences. While the natural selection has only been producing definite patterns of behaviour that, in a human context, may be helpful in one situation while disastrous in another. It must not come to a surprise then that the word Homo sapiens literally means “the wise man” [17]. With the accumulation of such reserved “wisdom”, in the form of scripts and cybernetic models, we were able through ages of unique civilisation to ” to complement our biological efficiency and make up for any physical incapability by sophisticated social structures and technology. Therefore, the potential viability of our species – normally relating to reproductive fitness and thus to instinctively-selective helping-tendencies in other organisms - have become in our case rational and deliberate.

In the case of cooperation for survival, which has finally been considered as recurrent and abundant in nature [8], the natural selection “does the homework” for the other species with a limited probability of conscious cognition or a revolutionary behavioural shift. A salmon who has never recognised parents will set off for a long trip from the river to the sea then back to her "birthplace" in the river to lay her eggs, then inevitably dies, before meeting the offspring or get to teach them anything [60]. A male Emperor penguin stands on the beach for nearly two months holding an egg on its feet till it hatches then sets off for feeding (Encyclopaedia Britannica). All what they need for surviving a current situation had been meticulously encoded into their genes by the long steady process of natural selection prior to the situation, otherwise they have almost no chance to survive [24][25][26]. Emerging

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

behavioural traits are generally introduced to the population, through random mutation, environmental factors and a limited portion of cognition, while in Homo sapiens, due to the advanced mental faculties, situational and “moral” modification of behaviour occur mainly through reason, education, social learning (imitation and reinforcement), and a limited portion of “social instincts” [11] (Darwin, 1871, pp. 77,100, 102).

The human version of cooperation/altruism therefore is rational [13][24] even while natural tendencies are presents! It may begin with nurturing offspring then kin-helping initiatives, through cooperation for mutual benefit, selfsacrifice for beloved ones and up to the extreme of dying for strangers - as with many soldiers, heroes or saints. Even in its most spontaneous form, cooperation involves a perceptive cling to certain values or an evolution of a behavioural pattern through positive reinforcement or a nurtured belief [58][83] of a delayed justice. We as human beings have the insight to cooperate for reasons other than boosting reproductive fitness as we believe we are capable of transmitting our selected behavioural traits through role modelling, social learning, literature and education [4][9a][12][59][63].more effectively and massively than through biological reproduction alone.

The survival of the Wise then is tied up today to what we select to massively communicate among each other through education, media and activism. Of our belief that we belong to each other as one unique kind beyond the limits of genetic dictation. There is a need to correct our self-image through the reconciliation








[17][33][45][76]. The cybernetic phylogeny

A cybernetic perspective of life is that the universe, molecules, cells,

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

ecosystems, among other aspects of nature, are self-organising" (Maturana and Valera, 1928; Umpleby, 2007) - Darwin's Survival of the fittest Theory specifically portrays a species as a system or an intergenerational population with system dynamics and a capacity - although such has never been articulated till a holistic Darwinism has been finally acknowledged.

"The science of cybernetics is not about thermostats or machines; that characterization is a caricature. Cybernetics is about purposiveness, goals, information flows, decision-making control processes and feedback (properly defined) at all levels of living systems." (Corning, 1996).

Death, on the other hand, is not the absence of life and is not equal to nothingness. Death is simply the prevalence of “lower-levels” of life organisations over a higher-level one, leading to the decomposition of an organic system into more simple components that would no longer be connected under the same cybernetic unit. Our bodies are composed of the same elements of earth, atmospheres and oceans, however, it is in the alignment of matter in such a manner which allows such communication and such autonomy under such natural forces at a certain point of time and space that makes a person a living organisation. All organic beings whether consciously or unconsciously strive to maintain their higher identity long enough to replicate and populate their advantageous traits by reproducing “more offspring than can survive”; and consequently get their species “higher in the scale” (Darwin, 1999) [12], then inevitably decompose into lower level existence by death, resulting in the continuation (renewal) of life and advancement of the surviving life organisations. Our higher identity, however, has drastically complixified to actually include more elements than we possess in the aggregation of our organic bodies and to expand beyond the genotype-phenotype correlations by a resilient bond among the organic and non-organic elements through cybernetics.

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

To further explain; Cybernetics is about the unique ability of human beings to observe, conceptualise and/or simulate self-regulatory systems. The capacity of observation! It has been known as the art of “steermanship” and that’s what the word means in Greek [42]. Corning (1997) sheds the light on the core concept of cybernetics, wrapping up a huge compilation of


provided by hundreds of scientists, philosophers, institution and Cyberneticists [2][8][20] in several domains of knowledge and areas of specialism:

Energy and matter are inter-reversible. They are often treated by biologists as one entity, while physics (which takes spatiotemporal aspects in relation to an observer into consideration) defines the relationship between energy and matter by adding an observed difference/information [60]. Human beings consequently cannot avoid editting life-systems' information through the capacity of observation.

My proposal for the unity of sciences over the human identity is that a real life system is an [hICEM] rather than [IEM]. The smallest biological “hICEM” known in our world would be the gene with its DNA, RNA, protein and the amazing energy of life [51].

Illustration 1: A real-life system hICEM = Relativity factor [h] (I+ [Cx+Cn]+ [E]±M) =real-life system hICEM=[I.a+I.a~b+I.a~b~c+I.a~b~c~d+(I.Capacity)+I.z]+[CX+Cn]+[E±]±[M1XM2XM3X(M. Capacity)+M.z]

Where [I] is information/data and [E] is energy, [M] is matter and [C] is the aggregation of intrinsic and extrnisic communication among the system components and with


environment, while; [h] A coefficient representing an amount of uncertainty relating system fragments to each

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

other purposefully in a spatiotemporal position to an observer – relativity factor. [Cn]: Intrinsic communication depicting the linkage among the system components where control basically lies. [Cx]: Extrinsic communication depicting the “structure determinism”. The coordination between [Cn] and [Cx] in relation to [h] represents a learning capacity (Maturana and Valera, 1928). It is what Stafford Beers (1972) describes as “the brain of the firm”. Any system has a capacity including a genome (Gott, 2003). Darwin proposed that species (as intergenerational populations) have capacities and cannot grow in number infinitely. Circularity is potentially infinite as inferred from the “structure determinism” paradigm and Newton’s Laws. In living systems, new behavioural traits (a, b, c, etc.) are generally introduced to the system, in case of animals, through random mutation (producing correspondent decisive behavioural patterns), environmental factors and limited portion of cognition, while in Homo sapiens, due to mental faculties, modification of behaviour occurs mainly through reason, education, social learning (imitation and reinforcement), and limited portion of “social instincts”(i.e. natural dispositions). (Darwin, 1871, pp. 77,100, 102)

his illustration applies to each self-regulatory system, be it an animal, plant, or a corporation, be it animate or a machine or even a social system -as long as it is capable of self-governance and self-directed motion at a certain point of time and space [22] as perceived by an observer. My cybernetic phylogenetic illustration depicts a uniquely human “divergence of character”[12] which has occurred some 10,000 years ago by the invention of agriculture and the use of cognitive artefacts [22][35].

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

Eventually, the more a system is capable of mobilising matter and energy into itself through complexity of governance and the higher capacity it acquires, due to subsuming lower-level systems (with their system capacity added) into itself.

In this sense human beings is the unique species which has a genotypephenotype capacity-building through system Cybernetics (i.e. building up systems) and in this sense human beings might not have to suffer amonggroups competition, but rather to have providence over other elements and groups/species through sustainability and conservation measures.

The idea of species capacities was introduced by Darwin (1871) himself in the example of the breeding elephants but as he did not argue cybernetics this was given a different name..

The Cybernetic Phylogeny: hICEM = h * {I.a + I.a~b + I.a~b~c + I.a~b~c~d + I.(cognitive code [vehicle]) + I.(cognitive code [aeroplane]) + I.(cognitive code [self-defence-weapon])+ I.(cognitive code [submarine]) + I.(cognitive code [TV]) + I.(cognitive code [agriculture]) + I.capacity+I.z} + {[Cn]+[Cx]+[C±]} + {E1+E2+E3+E4+E5+E6+ E7+E8+E9+E±} ± {M1XM2XM3XM4~(car) X M5(aeroplane) X M6~(self-defence-weapon) X M7(submarine) X M8~(TV) X m9~(Farm) X [M.capacity] X M.z} * ---------------------------------------------------Where a, b, c are genetic modification and 1, 2, 3 are biological modification involving an “attached” physical and social phenotype correspondent to attached cognitive codes (scientific-knowledge heritage).

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

From this cybernetic perspective, we are surprisingly not in a competition-forsurvival situation with other organic groups over resources, as we ideally (and uniquely) seek to replace the loss of organic matter we consume through agriculture, breeding, sustainability and conservation trends, and might not also be in competition with each other for survival as we ideally seek only to neutralise the vile, offensive and malignant (as the maladaptive in the special case of human beings) individuals and groups through our ”justice systems” [12] and self-defence battles - in worst case scenarios – towards the advancement of our organisation, with “fitness” taken to a new level in light of the Holistic Darwinism [8]. Bringing the so called “inanimate” substance into life [57] within our phylogeny, as an integrative genotype-phenotype structure, enabled us today to fly, dive, cross vast oceans and deserts, communicate across thousands of miles in addition to navigating the space, all ideally available to each by the invention of monetary systems without needing organic organs such as wings, feather, scales, fins, or antennas, and qualifies us, as I propose, to be the only sociophysiobiological kingdom on earth: The Homo Cyberneticist!

However, such extended human existence includes also enormous lot of harmful substance on the three levels: Organic, physical and cultural, and has been seriously threatening to breakdown lately. How come then that our conservation status has been based on the mere increase/decrease in number and range of distribution apart from our extended physical existence? While evaluating Homo sapiens, how can ethical aspects, threats of world wars; terrorism, mass- weapon destruction, man-caused climate change, deforestation, desertification, pollution, man-caused species extinction and threats to biodiversity [22], and finally and anticipated mess of the artificial intelligence which scientists say “we may not survive”[6], be simply overlooked?

In a world where there is an estimated number of 700 million hungry people

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

(WFP, 2014) [77], while 302 one third of amount of food “produced for human consumption every year gets lost or wasted” FAO [69], and where much of such hunger is caused by extraordinary conditions such as wars, civil wars, displacement, destruction of infrastructure then hunger traps (Challenges of Global Poverty, MIT, 2013), and exacerbated by gender inequality according to Women in Agriculture: Closing the Gender 306 Gap for Development, FAO, 2011 report.

In a world where we are complaining of the depletion of fossil fuel and/or global warming, while the “little bit of sunlight falling on earth for just one hour meets the world's energy demands for an entire year”![39] In a world where sectarian wars have been claiming thousands of human lives daily in addition to displacing millions of people[46], while someone claims that “the lack of major wars may be hurting economic growth” [47] - whatever excuse has been provided for making such a media statement - and where we kill about 12,000 elephants yearly to make ornamental “stuff”[79], that our human “activities” are considered as responsible for 99% of the threats to the current endangered species![18] In a world where there is enough weapons to wipe off humanity in a few seconds and enough influential people who would willingly go for it, and enough tension over power rather than resources: Time to have paused and reconsidered our realistic situation.

I claim that the required unity of self-reference as one unique intellectual human kind is essential for sustainability of life and that it is near impossible to reach such unity as long as our current collective self-image – as just another species of mammals - persists despite of the apparent current success based on population growth and distribution maps. Population growth is not the key

From a bio-sociological perspective, the failure of cooperation is a sign of

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

malignancy which would only result in increased “tension between lower and higher levels of complexity”. The growth in the number of un-synergetic cellgroups [8][18] in an organic system is not at all a healthy sign, no matter how vastly the system expands: The mere increase in number with no equilibrium “synergy”/correspondent population self-organisation towards a goal or a set of goals or too much chaotic/irrelevant substance might lead the system to reach its maximum capacity – unexpectedly - then inevitably break down into lower levels of existence

On the social level, people organised themselves, at a certain stage of our evolution, in families then tribes, then nations. Patriotism has been essential for group(s) survival and competition over resources was inevitable, nonetheless, by advancing in civilization and with globalisation trends, immigrations, war displacement, humanistic trends; ethical evolution, the concept of patriotism must be taken to a global level (as Darwin himself proposed) and the moral system driving our social system(s) must be reexamined against their survival and equality values, beyond localities and beliefs. It is the natural world that we have and it is nature that we are responsible to reserve! It is an overwhelming paradox that we depict the harmful impact of “human activities” on the environment as a product of a unity [21][33] while considering survival as individuals, moral systems, economic systems, ethnicities, communities and nations; knowing that such systems do not function in conformity, with some actually invasive of others leading to serious system conflicts.

As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached,

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races (Darwin, 1871) [12].

Important to note that the invitation for population-self-awareness, population self-organisation and unity of self-reference does not imply communism, totalitarianism or social control, as contributing to the welfare of humanity must come voluntarily and thus mutually enforced [32] through democratic decision-making mechanisms and is thus dependent on ongoing quality education and social activism. It is an on-going process of mutual negotiation and population self-recreation [41].

It is true that we might not be the only species whose members can learn (modify behaviour) through culture, however, we might be the only species on earth whose members have to learn mainly through culture (i.e. education of all sorts), that education has been described as our “biological make up [22].

Because of the lack of a global patriotism (collective-self-awareness and unity of self- reference), many philosopher and scholars have proposed that our social/economical systems are - on the long run - pathological and selfmutilating [40][41] this in addition to the recent concerns regarding the artificial intelligence [5] Machines at their current phase and despite of their “built in” control mechanism, can only operate through human providence, i.e. provided energy, and provided purpose. Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, has the potential of being able to unite independently with matter and import its own energy then have its own independent “self-awareness”. This may eventually have an uncontrollable-unpredictable impact on humanity and life in general, as we get more reliant on our own creation and more interrelated to the physical elements we’ve aligned. The ultimate irreversible result to this might be losing our identity as the higher-level organisation [6], a matter worthy of

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

serious contemplation: What is it that we are admitting into our life system/phylogeny! Do we really have a life system, to begin with, that can function towards conservation and sustainability or do we only consider ourselves as one when it comes to our harmful impact on nature? A report by the World Wild Life Fund warns that earth might be “expiring” by 2050 [88].

Self-awareness and population self-organisation

The multi-dimensional identity of our kind may explain why we value historical places, historical libraries, historical figures and the cultural heritage as part of our collective existence, and why we care to classify species, reach out for life in other planets, and why human beings have such influence on the environment.

This might be our last chance; as threats are maximising, and as we are the makers of our own ethics [8][11][12][31][40][41][44], biology, physics, chemistry and social sciences must “reconcile” through cybernetics to help us realise who we are, that we would be able to negotiate among ourselves what is the next-best-thing to do and how to distinguish “good” from “harmful” practices in regards of sustainability, survival and conservation through a holistic approach. We’ll be OK when men of intellect are our heroes rather than men of wars - although both are much appreciated – and when a female scientist is as popular as a female entertainer (with much respect for both), and when human beings have realised the beauty of wisdom over the beauty of hair and skin and where there is no discrimination whatsoever among people of different origins, colour, gender, sexuality or physical ability as long as each contributes positively, one way or another, to the welfare of humanity and the advancement of our organisation!

* This is a series of propaedeutic publications expressing our perspective of

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

the environment preceding the launch of a peer-reviewed Sustainability Cybernetics Journal. This publication is not the ideal format but an edited version of the original letter sent to the IUCN World Parks Congress on July 2014. The author had benefitted from a peer-reviewed paper at the time of writing (Andrulis 2012) but since that paper has been taken down by the publisher later, its perspective has been removed from this paper as well with no influence on the content, depending basically on the theory known as The Living Systems Theory articulated as “that cells, organs, organisms, groups, corporations, nations, and supranational organizations all process matter, energy, and information” introduced by G. Miller’s [1978]

and explained

further by Umpleby (2007). ** Gihan Sami Soliman

Environmental researcher and a certified educator, founder and president of International Curricula Educators Association (ICEA), a winner of educating Africa Award – 2011, for entrepreneurship in education and an accredited major group for the earth summit Rio+20, Brazil. A member in Teach a Man to Fish Organization and an affiliate practitioner to the Forum UNESCO University and Heritage. A semi-finalist in the MIT Enterprise Forum by the Sinai Sustainability Cybernetics Centre, 2013. Reference List

[1] Ashby, W. R.(1968) Variety , Constraint, And The Law Of Requisite Variety. E: CO Issue Vol. 13 Nos. 1-2 2011 pp. 190-207. [2] ASC Website (2014) Defining Cybernetics. Some background. Available at [], on:05/01/14]


International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

[3] Bajouhandeh, E. (2013) Personal Development and self-actualization of students in the new environment, International, Journal of Research In Social Sciences, IJRSS & K.A.J., Vol. 2, No.1 [4] Bandura (1971) Social Learning Theory, Standford University, General Learning Corporation [5] BBC News (2013) How are humans going to become extinct? Available at [] [6] Borello, M.E. (2005) The rise, fall and resurrection of group selection Endeavour .Vol.29 No.1 March 2005 45 [7] Ceccarelli, L. (2001) Uniting Biology and the Social Sciences: A Rhetorical Comparison of E. O. Wilson’s Consilience and Theodosius Dobzhansky’s Mankind







at :[] [8] Corning, P. (1997) A Holistic Darwinism "Synergistic Selection" and the Evolutionary, Process,.Institute for the Study of Complex Systems, JAI Press [9] Condillac, E.B. (2001) Essay on the Origin of Human Knowledge, translated and edited by Hans Aarsleff , Princeton University, Cambridge University Press [9a]* Curzon, L.B. (1990) Teaching in Further Education. Fourth edition [10] DambÖck, C. (2011) Caught in The Middle". Philosophy of Science between Science Studies and Formal Philosophy, as illustrated by the SneedStegmüller Formalism, Institute Vienna Circle, University of Vienna (results of the FWF- project P18066(04-2005-09.2009) and P21750(08.2009.09.2011) [11] Darwin, C. (1871) the Descent of Man, and selection in relation to sex, New York: D. Appleton [12] Darwin, C. (1999) On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, 6th Edition available at []. [13] Doebeli, M. and Hauert, C. (2005) Models of cooperation based on the Prisoner's Dilemma and the Snowdrift game, Ecology Letters, 8:748-766 [14] Espejo R. (2003) The Viable System Model: A Briefing about

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

Organizational Structure, SYNCHO Limited, Website: [15] Encyclopedia Britannica. Ctesibius Of Alexandria. Available at [] [16]






at[] [17]







[] [18]







[] [19] Featherston, J and Durand, P.M. (2012) Cooperation and conflict in cancer: An evolutionary perspective. S Afr J Sci;108(9/10), Art. #1002, 7 pages, v108i9/10.1002 available at []. [20] Foerster, H.V. (1979) On Cybernetics of Cybernetics, University of Illinois, Urbana. [21] Gallopin, G. (2003) A systems approach to sustainability and sustainable development, Sustainable Development and Human Settlements Division ECLAC/ Government of the Netherlands Project NET/00/063 “Sustainability Assessment in Latin America and the Caribbean”. [22] Gray, P. ( 2011) The Evolutionary Biology of Education: How Our Hunter – Gatherer Educative Extincts could form the Basis For Education Today, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011 [23] Gilbert, N. Altruism can be explained by natural selection, Evolutionary biologists





available] [24] Glasersfeld, E.V. (1980) “Viability and the concept of selection”, American Psychologist (vol.35, 1980, 970–974) [25] Glasersfeld, E.V. (1996) Cybernetics and the Art of Living, 13th European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Vienna. [26] Glasersfeld, E.V. (2002) Cybernetics and the Theory of Knowledge, UNESCO Encyclopedia. *

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

[32] Heylighen, F. (1992) Principles of \Systems and Cybernetics: an evolutionary perspective. Cybernetics and systems, 92, pp.3--10. Available at[] [33] International Council for Science(2005) Harnessing Science, Technology, and Innovation for Sustainable Development. A report from the ICSU-ISTSTWAS Consortium ad hoc Advisory Group.25. [34] IUCN World Park Conference available at [] [35] Jones and Nemeth (2005) Cognitive Artifacts in Complex Work, Redesign Research, USA, the University of Chicago, USA. [36] Kenny, V.(2009) "There is nothing like the real thing", Revisiting the Need for Third Order Cybernetics, Constructivist Foundations Volume4- Number 2.available at [], accessed on 24/2/2014 [37] Lederberg E. and Lederburg J. (1952) Evolution 101, available at:[]. [38] Live Science (2014) Newly Discovered Brain Region Helps Make Humans









[], accessed on 2/4/2014 [39] Maclamb (2010) The Secret World of Energy, Ecology Global Network available at [39a]* Park, J.H.(2007) Persistent Misunderstandings of Inclusive Fitness and Kin Selection: Their Ubiquitous Appearance in Social Psychology Textbooks. Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 5(4). 2007. -861available


content/uploads/EP05860873.pdf][], accessed on: 1/3/2014 [40] Mariotti, H.(OIKOS), Autpoiesis, culture, and society available at [] [41] Maturana and Valera (1928) Autopoieses and Cognition: The realization of the Living,Boston studies in the philosophy of science; v.42), available at

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

[ and_cognition.pdf] [42] Merriam Webster Online Dictionary (2014) Cybernetics. Merriam Webster, Inc. Available at [ ], accessed on; 5/7/2013 [43] Mindell, D. (2000) Cybernetics: Knowledge Domains in Engineering systems. [44] Mooney et al. Evolution of Natural and Social Science Interactions in Global






[] [45] Murray, J. (2006) Cybernetic Circularity in Teaching and Learning, International4 Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Volume 18,





[] [46] National Geographic Education. Mapping Displaced People around the World [47] New York Times. The lack of major wars may be hurting economy. [48] Nowak et al (2010) The evolution of Eusociality Macmillan Publishers Limited. [49] O'Neil d (1998-2013) Early Theories of Evolution: Darwin and Natural Selection,




[] [50] O'Neil d (1998-2013) Early Theories of Evolution: Darwin and Natural Selection,




[] [51] Ophardet, C.E. (2003) Virtual Chemobook; Types of RNA, Elmhurst College



[]. [52] Park, J.H.(2007) Persistent Misunderstandings of Inclusive Fitness and

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

Kin Selection: Their Ubiquitous Appearance in Social Psychology Textbooks. Evolutionary Psychology – ISSN 1474-7049 – Volume 5(4). 2007. -861available at[] [53] Parra-Luna F, (2009), Systems Science and Cybernetics: The Long Road to World Sociosystemicity - Francisco Parra-Luna ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) [54] Patterson, C. H. (1997) Foundation for the Theory of Instruction and Educational Psychology, Harp & Row. [55] Peel D. (2005) The significance of behavioural learning theory to the development of effective coaching practice, Hartnell Training Ltd. UK, International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 2005. [56] Piliavin & Charng, A review of Recent Theory and Research, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.16 (1990), pp.27-65, Annual Reviews, available at []



23/2/2014 [57] Pross A (2011) Toward a general theory of evolution: Extending Darwinian theory to inanimate matter, Pross Journal of Systems Chemistry, vailable at [] [58] Rachlin H (2002).Altruism and selfishness Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25, 239–296 [59] Reece, I. & Walker, S. (2003, 2007) Teaching, training and learning, (5th6th editions). and Sunderland. Business Education Publishers Ltd. [60] Ridly, M (1995) Animal Behaviour, Blackwell Scientific publications [61] Robock, A. (2008) 20 Reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists MAY/JUNE (Vol. 64, No. 2, p. 14-18, 59 DOI: 10.2968/064002006 [62] Ruggiero et al. (1994) Population Viability Analysis, Corel Corporation Limited, Available at [], accessed on 4/2/2014]. [63] Schroeder D.(2005) Evolutionary Ethics, Lancaster University, United

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014

Kingdom, (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). [64] Schwaninger M. (2004) System Dynamics and Cybernetics: A Necessary Synergy, International System Dynamics Conference, Oxford, July 2004. [65] Smith, M.K. (1996, 2000) Curriculum theory and practice, the encyclopedia of informal education, available at [ [66] Soliman, G.S. SSCC Project, 2013, MIT Forum Enterprise; Semi-finalist, Team 46. Stafford Beer(Uploaded on 19 Jun 2009) a Viable System Model ; Watt’s Engine, available at: []. [67] Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2003) Biological Altruism, Available at [], accessed on: 11/24/13 [68] The IUCN Red List of Threatened SpeciesTM (2014). Available at [] [69] The United Nations General Assembly (2000) The Millennium Declaration available at [] [70] Tummons J. (2010) Becoming a Professional Tutor in the Lifelong Learning Secor (Achieving QTLS Series) (p. 60). Learning Matters. Kindle Edition. [71] Umpleby, S.A. (2007) Physical relationships among matter, energy and information (Reprinted form Cybernetics and Systems ‘04, 2004). Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 2007, 24, 369-372. [72] UNEP (2009) Global Food Losses and Food Waste - FAO, 2011, the environmental crisis: The environment’s role in averting future food crisis [73] UNESCO, 1996 Management of Social Transformations (MOST) University Twinning Programmed (UNITWIN) Policy Paper - No. 3 [74] Varese F.(2001) Altruism and the Theory of Rational Choice: an Emperical Exploration, in collaboration with Meir Yaish. [75] Vincent Kenny (2009) "There is nothing like the real thing", Revisiting the Need for [76] Third Order Cybernetics, Constructivist Foundations Volume4-

International-Curricula Educators Association - Cybernetics and Ethics Vol. 1 – No. 2 13/7/2014





accessed on 24/2/2014 [78] Walkin, L. (2000) Teaching and Learning in Further and Adult Education, Stanely Thorne. [79] Wallace, S. (2005) Teaching & Supporting Learning in Further Education, Learning Matters. [80] West et al (2006) Altruism, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh Current Biology, Vol 16 No 13 R482. [81] West et al (2006) Social evolution theory for microorganisms, Nature Publishing Group, VOLUME 4 [82] Wilson & Holldobler(2005) Eusociality: Origin and consequences, PNAS, vol. 102 no. 38 13369. [83] Wilson & Wilson (2007) Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology, Quarterly review in Biology, press, Vol. 82, No. 4, December, available at []. [84] Wilson E. O.(1998) Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, New York, Knopf, 1998, p. 13. [85] World Food Program Website, Fighting Hunger Worldwide, Hunger, Hunger Statistics; available at [] accessed on: 2/3/2014. [86]







Encycopedia of Life Sciences. NaturePublishing Group [87] West et al (2006) Altruism. Institute of Evolutionary Biology. School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh. Current Biology. Vol 16 No 13 R48 [88] Wildlife Fund (WWF) report cited in the Guardian observer (2014) Earth 'will expire by 2050 [IUCN/Earth 'will expire by 2050' UK news The Observer.htmWorl]

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.