Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:38:02.149Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Information: Its Interpretation, Its Inheritance, and Its Sharing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Eva Jablonka
Eva Jablonka*
Affiliation:
The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv, Tel-Aviv 69978, Israel; jablonka@post.tau.ac.il.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The semantic concept of information is one of the most important, and one of the most problematical concepts in biology. I suggest a broad definition of biological information: a source becomes an informational input when an interpreting receiver can react to the form of the source (and variations in this form) in a functional manner. The definition accommodates information stemming from environmental cues as well as from evolved signals, and calls for a comparison between information-transmission in different types of inheritance systems—the genetic, the epigenetic, the behavioral, and the cultural-symbolic. This comparative perspective highlights the different ways in which information is acquired and transmitted, and the role that such information plays in heredity and evolution. Focusing on the special properties of the transfer of information, which are very different from those associated with the transfer of materials or energy, also helps to uncover interesting evolutionary effects and suggests better explanations for some aspects of the evolution of communication.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 69 , Issue 4 , December 2002 , pp. 578 - 605
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Acknowledgment: Many many thanks to Marion Lamb, Michael Lachmann, James Griesemer, Susan Oyama, Ayelet Shavit, and Eytan Avital for their constructive and critical comments. I am also grateful to Peter Godfrey-Smith and an anonymous referee for their thoughtful reviews of the previous version of this paper.

References

Amundson, Ron, and Lauder, George V. (1993), “Function without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology”, Function without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology 9:443–469.Google Scholar
Avital, Eytan, and Jablonka, Eva (2000), Animal Traditions: Behavioural Inheritance in Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caporale, Lynn H. (ed.) (1999), Molecular Strategies in Biological Evolution. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Volume 870. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Clark, Metrice M., Karpiuk, Peter, and Galef, Bennett G. Jr. (1993), “Hormonally Mediated Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics in Mongolian Gerbils”, Hormonally Mediated Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics in Mongolian Gerbils 364: 712.Google ScholarPubMed
Cummins, Robert (1975), “Functional Analysis”, Functional Analysis 72:741–765.Google Scholar
Fire, Andrew (1999), “RNA-Triggered Gene Silencing”, RNA-Triggered Gene Silencing 15:358–363.Google ScholarPubMed
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (1993), “Functions: Consensus without Unity”, Functions: Consensus without Unity 74:196–208.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2000), “Information, Arbitrariness, and Selection: Comments on Maynard Smith”, Information, Arbitrariness, and Selection: Comments on Maynard Smith 67:202–207.Google Scholar
Griesemer, James (2000), “Development, Culture, and the Units of Inheritance”, Philosophy of Science 67 (Proceedings): S348–S368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griesemer, James (forthcoming), Reproduction in the Evolutionary Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (2001), “Darwinism and Developmental Systems”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 195–218.Google Scholar
Hauser, Marc D. (1997), The Evolution of Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heldin, Carl-Henrik, and Purton, Mary (eds.) (1996), Signal Transduction. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Irelan, Jeffrey T., and Selker, Eric U. (1997), “Cytosine Methylation Associated with Repeat Induced Point Mutation Causes Epigenetic Gene Silencing in Neurospora crassa”, Cytosine Methylation Associated with Repeat Induced Point Mutation Causes Epigenetic Gene Silencing in Neurospora crassa 146:509–523.Google ScholarPubMed
Jablonka, Eva (1994), “Inheritance Systems and the Evolution of New Levels of Individuality”, Inheritance Systems and the Evolution of New Levels of Individuality 170:301–309.Google ScholarPubMed
Jablonka, Eva (2001), “The Systems of Inheritance”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency. Cambridge: MA MIT Press, 99–116.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva, and Lamb, Marion J. (1995), Epigenetic Inheritance and Evolution: The Lamarckian Dimension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva, and Lamb, Marion J. (1998), “Epigenetic Inheritance in Evolution”, Epigenetic Inheritance in Evolution 11:159–183.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva, and Lamb, Marion J. (in preparation) Evolution in Four Dimensions.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva, and Szathmáry, Eörs (1995), “The Evolution of Information Storage and Heredity”, The Evolution of Information Storage and Heredity 10:206–211.Google ScholarPubMed
Jablonka Eva, Marion J. Lamb, and Avital, Eytan (1998), “‘Lamarckian’ Mechanisms in Darwinian Evolution”, ‘Lamarckian’ Mechanisms in Darwinian Evolution 13:206–210.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Dale (1999), “Intercellular Signalling for Multicellular Morphogenesis”, in England, Reg R., Hobbs, Glyn, Bainton, Nigel J., and Roberts, Dave McL. (eds.), Microbial Signalling and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 139–160.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip S. (1993), “Function and Design”, Function and Design 18:379–397.Google Scholar
Lachmann Michael, Guy Sella, and Jablonka, Eva (2000), “On the Advantages of Information Sharing”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, series B 267:1287–1293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachmann Michael, Szablocs Számadó, and Bergstrom, Carl T. (2001), “Cost and Conflict in Animal Signals and Human Language”, Cost and Conflict in Animal Signals and Human Language 98:13189–13194.Google Scholar
Laland, Kevin N., and Brown, Gillian R. (2002), Sense and Nonsense: Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewontin, Richard C. (1983), “Gene, Organism, and Environment”, in Bendall, Derek S. (ed.), Evolution: From Molecules to Men. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 273–285.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John (2000), “The Concept of Information in Biology”, The Concept of Information in Biology 67:177–194.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John, and Szathmáry, Eörs (1995), The Major Transitions in Evolution. Oxford: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Miao, Shili L., Bazzaz, Fakhri A., and Primack, Richard B. (1991), “Persistence of Maternal Nutrient Effects in Plantago major: The Third Generation”, Persistence of Maternal Nutrient Effects in Plantago major: The Third Generation 72:1634–1642.Google Scholar
Millikan, Ruth G. (1984), Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Monod, Jaques (1971), Chance and Necessity. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Odling-Smee, John F. (1988), “Niche Constructing Phenotypes”, in Plotkin, Henry C. (ed.), The Role of Behavior in Evolution. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 73–132.Google Scholar
Odling-Smee, John F., Laland, Kevin N., and Feldman, Marcus W. (1996), “Niche Construction”, Niche Construction 147:641–648.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (1985), The Ontogeny of Information: Developmental Systems and Evolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2nd revised edition 2000. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2000), Evolution’s Eye: A System View of the Biology-Culture Divide. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2001), “Terms in Tension: What Do You Do When All the Good Words Are Taken?”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 177–193.Google Scholar
Paracer, Surindar, and Ahmadjian, Vernon (2000), Symbiosis: An Introduction to Biological Associations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (2000), “Information in Genetics and Developmental Biology: Comments on Maynard Smith”, Information in Genetics and Developmental Biology: Comments on Maynard Smith 67:208–213.Google Scholar
Shannon, Claude E., and Weaver, Warren (1949), The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Smith, John W. (1977), The Behavior of Communicating. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Sterelny, Kim (2000), “The ‘Genetic Program’ Program: A Commentary on Maynard Smith on Information in Biology”, The ‘Genetic Program’ Program: A Commentary on Maynard Smith on Information in Biology 67:195–201.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim (2001), “Niche Construction and the Extended Replicator”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 333–349.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, and Griffiths, Paul E. (1999), Sex and Death. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eörs, Szathmáry (2000), “The Evolution of Replicators”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, series B 355:1669–1676.Google Scholar
Thompson, John N., and Pellmyr, Olle (1991), “Evolution of Oviposition Behavior and Host Preference in Lepidoptera”, Evolution of Oviposition Behavior and Host Preference in Lepidoptera 36:65–89.Google Scholar
Wright, Larry (1973), “Functions”, Functions 82:139–168.Google Scholar
Zahavi, Amotz, and Zahavi, Avishag (1997), The Handicap Principle: A Missing Piece of Darwin’s Puzzle. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar