Growth, development and evolution – The parameters of change in a dynamic world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The challenges of change on a finite planet have rarely been felt as acutely by such a broad cross-section of humanity as they are in this day and age. Today, we witness the closing in of the parameters of choice from increasing societal demands for energy, material goods and commodities, access to sources of clean water, air and soil, and higher standards of living on the one hand, and decreasing availability of non-renewable sources of energy, arable land, geopolitical stability and a more meaningful quality of life on the other. This article considers general approaches to dealing with the mounting pressures caused by this narrowing of the funnel of strategic choice for human civilizational development in balanced harmony with Earth. It explores the limitations and assumptions inherent in models based on growth, development and evolution. By considering the classical evolutionary economics of Joseph Schumpeter and the emerging evolutionary systems design perspective of contemporary evolutionary change agents, it surfaces key patterns in the quest for meaningful indices of progress. In the final analysis, this article argues for a humanistic and essentially non-quantitative appreciation of life. It suggests that meaningful progress be advanced through the development of an evolutionarily attuned mindset, skillset and heartset, capable of grasping the often non-linear leaps of logic required for the cultivation of patterns of being and becoming that foster global thrivability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".