Shimeji Simulation - Vol. 5 Ch. 48 - Train

[Irian]

Thanks for the chapter

 

[gronkle]

Every chapter is a delight.
And this chapter got me wondering which philosophical work the author is referencing to this time. Thanks for clearing it up in the credits page.

The Origin of Species isn't really a philosophical work, nor is it what's being referenced as far as I can tell. Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species gave the first evidence-based account for evolutionary theory, giving us the first ideas of evolution by natural selection, and the idea of common ancestry. It's where he invented the idea of all life being connected via ancestry like the branches of a tree. I don't think it's particularly relevant to this chapter, anyway.

What it did remind me of was the early part of the video game Spore, where you start out as a small microorganism and gain traits ("evolve") and grow by eating living things around you. However, the analogy was explained by Mushroom, as being like how we try to better ourselves by overcoming what's around us, even if sometimes we are beaten (or eaten) by it.

 

[Reamer]

Reminds me of biomega

 

[_LOOP_]

The Origin of Species isn't really a philosophical work, nor is it what's being referenced as far as I can tell. Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species gave the first evidence-based account for evolutionary theory, giving us the first ideas of evolution by natural selection, and the idea of common ancestry. It's where he invented the idea of all life being connected via ancestry like the branches of a tree. I don't think it's particularly relevant to this chapter, anyway.

What it did remind me of was the early part of the video game Spore, where you start out as a small microorganism and gain traits ("evolve") and grow by eating living things around you. However, the analogy was explained by Mushroom, as being like how we try to better ourselves by overcoming what's around us, even if sometimes we are beaten (or eaten) by it.

I think it is sort of relevant. The reason the scanlation team referenced it is because of the line "Struggle for survival gives birth to all kinds of shapes.", which is a core element to Darwin's theory (there is more individuals than resources, thus natural selection. Life as we know it wouldn't have come to be if there hadn't been struggle for survival).

For anyone interested, here is my attempted analysis of these few pages, although I'm not a philosopher:
Very tall character said she tried to recreate the origin of life. The "symbols" could be seen as molecules, which "gradually become more complex and organized" and eventually become species. "When saturation occurs, the shapes that accumulate the most resources live on" is probably the phenomenon I described above (not enough resources anymore for all the individuals, so the strongest survive).
But then, she says "But when the culmination comes, will it reach the form that would resemble me?" I think the question here is whether, if you were to recreate the universe from scratch and just throw a bunch of atoms together, would life eventually evolve in the same way and end up creating the same individuals? Are we a mere coincidence, or are we inevitable considering the amount of atoms and an infinite amount of time? (I'm not necessarily taking position here).
Then Shimeji seems to experience something like what brought her existence, the molecules that constitute her, from the moment they first appeared. I think she concludes 2 things: 1) We all come from the same place, a certain idea of unification ("I see... We are...") 2) People (and species) always try to become better versions of themselves (What about her?)

 

[gronkle]

I think it is sort of relevant. The reason the scanlation team referenced it is because of the line "Struggle for survival gives birth to all kinds of shapes.", which is a core element to Darwin's theory (there is more individuals than resources, thus natural selection. Life as we know it wouldn't have come to be if there hadn't been struggle for survival).

I see what you're getting at, but just to satisfy my particular brand of autism here: the core element to Darwinian Natural Selection, is speciation (ie: the creation of new species) by environmental selection (that is, negative selection; ie: not being selected is survival) for fitness (where "fitness" refers to the relative ability to produce fertile offspring, mediated by access to ecological niches over geological time). As such, it is more deterministic, because adaptation to a particular niche necessitates certain forms to evolve over others (an idea that has been borne out since his death, see: convergent evolution).

This actually feeds well into the next part:

Very tall character said she tried to recreate the origin of life. The "symbols" could be seen as molecules, which "gradually become more complex and organized" and eventually become species. "When saturation occurs, the shapes that accumulate the most resources live on" is probably the phenomenon I described above (not enough resources anymore for all the individuals, so the strongest survive).
But then, she says "But when the culmination comes, will it reach the form that would resemble me?" I think the question here is whether, if you were to recreate the universe from scratch and just throw a bunch of atoms together, would life eventually evolve in the same way and end up creating the same individuals? Are we a mere coincidence, or are we inevitable considering the amount of atoms and an infinite amount of time? (I'm not necessarily taking position here).
Then Shimeji seems to experience something like what brought her existence, the molecules that constitute her, from the moment they first appeared. I think she concludes 2 things: 1) We all come from the same place, a certain idea of unification ("I see... We are...") 2) People (and species) always try to become better versions of themselves (What about her?)

What I think you are getting at here is the idea of determinism; that is, that outcomes are naturally predicted by the circumstances that precede them. If someone created a universe with origins exact to our own, down to the smallest quantum ripple, would the outcomes be the same? Would they create themselves, or at least a near-perfect copy, eventually?
Incidentally, I'd say no because of quantum weirdness adding a certain level of randomness, or at least causing a range of values rather than specifics. However, at the level of organisms, I'd say determinism holds fairly true. Even with all our illusions of free will, our behaviours, especially on cohort, are immensely predictable. Same, too, at the level of atoms and molecules. Isotopes decay at a predictable rate even if we can't predict when a decay event will occur, due to quantum effects.
I'd say given the same circumstances and time, something at least recognisable as hominids would probably evolve, being the natural course for matter to organise given the circumstances (possibly tautologically so!).
However, I get the feeling I might be taking a more materialist take than was intended.

What I got from Mushroom was a sense of belonging, borne of an empathy with others' stuggles (having briefly lived it as a fish shape creature). If I synthesise that with what I get from you, I'd say that perhaps it was a sense of belonging to a greater whole, and connection with the great continuity of life from the first subatomic particles to their reorganisation into every life today. Perhaps?

 

[_LOOP_]

I see what you're getting at, but just to satisfy my particular brand of autism here: the core element to Darwinian Natural Selection, is speciation (ie: the creation of new species) by environmental selection (that is, negative selection; ie: not being selected is survival) for fitness (where "fitness" refers to the relative ability to produce fertile offspring, mediated by access to ecological niches over geological time). As such, it is more deterministic, because adaptation to a particular niche necessitates certain forms to evolve over others (an idea that has been borne out since his death, see: convergent evolution).

This actually feeds well into the next part:

What I think you are getting at here is the idea of determinism; that is, that outcomes are naturally predicted by the circumstances that precede them. If someone created a universe with origins exact to our own, down to the smallest quantum ripple, would the outcomes be the same? Would they create themselves, or at least a near-perfect copy, eventually?
Incidentally, I'd say no because of quantum weirdness adding a certain level of randomness, or at least causing a range of values rather than specifics. However, at the level of organisms, I'd say determinism holds fairly true. Even with all our illusions of free will, our behaviours, especially on cohort, are immensely predictable. Same, too, at the level of atoms and molecules. Isotopes decay at a predictable rate even if we can't predict when a decay event will occur, due to quantum effects.
I'd say given the same circumstances and time, something at least recognisable as hominids would probably evolve, being the natural course for matter to organise given the circumstances (possibly tautologically so!).
However, I get the feeling I might be taking a more materialist take than was intended.

What I got from Mushroom was a sense of belonging, borne of an empathy with others' stuggles (having briefly lived it as a fish shape creature). If I synthesise that with what I get from you, I'd say that perhaps it was a sense of belonging to a greater whole, and connection with the great continuity of life from the first subatomic particles to their reorganisation into every life today. Perhaps?

That's very interesting. I still lack the knowledge to properly analyze this manga, but I'd like to try eventually (unfortunately, I don't really have time for that, at least for now). It could be fun to share opinions between a few people, I think it could lead to very interesting (and long) discussions

 

[aTI53]

This is just the prolog to "lagtrain"

 

[Hikineet]

Thanks for the chapter.

 

[MrViktor]

Not even rewriting the laws of the universe can separate Chito and Yuuri

The best part of this is when it shows them disembarking on a plain, could this be a reference to the last chapter of GLT?

 

[AerinSoronume]

why does she remind me of the AI from GLT the suicidal one

 

[dejaman]

The more I read this manga more I feel like it really isnt meant to be enjoyed at all. It‘s just one exposition after another… never seen such heavy handed storytelling in any medium lol. I guess that makes it pretty unique though.

 

[pushpakg]

@Burden can you continue mysteries and maidens

 

[Nylodale]

I can't stop seeing the parallels with Second Order Cybernetics anymore. The way in which people are both observers and participants of a self-maintaining system of Autopoiesis. Although it may be my own bias.

 

[Wouju]

At page 11 Yuuri and Chito disembark onto a field. Reminds me of the GLT afterword where we see Yuuri and Chito also standing in a similar field

 

[ImNotCreativeEnoughtForThese]

Real scared of reading the comments when reading stuff like this.

 

[namecantbebl0nk]

OMG PLEASE DON'T BE A BAD ENDING

 

[eirianrobotto]

i hope someone someday makes a big juicy video essay on this manga. A 3 hour one.

maybe Internet Pitstop
or Eyepatch Wolf.