On the Nature of the Subjectivity of Living Things

A biosemiotic view of living things is presented that supersedes the mechanistic view of life prevalent in biology today. Living things are active agents with autonomous subjectivity, whose structure is triadic, consisting of the individual organism, its Umwelt and the society. Sociality inheres in every living thing since the very origin of life on the earth. The temporality of living things is guided by the purpose to live, which works as the semantic boundary condition for the processes of embodiment of the subjectivity. Freedom at the molecular and cellular levels allows autonomy and spontaneity to emerge even in single cell organisms, and the presence of the dimension of mind in every living thing is deduced. Living things transcend their individualness, as they live in historically formed higher order structure consisting of the lineage-species and the society. They also transcend materiality, having the dimension of mind.     

The evolution of the human mind and logic--mathematics structures

The evolution of the human mind is discussed based on: (i) the fact that living beings interchange matter, energy and information with their environment, (ii) an ontological interpretation of the "reality" of the quantum world, of which logic-mathematics structures are considered constitutive parts, (iii) recent theories according to which living beings are considered as dynamic complex systems organized by information, and (iv) the fact that the evolution of living beings is guided by information about the environment and by intrinsic information on living systems (auto-organization). Assuming the evolution of vision as a model we observe that the driving forces that directed the evolution of the eyes, as dynamic complex systems, are the information about the environment supplied by sunlight and the intrinsic information-gaining mechanism of living organisms. Thus, there exists a convergence toward a visual system with the greatest ability to obtain light information, like the human eye, and also a divergence that leads to the development of specific qualities in some species. As in the case of vision the evolution of the human mind-brain cannot be a consequence of factors unrelated to the object of its own functioning. The human mind was structured for the acquisition from reality of the logic-mathematics structures that underlie the whole universe and consequently of an internal representation of the external world and of its own self. Thus, these structures are, together with the intrinsic capacity for auto-organization of the human brain, the predominant driving force of the human mind evolution. Both factors are complementary.     

Where is Darwin 200 years later?

The theory of evolution is perceived by many people, particularly but not only in the United States, as a controversial theory not yet fully demonstrated. Yet, that living organisms, including humans, have evolved from ancestors who were very different from them is beyond reasonable doubt, confirmed by at least as much evidence as any other widely accepted scientific theory. I argue that Darwin’s contribution to science goes much beyond the theory of evolution in itself. The theory of natural selection explains the adaptations of organisms, their ‘design’. The ‘Copernican Revolution’ brought the phenomena of the physical universe into the realm of science: explanations by natural causes that can be tested by observation and experiment. However, the scientific revolution that occurred in the 16th and 17th centuries had left the living world out of scientific explanations, because organisms seemingly show that they are ‘designed,’ and thus call for an intentional designer. It was Darwin’s greatest contribution to science, to demonstrate that the adaptations of organisms, their apparent ‘design’, can be explained by natural processes governed by natural laws. At that point, science came into maturity, because all natural phenomena in the universe, living as well as nonliving, could be investigated scientifically, and explained as matter in motion governed by natural laws.     

Finding simplicity in complexity: general principles of biological and nonbiological organization

What differentiates the living from the nonliving? What is life? These are perennial questions that have occupied minds since the beginning of cultures. The search for a clear demarcation between animate and inanimate is a reflection of the human tendency to create borders, not only physical but also conceptual. It is obvious that what we call a living creature, either bacteria or organism, has distinct properties from those of the normally called nonliving. However, searching beyond dichotomies and from a global, more abstract, perspective on natural laws, a clear partition of matter into animate and inanimate becomes fuzzy. Based on concepts from a variety of fields of research, the emerging notion is that common principles of biological and nonbiological organization indicate that natural phenomena arise and evolve from a central theme captured by the process of information exchange. Thus, a relatively simple universal logic that rules the evolution of natural phenomena can be unveiled from the apparent complexity of the natural world.     

Intelligence is universal in life.

Behaviorists assume that living things memorize random atoms of information (engrams), "reinforced" by success, just as in the neo-Darwinian mutation-selection process. On the contrary we have to recognize the existence of organized and systematic responses in the learning process (Krechevsky). The animals seek desperately to "understand the meaning" of the world around them, by widening its context. Intelligence is not an exclusive prerogative of human mind. The minds of insects operate in the same way as that of man. Even a cell has a sort of intelligence (Cuenot). Consciousness is a state of awareness associated with enhanced mental activity. It occurs also in other "higher" animals (Thorpe). However human themselves are non conscious of their basic underlying motivations. Unconscious or ineffable knowledge plays a great role in shaping our world-view and in determining our influence on the Gaian hierarchy.     

Fast, cheap and somewhat in control

Efforts to manipulate living organisms have raised the question of whether engineering principles of hierarchy, abstraction and design can be applied to biological systems. Here, we consider the practical challenges to controlling living organisms that must be surmounted, or at least managed, if synthetic biology and cellular bioengineering are to be productive.     

The complexity of living bodies and the structure of biological theories

It has been suggested that biological theories differ from physical theories because the subject matter of biology differs from the subject matter of physics especially in the fact that living bodies are more complex than nonliving bodies. It is shown that the interactional complexity of living bodies can only be expressed by invoking biological theories. The claim that living bodies are complex is, therefore, ultimately a claim about the nature of scientific theories rather than a claim about the nature of the subject matter of biology resting upon a presystematic judgement.     

Delectable Creatures and the Fundamental Reality of Metaphor: Biosemiotics and Animal Mind

This article argues that organisms, defined by a semi-permeable membrane or skin separating organism from environment, are (must be) semiotically alert responders to environments (both Innenwelt and Umwelt). As organisms and environments complexify over time, so, necessarily, does semiotic responsiveness, or ‘semiotic freedom’. In complex environments, semiotic responsiveness necessitates increasing plasticity of discernment, or discrimination. Such judgements, in other words, involve interpretations. The latter, in effect, consist of translations of a range of sign relations which, like metaphor, are based on transfers (carryings over) of meanings or expressions from one semiotic ‘site’ to another. The article argues that what humans describe as ‘metaphor’ (and believe is something which only pertains to human speech and mind and, in essence, is ‘not real’) is, in fact, fundamental to all semiotic and biosemiotic sign processes in all living things. The article first argues that metaphor and mind are immanent in all life, and are evolutionary, and, thus, that animals certainly do have minds. Following Heidegger and then Agamben, the article continues by asking about the place of animal mind in humans, and concludes that, as a kind of ‘night science’, ‘humananimal’ mind is central to the semiotics of Peircean abduction.     

The psychophysiology of the emotions and personality

According to the need-informational approach the need is specific (essential) force of living organisms, procuring their connections with external environment for self-preservation and self-development, a source of living systems' activity in the surrounding world. Emotion-reflection in human and higher animals' brain of an urgent need and of probability (possibility) of its satisfaction. Emotion in its neurophysiological sense is an active state of a system of specialized brain structures, prompting the subject to change his behaviour so that to maximize or to minimize this state which determines the role of emotions in organization of goal-directed behaviour. Personality is individual unique composition and internal hierarchy of basic (vital, social, ideal) needs of a given human being, including their varieties of preservation and development, "for me" and "for others". The most important personality characteristic is which of those needs and for how long are dominant in the hierarchy of coexisting motives, which need is "supplied" by creative intuition (superconsciousness, according to K. S. Stanislavski?'s terminology).     

The Intelligent Egg, and How It Got That Way: from Genes to Genius in a Few Easy Lessons

A seed has no flowers or leaves, and an egg no fingers or lungs. Yet plants and animals not only have these things but they resemble their parents in detail throughout their bodies. Something is inherited, but what is it? Life is based on the activities of cells. An organism has large numbers of them—a human has trillions! Cells live as separate units, which enables them each to do its own thing within its particular organ, but to be an organism they must work together. A cell can only detect its immediate local environment, but that includes various kinds of signals or information from nearby or far away within the body—or even from the external environment. It is by being local but responding globally in this way that an egg becomes an organism, an organism manages its way through life, and organisms make up species and ecosystems that interact with each other. The evolution of these abilities has produced the glorious array of living forms that populate the world. In these ways, an egg may have no thoughts but is a highly intelligent being.     

Meaning Matters: The Biosemiotic Basis of Bioethics

If the central problem in philosophical ethics is determining and defining the scope of moral value, our normative ethical theories must be able to explain on what basis and to what extent entities have value. The scientific foundation of contemporary biosemiotic theory grounds a theory of moral value capable of addressing this problem. Namely, it suggests that what is morally relevant is semiosis. Within this framework, semiosis is a morally relevant and natural property of all living things thereby offering us an ecological, as opposed to merely environmental, ethic. A consequence of this semiotic theory is that living things are accorded inherent moral value based on their natural relational properties—their ability to signify. This consequence establishes a hierarchy of inherent moral value based on the scope of signification: the larger the Umwelten, the greater the value. This paper argues that a robust semiotic moral theory can take into account a much wider scope of inherent value.. These consequences have positive ramifications for environmental ethics in their recognition of the natural ecological networks in which each organism is bound. This presentation of a biosemiotic model of value offers a justificatory strategy for our contemporary moral intuitions concerning our semiotic/moral relationships with living things while also productively pushing our normative ethical boundaries.     

Fitness in the universe: Choices and necessities

We live in a universe of chance, but not of accident. Repeatedly in the course of its development choices have been made for which one can ask the reasons. One such choice is fundamental: if the proton had not so much greater mass than the electron, all matter would be fluid; and if the proton did not have exactly the same numerical charge as the electron — or some simple multiple of that charge — virtually all matter would be charged. If a universe were started with charged hydrogen, it could expand, but probably nothing more. Hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen play as fundamental — and irreplaceable — roles in the metabolism of stars as of living organisms. Both metabolisms are coupled, through radiation from the stars providing the energy on which life must come ultimately to run on the planets. In the course of their evolution on the Earth, living organisms have found their way repeatedly and exclusively to certain types of organic molecule to perform specific functions; so, for example, the chlorophylls for photosynthesis, and carotenoids for plant phototropism and for vision. It is argued that some measure of necessity has governed these choices; and that an extended principle of natural selection has operated at all levels of material organization to produce such elements of order and compatibility in the universe.     

FOUR BASIC QUESTIONS OF PLANT BIOLOGY

The 4 questions discussed are the nature of life, the mechanism of heredity, the mechanism of development, and the problem of evolution. The basic property of life is organization, but no single property, present in all living things, distinguishes them from nonliving systems. Life results from integration of various properties, which at the individual level are principally replication of specific substances and response to stimuli, but at the level of the population in time the most significant property of life is its ability to generate unpredictable systems of variability. Heredity is determined primarily by the DNA-RNA-protein system, which must be regarded as a single functioning unit, since its elements are functionless when separated from each other. In addition, 4 different kinds of mechanisms for regulating gene action are postulated. Our full understanding of heredity must include a thorough knowledge of these mechanisms, as well as of the reasons why organisms differ in base pair composition of their DNA, and in the total amount of DNA present in the nucleus. Development in higher plants does not involve changes in basic heredity, but rather semi-permanent alterations in the physicochemical conditions of cells. Modern research on cell, tissue, and organ culture is beginning to elucidate the nature of these alterations, and to relate them to gene-controlled enzyme activity. The translation of physicochemical differences in cells to morphogenetic behavior is principally via 4 processes, which are beginning to be understood: differential rates of cell division and cell enlargement; orientation of the mitotic spindle by cell shape, cell growth, and cytoplasmic structure; intracellular polarization of cytoplasmic elements followed by differential mitosis across the gradient thus produced; and intercellular induction of mitosis. In regard to evolution, the basic processes controlling it have been identified and are reasonably well known. Future research should be on the nature of hybrid inviability and sterility, the comparative evolution of genetic systems, and the question of whether new morphological characteristics require the origin and activity of genes with new enzymatic activities, or are brought about by repatterning previously existing sequences.     

The similarity of life across the universe

Is the hypothesis correct that if life exists elsewhere in the universe, it would have forms and structures unlike anything we could imagine? From the subatomic level in cellular energy acquisition to the assembly and even behavior of organisms at the scale of populations, life on Earth exhibits characteristics that suggest it is a universal norm for life at all levels of hierarchy. These patterns emerge from physical and biochemical limitations. Their potentially universal nature is supported by recent data on the astrophysical abundance and availability of carbon compounds and water. Within these constraints, biochemical and biological variation is certainly possible, but it is limited. If life exists elsewhere, life on Earth, rather than being a contingent product of one specific experiment in biological evolution, is likely to reflect common patterns for the assembly of living matter.     

The self-organizing fractal theory as a universal discovery method: the phenomenon of life

A universal discovery method potentially applicable to all disciplines studying organizational phenomena has been developed. This method takes advantage of a new form of global symmetry, namely, scale-invariance of self-organizational dynamics of energy/matter at all levels of organizational hierarchy, from elementary particles through cells and organisms to the Universe as a whole. The method is based on an alternative conceptualization of physical reality postulating that the energy/matter comprising the Universe is far from equilibrium, that it exists as a flow, and that it develops via self-organization in accordance with the empirical laws of nonequilibrium thermodynamics. It is postulated that the energy/matter flowing through and comprising the Universe evolves as a multiscale, self-similar structure-process, i.e., as a self-organizing fractal. This means that certain organizational structures and processes are scale-invariant and are reproduced at all levels of the organizational hierarchy. Being a form of symmetry, scale-invariance naturally lends itself to a new discovery method that allows for the deduction of missing information by comparing scale-invariant organizational patterns across different levels of the organizational hierarchy.     

The antiquity of group I introns.

The recent discovery of self-splicing introns in cyanobacteria has given renewed interest to the question of whether introns may have been present in the ancestor of all living things. The properties of introns in genes of bacteria and bacteriophages are discussed in the context of their possible origin and biological function.     

An essay on the evolution of cognition: Constructing a theoretical conceptual framework

In this essay we provide an interdisciplinary approach to the problem of the evolution of human cognition and suggest the theoretical framework of genetic system theory (GST) for organizing the relevant content of several disciplines. This bio-social-cultural theory is based on the assumption that organisms are dynamic systems which interact with one another and their environment and are themselves composed of dynamic internal relations at several levels. Special emphasis will be placed upon these internal cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the physiological mechanisms of learning and memory. The human individual organism is emphasized because in its experiential activity over time it is the site of integration for social, and cultural stimuli and because of its unique properties among living things. The primary disciplines for our discussion are drawn from the biological, social, and humanistic sciences and several concrete examples are given from each science.     

Three puzzles in hierarchical evolution

The maximum degree of hierarchical structure of organisms hasrisen over the history of life, notably in three transitions:the origin of the eukaryotic cell from symbiotic associationsof prokaryotes; the emergence of the first multicellular individualsfrom clones of eukaryotic cells; and the origin of the firstindividuated colonies from associations of multicellular organisms.The trend is obvious in the fossil record, but documenting itusing a high-resolution hierarchy scale reveals three puzzles:1) the rate of origin of new levels accelerates, at least untilthe early Phanerozoic; 2) after that, the trend may slow oreven stop; and 3) levels may sometimes arise out of order. Thethree puzzles and their implications are discussed; a possibleexplanation is offered for the first.     

Are ant supercolonies crucibles of a new major transition in evolution?

The biological hierarchy of genes, cells, organisms and societies is a fundamental reality in the living world. This hierarchy of entities did not arise ex nihilo at the origin of life, but rather has been serially generated by a succession of critical events known as ‘evolutionary transitions in individuality’ (ETIs). Given the sequential nature of ETIs, it is natural to look for candidates to form the next hierarchical tier. We analyse claims that these candidates are found among ‘supercolonies’, ant populations in which discrete nests cooperate as part of a wider collective, in ways redolent of cells in a multicellular organism. Examining earlier empirical work and new data within the recently proposed ‘Darwinian space’ framework, we offer a novel analysis of the evolutionary status of supercolonies and show how certain key conditions might be satisfied in any future process transforming these collaborative networks into true Darwinian individuals.