Volume 7 · Number 1 · Pages 48–67
Autopoietic Systems: A Generalized Explanatory Approach – Part 2

Hugo Urrestarazu

Download the full text in
PDF (629 kB)

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment

Abstract

Context: In this paper I expand aspects of the generalized bottom-up explanatory approach devised in Part I to expound the natural emergence of composite self-organized dynamic systems endowed with self-produced embodied boundaries and with observed degrees of autonomous behavior. In Part I, the focus was on the rules defined by Varela, Maturana & Uribe (VM&U rules), viewed as a validation test to assess if an observed system is autopoietic. This was accomplished by referring to Maturana’s ontological-epistemological frame and by defining distinctions, concepts, and abstractions necessary to describe dynamic systems in any observational domain. This approach concentrates on pure causation flow rather than on domain-specific interaction mechanisms. Problem: It is essential to analyze the requirements imposed by the VM&U rules on the “intra-boundaries” phenomenology for compliance with the self-production capabilities expected from an autopoietic system. Beyond what is merely implied by the compact wording of the VM&U rules, a key point needs to be addressed explicitly: how to describe some “peculiar” capabilities that the components should be endowed with to participate in new component production (as macro-molecules do in the biological domain) so that system’s self-production can be assessed. Method: Using this approach, I first describe the process of constituting self-organized dynamic structures provided with embodied boundaries. Then I explain how a capability of self-organization emerges and how this results in ephemeral configurations that may evolve into self-regulated long-lasting dynamic system stability within a continuous causation flow inside the boundaries, up to the emergence of some “specialized” subsets of components. This explication allows us to distinguish the medium, the boundaries, and the core of a self-organized dynamic system and to focus attention on the “intra-boundaries” phenomenology that should be at the heart of self-production capabilities, as prescribed by the 5th and 6th VM&U rules. Results: I propose an abstract, domain-free description of the “peculiar” composition and decomposition transformation capabilities that components should possess while subject to state transitions triggered within the “intra-boundaries” causation flow. This is combined with a discussion concerning the “intra-boundaries” causation structure’s possible topological layouts that could be compliant with the 6th rule. Implications: The above-mentioned results allow us to improve our analytic criteria when observing dynamic systems existing in non-biological domains in order to assess their autopoietic nature. They also reveal that the task of consistently identifying possible non-biological autopoietic systems is harder than merely identifying self-organized dynamic systems provided with boundaries and some observable autonomous behavioral capabilities in a given observational domain. More implications will be discussed further in Part III.

Key words: autopoiesis, dynamic system, self-organization, self-production, boundary, autonomy, operational closure, causation, structure determined, meta-molecular, embodiment, interaction network, organizational invariance

Citation

Urrestarazu H. (2011) Autopoietic systems: A generalized explanatory approach – part 2. Constructivist Foundations 7(1): 48–67. http://constructivist.info/7/1/048

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

Similar articles

Urrestarazu H. (2012) Autopoietic Systems: A Generalized Explanatory Approach – Part 3: The Scale of Description Problem
Urrestarazu H. (2011) Autopoietic Systems: A Generalized Explanatory Approach – Part 1
Urrestarazu H. (2014) Social Autopoiesis?
Brier S. (2009) Cybersemiotic Pragmaticism and Constructivism
Kauffman L. H. (2017) Mathematical Work of Francisco Varela

References

Maturana H. R. & Varela F. J. (1973) De máquinas y seres vivos: Una teoría sobre la organización biológica. Editorial Universitaria, Santiago. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. & Varela F. J. (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Reidel, Boston. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. (1978) Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In: Miller G. & Lenneberg E. (eds.) Psychology and biology of language and thought: Essays in honor of Eric Lenneberg. Academic Press, New York: 27–63. http://www.enolagaia.com/M78BoL.html
Maturana H. R. (1988) Ontology of observing: The biological foundations of self-consciousness and the physical domain of existence. In: Donaldson R. E. (ed.) Texts in cybernetic theory: An in-depth exploration of the thought of Humberto Maturana, William T. Powers, and Ernst von Glasersfeld. American Society for Cybernetics (ASC) conference workbook. http://www.inteco.cl/biology/ontology/index.htm
Maturana H. R. (2002) Autopoiesis, structural coupling and cognition: A history of these and other notions in the biology of cognition. Cybernetics & Human Knowing 9(3–4): 5–34. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Urrestarazu H. (2011) Autopoietic systems: A generalized explanatory approach. Part I. Constructivist Foundations 6(3): 307–324. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/6/3/307.urrestarazu
Varela F. J. (1980) Principles of biological autonomy. Elsevier North Holland, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Varela F. J. (1995) The emergent self. In: Brockman J. (ed.) The third culture: Beyond the scientific revolution. Simon & Schuster, New York: 209–222. http://www.edge.org/documents/ThirdCulture/t-Ch.12.html
Varela F. J., Coutinho A., Dupire B. & Vaz N. (1988) Cognitive networks: Immune, neural, and otherwise. In: Perelson A. (ed.) Theoretical immunology Part II. Addison-Wesley, Reading MA: 359–375. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Varela F. J., Maturana H. R. & Uribe R. (1974) Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. BioSystems 5(4): 187–196. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.