Volume 15 · Number 2 · Pages 122–134
A Critique of Barbieri’s Code Biology

Alexander V. Kravchenko

Log in to download the full text for free

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Context: The key semiotic notion of interpretation as involving an organism’s adaptive response to the environment poses a problem for some biosemiotic theories. Code biology, or the study of “(organic) codes of life” - a theoretical framework developed by Marcello Barbieri - discards interpretation as irrelevant for semiosis, and views coding as the sole mechanism of semiosis in the organic world. Problem: This article offers a critique of such an approach, showing that the concept of “code” as a one-to-one correspondence between two sets of objects (sign vehicles) cannot explain living organization, which is based on relational dynamic properties. Method: The assumptions and metaphors employed by code biology are analyzed and critiqued. Results: When relational dynamic properties of living systems are seen as sets of arbitrary rules “selected” from a potentially unlimited number to “ensure” a specific correspondence between two “independent worlds of objects,” we are faced with a homuncular explanation in which lower-level components exhibit properties that are no simpler than those they are purported to explain. Implications: Rather than ignore the problem of interpretation, a comprehensive biosemiotic theory should approach it from a different perspective, focusing on its relational nature.

Key words: Semiosis, code biology, sign, information, interpretation, emergence, language, metaphor, epistemology.

Handling Editor: Alexander Riegler


Kravchenko A. V. (2020) A critique of barbieri’s code biology. Constructivist Foundations 15(2): 122–134. https://constructivist.info/15/2/122

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

Similar articles

Gasparyan D. (2020) Semiosis as Eigenform and Observation as Recursive Interpretation
Kravchenko A. V. (2022) The Maturanian Turn: Good Prospects for the Language Sciences
Weibel P. (2008) Tertium Datur. Historical Preconditions and Ways to Mitterer’s Non-dualizing Philosophy
Grampp S. (2008) Dualism Still at Work. On Wittgenstein’s Certainty
Füllsack M. (2013) Constructivism and Computation: Can Computer-Based Modeling Add to the Case for Constructivism?


Barbieri M. (2003) The organic codes: An introduction to semantic biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2007) Is the cell a semiotic system. In: Barbieri M. (ed.) Introduction to Biosemiotics. Springer, Dordrecht: 179–207. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2007) The origin and evolution of semiosis. In: Witzany G. (ed.) Biosemiotics in transdisciplinary contexts. Umweb Publications, Vilnius: 105–113. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2009) Three types of semiosis. Biosemiotics 2: 19–30. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2010) On the origin of language: A bridge between biolinguistics and biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 3: 201–223. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2012) Codepoiesis: The deep logic of life. Biosemiotics 5: 297–299. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2014) Introduction to code biology. Biosemiotics 7: 167–179. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2015) Code biology: A new science of life. Springer, Dordrecht. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2016) What is information? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 374: 20150060. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (2018) What is code biology? BioSystems 164: 1–10. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (ed.) (2007) Introduction to biosemiotics. Springer, Dordrecht. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Barbieri M. (ed.) (2007) The codes of life: The rules of macroevolution. Springer, Dordrecht. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Birdwhistell R. L. (1971) Kinesics and context. Allen Lane, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bouissac P. (ed.) (1998) Encyclopedia of semiotics. Oxford University Press, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Brier S. & Joslyn C. (2013) Information in biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 6: 1–7. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Brier S. (2015) Can biosemiotics be a “science” if its purpose is to be a bridge between the natural, social and human sciences? Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 119(3): 576–587. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Brier S. (2015) “Cybersemiotics and the reasoning powers of the universe: Philosophy of information in a semiotic-systemic transdisciplinary approach.” Green Letters: Studies in Ecocriticism 19(3): 280–292. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Champagne M. (2009) A note on Barbieri’s “Scientific Biosemiotics.” The American Journal of Semiotics 25(1–2): 155–161. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Chardin T. de (1956) Le phénomène humain. Les Éditions du Seuil, Paris. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Chomsky N. (1975) Reflections on language. Pantheon, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cowley S. J. & Markoš A. (2019) Evolution, lineages and human language. Language Sciences 71: 8–18. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Cuffari E. C., Di Paolo E. & De Jaegher H. (2015) From participatory sense-making to language: There and back again. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 14(4): 1089–1125 https://cepa.info/4351
de Beule J., Hovig E. & Benson M. (2011) Introducing dynamics into the field of biosemiotics: A formal account with examples from language and immunology. Biosemiotics 4: 5–24. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Deacon T. W. (2006) Emergence: The hole at the wheel’s hub. In: Clayton P. & Davies P. (eds.) The re-emergence of emergence. The MIT Press, Boston: 111–150. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Deacon T. W. (2012) Incomplete nature: How mind emerged from matter. W. W. Norton, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Deacon T. W. (2015) Steps to a science of biosemiotics. Green Letters: Studies in Ecocriticism 19(3): 293–311. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Deely J. (2015) Objective reality and the physical world: Relation as key to understanding semiosis. Green Letters: Studies in Ecocriticism 19(3): 267–279. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Di Paolo E. (2005) Autopoiesis, adaptivity, teleology, agency. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4(4): 429–452 https://cepa.info/2269
Di Paolo E. A., Cuffari E. C. & De Jaegher H. (2018) Linguistic bodies: The continuity between life and language. The MIT Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Di Paolo E., Barandiaran X., Beaton M., Buhrmann T. (2014) Learning to perceive in the sensorimotor approach: Piaget’s theory of equilibration interpreted dynamically. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8: 1–16 https://cepa.info/4799
Emmeche C. (1992) Modeling life: A note on the semiotics of emergence and computation in artificial and natural living systems. In: Sebeok T. A. & Umiker-Sebeok J. (eds.) Biosemiotics. The Semiotic Web 1991. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin: 77–99. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Fernandez-Leon J. A. & Di Paolo E. A. (2007) Neural uncertainty and sensorimotor robustness. In: Almeida e Costa F., Rocha L. M., Costa E., Harvey I. & Coutinho A. (eds.) Advances in artificial life. ECAL 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4648. Springer, Berlin: 786–795. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Gimona M. (2008) Protein linguistics and the modular code of the cytoskeleton. In: Barbieri M. (ed.) The codes of life: The rules of macroevolution. Springer, Dordrecht: 189–206. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Glanville R. (1996) Communication without coding: Cybernetics, meaning and language (How language, becoming a system, betrays itself). MLN 111(3): 441–462 https://cepa.info/6218
Glasersfeld E. von (2004) Knowledge without knower? Karl Jaspers Forum TA69C10 https://cepa.info/1549
Halliday M. A. K. & Matthiessen C. (1999) Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. Continuum, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Harris R. (1981) The language myth. Duckworth, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Harris R. (1996) The language connection: Philosophy and linguistics. Thoemmes Press, Bristol. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Herrmann-Pillath C. & Salthe S. N. (2011) Triadic conceptual structure of the maximum entropy approach to evolution. BioSystems 103: 315–330. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Imoto S. (2004) What is the external world? A cognitive science perspective. Tetsugaku (Annals of the Philosophical Society of Hokkaido University) 40: 29–44 https://cepa.info/6222
Imoto S. (2011) The logic of Maturana’s biology. Constructivist Foundations 6(3): 325–333 https://constructivist.info/6/3/325
Järvilehto T. (1998) The theory of the organism-environment system: I. Description of the theory. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science 33: 317–330 https://cepa.info/6223
Ji S. (1997) Isomorphism between cell and human languages: Molecular biological, bioinformatic and linguistic implications. Biosystems 44(1): 17–39. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kastrup B. (2018) Conflating abstraction with empirical observation: The false mind-matter dichotomy. Constructivist Foundations 13(3): 341–347 https://constructivist.info/13/3/341
Kravchenko A. (2007) Essential properties of language, or, why language is not a code. Language Sciences 29(5): 650–671 https://cepa.info/5651
Kravchenko A. V. & Payunena M. V. (2017) Education: A value lost? In: Dudziak A. & Orzechowska J. (eds.) Język i tekst w ujęciu strukturalnym i funkcjonalnym. Centrum Badań Europy Wschodniej Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego w Olsztynie, Olsztyn: 239–246. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2003) Sign, meaning, knowledge. Peter Lang, Frankfurt/Main. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2008) Biology of cognition and linguistic analysis: From non-realist linguistics to a realistic language science. Peter Lang, Frankfurt/Main. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2009) Reassessing the project of linguistics. In: Zlatev J., Andrén M., Falck M. J. & Lundmark C. (eds.) Studies in language and cognition. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne: 27–42. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2009) The experiential basis of speech and writing as different cognitive domains. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(3): 527–548. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2009) О традициях, языкознании и когнитивном подходе [On tradition, linguistics, and the cognitive approach]. In: Riabtseva N. K. (ed.) Горизонты современной лингвистики: Традиции и новаторство [Horizons of modern linguistics: Tradition and innovation]. Языки славянских культур, Moscow: 51–65. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2011) How Humberto Maturana’s biology of cognition can revive the language sciences. Constructivist Foundations 6(3): 352–362 https://constructivist.info/6/3/352
Kravchenko A. V. (2013) Биологическая реальность языка [The biological reality of language]. Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики [Issues in Cognitive Linguistics] 1: 55–63. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2015) “Linguistic analysis” as a misnomer, or, why linguistics is in a state of permanent crisis. In: Szumska D. & Ozga K. (eds.) Język i metoda: Język rosyjski w badaniach lingwistycznych XXI wieku, 2: Analiza lingwistyczna na granicy załamania metodologicznego. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Krakow: 25–36. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kravchenko A. V. (2016) Constructivism and the epistemological trap of language. Constructivist Foundations 12(1): 110–112 https://constructivist.info/12/1/039
Kravchenko A. V. (2016) Эпистемологическая ловушка языка [The epistemological trap of language]. Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология [Tomsk State University Journal of Philology] 3(41): 14–26. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kull K. & Velmezova E. (2014) What is the main challenge for contemporary semiotics? Sign Systems Studies 42(4): 530–548. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kull K. (2007) Biosemiotics and biophysics: The fundamental approaches to the study of life. In: Barbieri M. (ed.) Introduction to biosemiotics. Springer, Dordrecht: 167–177. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Kull K., Deacon T., Emmeche C., Hoffmeyer J. & Stjernfelt F. (2009) Theses on biosemiotics: Prolegomena to a theoretical biology. Biological Theory 4(2): 167–173. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lakoff G. & Johnson M. (1980) Metaphors we live by. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lakoff G. & Johnson M. (1999) Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lieberman P. (2006) Toward an evolutionary biology of language. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Lotman J. M. (2009) Culture and explosion. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. Originally published in Russian as: Лотман Ю. М. (1992) Культура и взрыв. Гнозис, Moscow. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Love N. (2004) Cognition and the language myth. Language Sciences 26(6): 525–544. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Maturana H. R. (1970) Biology of cognition. Biological Computer Laboratory (BCL) Research Report BCL 9.0. University of Illinois, Urbana IL https://cepa.info/535
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 https://cepa.info/549
Maturana H. R. (1983) Comment by Humberto R. Maturana. Journal of Social and Biological Structures 6(2): 155–159 https://cepa.info/567
Maturana H. R. (1985) Comment by Humberto R. Maturana: The mind is not in the head. Journal of Social and Biological Structures 8(4): 308–311 https://cepa.info/575
Maturana H. R. (1990) The biological foundations of self-consciousness and the physical domain of existence. In: Luhmann N., Maturana H. R., Namiki M., Redder V. & Varela F. J. Beobachter: Konvergenz der Erkenntnistheorien? Wilhelm Fink Verlag, Munich: 47–117 https://cepa.info/609
Maturana H. R. (2007) Systemic versus genetic determination. Constructivist Foundations 3(1): 21–26 https://constructivist.info/3/1/021
Maturana H. R., Mpodozis J. & Letelier J. C. (1995) Brain, language, and the origin of human mental functions. Biological Research 28: 15–26 https://cepa.info/642
Mayr E. (1982) The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution, and inheritance. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Mehrabian A. (1971) Silent messages. Wadsworth, Belmont CA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Morris C. W. (1938) Foundations of the theory of signs. In: Neurath O., Carnap R. & Morris C. W. (eds.) International encyclopedia of unified science. Volume 1, Part 2. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1–59. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Pagnotta M. (2017) The use and abuse of “information” in biology. The New Atlantis 51: 93–107. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Pascal B. (1966) Human happiness. Translated by A. J. Krailsheimer. Penguin Books, London. Originally published in French as: Pascal Blaise (1669) Pensées de M. Pascal sur la religion, et sur quelques autres sujets, qui ont esté trouvées après sa mort parmy ses papiers. Guillaume Desprez, Paris. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Peirce C. S. (1958) Logical foundations of the theory of signs. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Popper K. (2011) Three worlds. The Tanner lecture on human values, delivered at The University of Michigan, April 7. (1978) In The Tanner Lectures on Human Values I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 141–167. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Portin P. (2009) The elusive concept of the gene. Hereditas 146(3): 112–117. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Premack D. (1990) The infant’s theory of self-propelled objects. Cognition 36(1): 1–16. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rączaszek-Leonardi J., Nomikou I., Rohlfing K. J. & Deacon T. W. (2018) Language development from an ecological perspective: Ecologically valid ways to abstract symbols. Ecological Psychology 30(1): 39–73. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Reeke G. & Edelman G. (1988) Real brains and artificial intelligence. Deadalus 117: 143–174. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rodríguez Higuera C. (2018) Productive perils: On metaphor as a theory-building device. Linguistic Frontiers 9(1): 1–10. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Ross D. (2007) H. sapiens as ecologically special: What does language contribute? Language Sciences 29(5): 710–731. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Saussure F. de (1916) Cours de linguistique générale. Payot & Cie, Paris. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Schrödinger E. (1959) Mind and matter. The Tarner lectures delivered at Trinity College, Cambridge, in October 1956. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Sebeok T. A. (2001) Global semiotics. Indiana University Press. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Shannon C. E. (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27: 379–423 & 623–656. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Sharov A. (1992) Biosemiotics: Functional-evolutionary approach to the analysis of the sense of information. In: Sebeok T. & Umiker-Sebeok J. (eds.) Biosemiotics: The semiotic web 1991. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin: 345–373. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Sharov A., Maran T. & Tønnessen M. (2015) Towards synthesis of biology and semiotics. Biosemiotics 8: 1–7. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Sherman J. (2017) Neither ghost nor machine: The emergence and nature of selves. Columbia University Press, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Varela F. J., Thompson E. & Rosch E. (1991) The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Zlatev J. (2003) Meaning = life (+ culture) An outline of a unified biocultural theory of meaning. Evolution of Communication 4(2): 253–296. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Zlatev J., Steffensen S. V., Harvey M. I. & Kimmel M. (2018) Introduction to the special issue “Meaning making: Enactive, participatory, interactive, symbolic.” Cognitive Semiotics 11(1): 1–6. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 0

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