Journal articles on the topic 'Autopoiesis'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Autopoiesis.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Autopoiesis.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Bourgine, Paul, and John Stewart. "Autopoiesis and Cognition." Artificial Life 10, no. 3 (June 2004): 327–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1064546041255557.
Full textAbstract:
This article revisits the concept of autopoiesis and examines its relation to cognition and life. We present a mathematical model of a 3D tesselation automaton, considered as a minimal example of autopoiesis. This leads us to a thesis T1: “An autopoietic system can be described as a random dynamical system, which is defined only within its organized autopoietic domain.” We propose a modified definition of autopoiesis: “An autopoietic system is a network of processes that produces the components that reproduce the network, and that also regulates the boundary conditions necessary for its ongoing existence as a network.” We also propose a definition of cognition: “A system is cognitive if and only if sensory inputs serve to trigger actions in a specific way, so as to satisfy a viability constraint.” It follows from these definitions that the concepts of autopoiesis and cognition, although deeply related in their connection with the regulation of the boundary conditions of the system, are not immediately identical: a system can be autopoietic without being cognitive, and cognitive without being autopoietic. Finally, we propose a thesis T2: “A system that is both autopoietic and cognitive is a living system.”
2
Beer, Randall D. "Autopoiesis and Cognition in the Game of Life." Artificial Life 10, no. 3 (June 2004): 309–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1064546041255539.
Full textAbstract:
Maturana and Varela's notion of autopoiesis has the potential to transform the conceptual foundation of biology as well as the cognitive, behavioral, and brain sciences. In order to fully realize this potential, however, the concept of autopoiesis and its many consequences require significant further theoretical and empirical development. A crucial step in this direction is the formulation and analysis of models of autopoietic systems. This article sketches the beginnings of such a project by examining a glider from Conway's game of life in autopoietic terms. Such analyses can clarify some of the key ideas underlying autopoiesis and draw attention to some of the central open issues. This article also examines the relationship between an autopoietic perspective on cognition and recent work on dynamical approaches to the behavior and cognition of situated, embodied agents.
3
Agmon, Eran. "Deriving the bodily grounding of living beings with molecular autopoiesis." Adaptive Behavior 28, no. 1 (February 19, 2019): 35–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059712319830645.
Full textAbstract:
“Are living beings extended autopoietic systems? An embodied reply,” makes the case for grounding the autopoietic definition of living beings to the discrete bodies of organisms rather than to autopoietic systems that extend beyond the organisms into their environments. They attempt this grounding by amending a clause to the original formulation of autopoiesis that identifies living beings with their bodies, and then they explicitly define “bodies”. This commentary makes the case that bodily grounding can be derived from molecular autopoiesis by taking the molecular domain seriously, and no new amendment is required.
4
Khan, Tehmina, and Rob Gray. "Accounting, identity, autopoiesis + sustainability." Meditari Accountancy Research 24, no. 1 (April 11, 2016): 36–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/medar-06-2015-0032.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This paper is prompted by an analysis of accounting and accounting education by Lawrence et al. (2013) in this journal. In that paper, the authors use the theory of autopoiesis to articulate and explore, what they argue is, an inappropriate conservatism in accounting. This aims to develop the insights offered by Lawrence et al., to advance the understanding of autopoiesis and to use the insights from the theory of autopoiesis to try and confront (what we see as) the resistance shown in business and accounting to the possibilities of a more substantive sustainability agenda. Design/methodology/approach The essay takes its departure point as the paper by Lawrence et al. and uses the theory of autopoiesis as a metaphorical lens through which to re-examine accounting, business and educational practice with respect to sustainability. Findings This paper depart somewhat from Lawrence et al.’s arguments and inferences but broadly supports their contentions that accounting and accounting education are autopoietic. Some advances are offered to the theory and some issues for future research are briefly speculated upon. The analysis succeeds in highlighting that the accounting, business and educational systems may well be protecting their “cores” but are doing so by ignoring crucial and life-threatening information. In autopoietic terms, the sub-systems are behaving as closed systems that are causing self-harm and are being psychopathic. It is speculate that accounting educators may be, themselves, acting as autopoietic persons. Research limitations/implications The essay, in identifying some of the empirical weaknesses inherent in the theory of autopoiesis in a social science context, suggests that the persuasiveness or otherwise of the theory will probably lie in the extent to which a reader finds the heuristic plausible and not in any easily testable propositions. The implications, if this limitation is accepted, are, broadly, that accounting and accounting education are acting psychopathically in the face of (arguably) life-threatening data. Practical Implications There are extensive implications for research and policy but only those for education are explored here. Social Implications If the analysis is persuasive, the implication for engagement with the exigencies of sustainability is profound and disturbing. Originality/value The paper has two primary purposes: to challenge and develop debate around Lawrence et al.’s arguments and to use autopoiesis as one explanation for the inertia around sustainability, business and accounting. The paper extends the theory of autopoiesis as articulated in accounting to embrace both the issue of nesting systems and the autopoietic person. The combination of these contributions is combined with Lawrence et al., in offering a substantive challenge to accounting educators: albeit a substantively different one than those authors offered. It is these matters of difference that ultimately challenge the authors’ roles as educators, researchers and accountants.
5
Radosavljevic, M. "Autopoiesis vs. social autopoiesis: critical evaluation and implications for understanding firms as autopoietic social systems." International Journal of General Systems 37, no. 2 (April 2008): 215–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081070701251018.
Full text
6
Suzuki, Keisuke, and Takashi Ikegami. "Shapes and Self-Movement in Protocell Systems." Artificial Life 15, no. 1 (January 2009): 59–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/artl.2009.15.1.15104.
Full textAbstract:
The effect of shapes on self-movement has been studied with an extended model of autopoiesis. Autopoiesis is known as a theory of self-boundary maintenance. In this study, not only the autopoietic generation of the self-boundary, but also the emergence of self-motility, has been examined. As a result of computer simulations, it has been found that different membrane shapes cause different types of self-movement. A kind of chemotaxis has been observed for some shapes. The mechanism of chemotaxis is discussed by studying the internal chemical processes within the shape boundaries.
7
Devellennes, Charles. "Choice, blind spots and free will." Philosophy & Social Criticism 40, no. 9 (August 12, 2014): 895–911. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0191453714545339.
Full textAbstract:
This article shows that the concept of choice is central to Isaiah Berlin’s liberalism. It argues that his valuing of choice is anchored in a particular conception of human nature, one that assumes and presupposes free will. Berlin’s works sketch a metaphysics of choice, and his reluctance to situate himself openly in the debate on free will is unconvincing. By introducing the theory of autopoiesis, this article further suggests that there is a way to take Berlin’s value pluralism seriously, by considering sets of values as autopoietic conscious systems. Drawing on the works of Maturana and Varela in biology and Luhmann in sociology, autopoiesis strengthens value pluralism and acts as a critique of liberalism. By putting objectivity in parenthesis, autopoiesis finally allows for value systems to coexist side by side in a stronger sense than Berlin’s liberalism ever could.
8
Corris, Amanda, and Anthony Chemero. "The broad scope of enactivism." Adaptive Behavior 28, no. 1 (April 22, 2019): 27–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059712319843268.
Full textAbstract:
Villalobos and Razeto-Barry suggest that extended enactivist interpretations of the autopoietic theory do not adequately address the bodily dimensions of living beings. In reply, we suggest that the extended enactivist view provides a richer account of living beings than a theory confined to autopoiesis, and therefore should not be supplanted by a modified autopoietic theory.
9
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas, and Thomas E. Webb. "Vulnerable bodies, vulnerable systems." International Journal of Law in Context 11, no. 4 (November 2, 2015): 444–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1744552315000294.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn this paper we examine the concept of vulnerability as it relates to the materiality of systems, the exclusion of human physical corporeality, and social exclusion in Luhmann's theory of social autopoiesis. We ask whether a concept of vulnerability can be included in autopoiesis in order to better conceptualise social exclusion and the excluded, with a view to understanding how, if at all, the dangers posed by this exclusion are mitigated by autopoietic processes. We are emphatically not returning to the human subject over operational systems, but seek instead to develop an understanding of the embodied nature of humans and their vulnerability within an autopoietic framework. We argue that the awareness of the risks to social functional differentiation posed by unmanaged exclusion – disenchantment, disassociation and, most drastically, dedifferentiation – provided by our analysis indicates why hyper-exclusion must be mitigated.
10
Whiteley, Alma M. "Systemic Barriers to Managing Change: Is Autopoiesis an Appropriate Metaphor?" Journal of Management & Organization 5, no. 2 (March 1999): 38–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1833367200005551.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe paper reports on a study into the usefulness of autopoiesis as a metaphor for reflective thinking about organisations contemplating change. Autopoietic systems display qualities of evolutionary invariance, self organisation to perpetuate the system's status quo, self referential activities and attempts to organise aspects of the environment to suit the system's needs. Systemic characteristics include a desire to return to equilibrium and to be resistant to evolutionary change. Autopoiesis can be used as a metaphor for gaining insights and seeing with fresh eyes some of the perhaps hidden, institutionalised concepts that inform contemporary management strategies. The need for a metaphorical image emerges from the difficulty in reflecting on organisational activities while using historically derived language and symbols. The autopoiesis metaphor was integrated into an exploratory research project with human resource managers as respondents. Tentative findings were that this is a useful metaphor for use in organisational diagnosis. Given this, a more comprehensive study would seem to be worthwhile.
11
Whiteley, Alma M. "Systemic Barriers to Managing Change: Is Autopoiesis an Appropriate Metaphor?" Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 5, no. 2 (March 1999): 38–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/jmo.1999.5.2.38.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe paper reports on a study into the usefulness of autopoiesis as a metaphor for reflective thinking about organisations contemplating change. Autopoietic systems display qualities of evolutionary invariance, self organisation to perpetuate the system's status quo, self referential activities and attempts to organise aspects of the environment to suit the system's needs. Systemic characteristics include a desire to return to equilibrium and to be resistant to evolutionary change. Autopoiesis can be used as a metaphor for gaining insights and seeing with fresh eyes some of the perhaps hidden, institutionalised concepts that inform contemporary management strategies. The need for a metaphorical image emerges from the difficulty in reflecting on organisational activities while using historically derived language and symbols. The autopoiesis metaphor was integrated into an exploratory research project with human resource managers as respondents. Tentative findings were that this is a useful metaphor for use in organisational diagnosis. Given this, a more comprehensive study would seem to be worthwhile.
12
Arnoldi, Jakob. "Autopoiesis." Theory, Culture & Society 23, no. 2-3 (May 2006): 116–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026327640602300220.
Full text
13
Van den Bergen, Laetitia, and Robin Van den Akker. "Biomimicry and Nature as Sympoiesis." Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 25, no. 3 (2021): 434–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/techne2021107146.
Full textAbstract:
Formulating how biomimicry relates to nature has been crucial to ‘deepening’ its theory. Currently, an autopoietic model of nature dominates the literature. However, advances in the natural and human sciences have demonstrated that autopoiesis does not adequately explain complex, dynamic, responsive, and situated systems. This article draws on Beth Dempster’s (1998) characterisation of ecosystems as sympoietic, that is as homeorhetic, evolutionary, distributively controlled, unpredictable, and adaptive, and on Donna Jeanne Haraway’s (2016) critique that entities do not pre-exist their relationships. We argue that using sympoietic processes of becoming as our model, measure, and mentor impacts biomimicry’s practice and relation to sustainability. Taking John Todd’s Living Machines as a case study, we explicate how sympoiesis unfurls autopoiesis. By integrating advances in the natural and human sciences into the philosophy of biomimicry, we address the limitations of the autopoietic model and provide a more comprehensive and adequate model of ‘nature.’
14
Mikkilineni, Rao. "Infusing Autopoietic and Cognitive Behaviors into Digital Automata to Improve Their Sentience, Resilience, and Intelligence." Big Data and Cognitive Computing 6, no. 1 (January 10, 2022): 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bdcc6010007.
Full textAbstract:
All living beings use autopoiesis and cognition to manage their “life” processes from birth through death. Autopoiesis enables them to use the specification in their genomes to instantiate themselves using matter and energy transformations. They reproduce, replicate, and manage their stability. Cognition allows them to process information into knowledge and use it to manage its interactions between various constituent parts within the system and its interaction with the environment. Currently, various attempts are underway to make modern computers mimic the resilience and intelligence of living beings using symbolic and sub-symbolic computing. We discuss here the limitations of classical computer science for implementing autopoietic and cognitive behaviors in digital machines. We propose a new architecture applying the general theory of information (GTI) and pave the path to make digital automata mimic living organisms by exhibiting autopoiesis and cognitive behaviors. The new science, based on GTI, asserts that information is a fundamental constituent of the physical world and that living beings convert information into knowledge using physical structures that use matter and energy. Our proposal uses the tools derived from GTI to provide a common knowledge representation from existing symbolic and sub-symbolic computing structures to implement autopoiesis and cognitive behaviors.
15
Villalobos, Mario, and Pablo Razeto-Barry. "Are living beings extended autopoietic systems? An embodied reply." Adaptive Behavior 28, no. 1 (January 22, 2019): 3–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059712318823723.
Full textAbstract:
Building on the original formulation of the autopoietic theory (AT), extended enactivism argues that living beings are autopoietic systems that extend beyond the spatial boundaries of the organism. In this article, we argue that extended enactivism, despite having some basis in AT’s original formulation, mistakes AT’s definition of living beings as autopoietic entities. We offer, as a reply to this interpretation, a more embodied reformulation of autopoiesis, which we think is necessary to counterbalance the (excessively) disembodied spirit of AT’s original formulation. The article aims to clarify and correct what we take to be a misinterpretation of AT as a research program. AT, contrary to what some enactivists seem to believe, did not (and does not) intend to motivate an extended conception of living beings. AT’s primary purpose, we argue, was (and is) to provide a universal individuation criterion for living beings, these understood as discrete bodies that are embedded in, but not constituted by, the environment that surrounds them. However, by giving a more explicitly embodied definition of living beings, AT can rectify and accommodate, so we argue, the enactive extended interpretation of autopoiesis, showing that although living beings do not extend beyond their boundaries as autopoietic unities, they do form part, in normal conditions, of broader autopoietic systems that include the environment.
16
Kliska, Nemanja, and Chrystopher L. Nehaniv. "Autocatalysis, Autopoiesis, and the Opportunity Cost of Individuality." Biomimetics 9, no. 6 (May 30, 2024): 328. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics9060328.
Full textAbstract:
Ever since Varela and Maturana proposed the concept of autopoiesis as the minimal requirement for life, there has been a focus on cellular systems that erect topological boundaries to separate themselves from their surrounding environment. Here, we reconsider whether the existence of such a spatial boundary is strictly necessary for self-producing entities. This work presents a novel computational model of a minimal autopoietic system inspired by dendrites and molecular dynamic simulations in three-dimensional space. A series of simulation experiments where the metabolic pathways of a particular autocatalytic set are successively inhibited until autocatalytic entities that could be considered autopoietic are produced. These entities maintain their distinctness in an environment containing multiple identical instances of the entities without the existence of a topological boundary. This gives rise to the concept of a metabolic boundary which manifests as emergent self-selection criteria for the processes of self-production without any need for unique identifiers. However, the adoption of such a boundary comes at a cost, as these autopoietic entities are less suited to their simulated environment than their autocatalytic counterparts. Finally, this work showcases a generalized metabolism-centered approach to the study of autopoiesis that can be applied to both physical and abstract systems alike.
17
Dollens, Dennis. "Alan Turing's Drawings, Autopoiesis and Can Buildings Think?" Leonardo 47, no. 3 (June 2014): 249–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/leon_a_00766.
Full textAbstract:
Alan Turing decoded nature in drawings and algorithmic programming. His botanical decryptions helped situate synthetic AI/ALife processes in digital realms now encompassing algorithmic simulation. These little-known drawings prompted the author's analysis via Maturana and Varela's theory of autopoiesis because of its emphasis on self-organization and minimal requirements for life. Autopoiesis, if hybridized with Andy Clark's extended cognition, then supports an underpinning hypothesis for generative architecture. Together, the theory and drawings propel design research, leading to the question: Can buildings think?—reprocessing Turing's original question: “Can machines think?” This paper thus situates Turing's 1950s' nature-to-computation images as unacknowledged design patrimony appropriated for generative architecture derived from nature and implemented via autopoietic-extended design.
18
Mingers, John. "Can Social Systems Be Autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann's Social Theory." Sociological Review 50, no. 2 (May 2002): 278–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-954x.00367.
Full textAbstract:
The theory of autopoiesis, that is systems that are self-producing or self-constructing, was originally developed to explain the particular nature of living as opposed to non-living entities. It was subsequently enlarged to encompass cognition and language leading to what is known as second-order cybernetics. However, as with earlier biological theories, many authors have tried to extend the domain of the theory to encompass social systems, the most notable being Luhmann. The purpose of this article is to consider critically the extent to which the theory of autopoiesis, as originally defined, can be applied to social systems – that is, whether social systems are autopoietic. And, if it cannot, whether some weaker version might be appropriate.
19
Ding, Wai Boh. "Legal Autopoiesis and the Capital/Revenue Distinction." Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 38, no. 3 (November 1, 2007): 489. http://dx.doi.org/10.26686/vuwlr.v38i3.5531.
Full textAbstract:
This paper attempts to use the theory of legal autopoiesis to understand the struggle the courts have experienced when asked to decide tax cases involving the capital/revenue distinction, which is a distinction that could not be determined by any criteria. The theory of legal autopoiesis, as propounded by Niklas Luhmann, posits that the legal system, as an autopoietic system within society, produces and reproduces its own elements self-referentially and recursively. The legal system operates according to its code, which comprises the values 'legal/illegal'. The code is complemented and filled by programmes, which must be suitable and help to allocate the values in particular situations. However, if there are no programmes, how does the legal system allocate the values? The lack of a definite set of rules that can be used in tax cases to determine whether an item is capital or revenue in nature means that there is no programme according to which the legal system can allocate the values. This lack exposes a critical weakness in Luhmann's theory of legal autopoiesis.
20
Keane, John F., W. A. Taylor, Myfanwy Trueman, and Gillian Wright. "Autopoiesis in Disneyland: reassuring consumers via autopoietic brand management." International Journal of Advertising 18, no. 4 (January 1999): 519–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02650487.1999.11104776.
Full text
21
McMullin, Barry. "Thirty Years of Computational Autopoiesis: A Review." Artificial Life 10, no. 3 (June 2004): 277–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1064546041255548.
Full textAbstract:
Computational autopoiesis—the realization of autopoietic entities in computational media—holds an important and distinctive role within the field of artificial life. Its earliest formulation by Francisco Varela, Humberto Maturana, and Ricardo Uribe was seminal in demonstrating the use of an artificial, computational medium to explore the most basic question of the abstract nature of living systems—over a decade in advance of the first Santa Fe Workshop on Artificial Life. The research program it originated has generated substantive demonstrations of progressively richer, lifelike phenomena. It has also sharply illuminated both conceptual and methodological problems in the field. This article provides an integrative overview of the sometimes disparate work in this area, and argues that computational autopoiesis continues to provide an effective framework for addressing key open problems in artificial life.
22
Hashimoto, Wataru. "Autopoiesis, Observation and Informatics: Lessons from the Development of Autopoietic Systems Theory in Japan." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 9, no. 2 (October 30, 2011): 414–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v9i2.294.
Full textAbstract:
This article is concerned with redefining the notion of information from a perspective of systems theory. In recent years, the notion of information, which was closely related to the framework of old cybernetics, has been refined in parallel with the emergence of new cybernetics, especially second-order cybernetics and autopoiesis. The systemic view of new cybernetics provides us with the notion of “informationally closed system.” This notion is congruent with the epistemological implications of radical constructivism. In order to help understand this argument, we aim at highlighting the development of autopoietic systems theory in Japan. Autopoiesis has often been considered as a thoroughly closed system in Japan, where the relationships between autopoiesis and radical constructivism have frequently been overlooked. This is mainly because the importance which autopoietic systems theory originally attaches to the notion of observer and observation has been inadequately discussed, and autopoietic systems theory is regarded as distinct from second-order cybernetics and radical constructivism. However, they must be dealt with together, and Humberto Maturana should be given credit for his ontology of observing. Since the publication of his paper “Biology of Cognition,” Maturana has been attempting to explain the notion of observation as a biological phenomenon in his own way. Likewise, by taking into consideration the notion of observation, we can build a unified theory of information. Fundamental Informatics, which is being developed by Toru Nishigaki, outlines a unified approach to information by putting human observers at the center of his theory. Social and mechanical information is generated only when human observers conduct observations on the basis of biological information, and this mechanism of generation of information is discussed through the notion of “hierarchical autonomous system.” For an autopoietic organi- zation to be realized, of course, no hierarchy of systems is required, but observers are likely to construct some hierarchy between two systems. The construction of certain hierarchies of systems by observers is of great use for the explanation of fictitious phenomena of information transmission.
23
Hashimoto, Wataru. "Autopoiesis, Observation and Informatics: Lessons from the Development of Autopoietic Systems Theory in Japan." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 9, no. 2 (October 30, 2011): 414–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/vol9iss2pp414-423.
Full textAbstract:
This article is concerned with redefining the notion of information from a perspective of systems theory. In recent years, the notion of information, which was closely related to the framework of old cybernetics, has been refined in parallel with the emergence of new cybernetics, especially second-order cybernetics and autopoiesis. The systemic view of new cybernetics provides us with the notion of “informationally closed system.” This notion is congruent with the epistemological implications of radical constructivism. In order to help understand this argument, we aim at highlighting the development of autopoietic systems theory in Japan. Autopoiesis has often been considered as a thoroughly closed system in Japan, where the relationships between autopoiesis and radical constructivism have frequently been overlooked. This is mainly because the importance which autopoietic systems theory originally attaches to the notion of observer and observation has been inadequately discussed, and autopoietic systems theory is regarded as distinct from second-order cybernetics and radical constructivism. However, they must be dealt with together, and Humberto Maturana should be given credit for his ontology of observing. Since the publication of his paper “Biology of Cognition,” Maturana has been attempting to explain the notion of observation as a biological phenomenon in his own way. Likewise, by taking into consideration the notion of observation, we can build a unified theory of information. Fundamental Informatics, which is being developed by Toru Nishigaki, outlines a unified approach to information by putting human observers at the center of his theory. Social and mechanical information is generated only when human observers conduct observations on the basis of biological information, and this mechanism of generation of information is discussed through the notion of “hierarchical autonomous system.” For an autopoietic organi- zation to be realized, of course, no hierarchy of systems is required, but observers are likely to construct some hierarchy between two systems. The construction of certain hierarchies of systems by observers is of great use for the explanation of fictitious phenomena of information transmission.
24
Harnad, Stevan. "Maturana’s autopoietic hermeneutics versus Turing’s causal methodology for explaining cognition." Mechanicism and Autonomy: What Can Robotics Teach Us About Human Cognition and Action? 15, no. 3 (December 13, 2007): 599–603. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.15.3.13har.
Full textAbstract:
Kravchenko (2007) suggests replacing Turing’s suggestion for explaining cognizers’ cognitive capacity through autonomous robotic modelling by ‘autopoiesis’, Maturana’s extremely vague metaphor for the relations and interactions among organisms, environments, and various subordinate and superordinate systems (‘autopoietic systems’) therein. I suggest that this would be an exercise in hermeneutics rather than causal explanation.
25
Yolles, Maurice, and B. Roy Frieden. "Autopoiesis and Its Efficacy—A Metacybernetic View." Systems 9, no. 4 (October 25, 2021): 75. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/systems9040075.
Full textAbstract:
This paper seeks to explain the nature of autopoiesis and its capacity to be efficacious, and to do this, it uses agency theory as embedded in metacybernetics. Agency, as a generalised intelligent adaptive living system, can anticipate the future once it has internalised a representation of an active contextual situation through autopoiesis. The role of observation and the nature of internalisation will be discussed, explaining that the latter has two states that determine agency properties of cognition. These are assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation is an information process and results in implicit cognition and recognition, whereas accommodation uses assimilated information delivering explicit cognition, recognition, and conscious awareness with rationality. Similarly, anticipation, a required property of the living, has two states, weak and strong, and these correspond to the two states of internalisation. Autopoiesis has various properties identifiable through the lenses of three autonomous but configurable schemas: General Collective Intelligence (GCI), Eigenform, and Extreme Physical Information (EPI). GCI is a pragmatic evolutionary approach concerned with a contextually connected purposeful and relatable set of task processes, each undertaken by a team of subagencies seeking collective fitness. Eigenform is a symbolic approach that is concerned with how observations can be suitably internalised and thus be used as a token to determine future behaviour, and how that which has been internalised can be adopted to anticipate the future. Extreme Physical Information (EPI) is an empirical approach concerned with acquiring information through observation of an unknown parameter through sampling regimes. The paper represents the conceptualisations of each schema in terms of autopoietic efficacy, and explores their configurative possibilities. It will adopt the ideas delivered to enhance explanations of the nature of autopoiesis and its efficacy within metacybernetics, providing a shift in thinking about autopoiesis and self-organisation.
26
Oppegaard, Sigurd M Nordli. "Nyliberalismens autopoiesis." Agora 36, no. 03-04 (December 3, 2019): 317–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.18261/issn1500-1571-2019-03-04-18.
Full text
27
Anchor, Robert. "Whose Autopoiesis?" History and Theory 39, no. 1 (February 2000): 107–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0018-2656.00117.
Full text
28
Vásquez, Consuelo, and Rubén Dittus Benavente. "Revisiting Autopoiesis." Management Communication Quarterly 30, no. 2 (December 9, 2015): 269–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318915620492.
Full text
29
Ferrando, Francesca. "AUTOPOIESIS COGNITIVA." Revista Iberoamericana 88, no. 281 (December 2022): 857–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.3828/reviberoamer.2022.88281857.
Full text
30
Hansen, Sid. "Beyond Autopoiesis." TSQ 10, no. 3-4 (November 1, 2023): 369–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/23289252-10900900.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract As the notion of biological sex becomes increasingly invested with binary, anti-trans meanings in US discourse, some scholars suggest that “reimagining biology” as diverse and not dichotomous might help affirm trans identities. Instead of ignoring science and emboldening its reductionist forms, it is said that theorists should celebrate trans identities as biological diversity. This essay explores the fraught terrain of this hopeful project. The first section examines how dominant histories of the sex-gender distinction autopoietically flatten trans lives by conflating them with the passive materiality of biological sex. The second section turns to two histories of trans life that challenge this historiographic tendency—Jules Gill-Peterson's Histories of the Transgender Child and C. Riley Snorton's Black on Both Sides. Following Sylvia Wynter's call to forge liminal sciences, the article shows how Gill-Peterson and Snorton reimagine biology by encountering marginalized modes of trans scientific practice. In the margins, gaps, and opacities of the archive, there are encounters with trans experimentation, rearrangements of biology and science that do not “affirm” transness as much as they rebel against the racist order of cis-normativity.
31
Morkunas, Mangirdas, Viktorija Skvarciany, and Jelena Titko. "Development of autopoietic economic structures in the Baltic states: analysis of factors." Equilibrium 12, no. 2 (June 30, 2017): 319. http://dx.doi.org/10.24136/eq.v12i2.17.
Full textAbstract:
Research background: Since the introduction of the concept in 1972 Autopoiesis has enjoyed great popularity among academicians representing various fields of science. However, the number of studies devoted to the investigation of factors that have an impact on the formation of autopoietic economic structures is quite limited. This paper addresses the gap in scientific research on autopoiesis of economic structures in small open markets, specifically in the Baltic States.Purpose of the article: The paper aims to identify and evaluate factors that turn on self-organization mechanisms of autopoietic economic structures in the Baltic States, in particular in Latvia.Methods: Expert survey was used to identify the most important factors affecting the for-mation of meso-economic entities in the Baltic States. The factors’ assessments provided by seven experts were analyzed. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with fuzzy numbers was employed to process the data. Two different scales of evaluation (inverse linear and balanced) were used.Findings & Value added: The factors influencing the process of formation of business groups were evaluated by experts. Research results allow for making conclusions regarding the causes of the business integration, and impact of diversified integrated business structures on the country's business system in Central Europe.
32
Weber, Andreas. "Cognition as expression: On the autopoietic foundations of an aesthetic theory of nature." Sign Systems Studies 29, no. 1 (December 31, 2001): 153–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2001.29.1.10.
Full textAbstract:
This paper attempts to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic description of the living, which in turn is derived from an autopoietic theory of organism (p. Varela). An autopoietic system's reaction to material constraints is the unfolding of a dimension of meaning. In the outward Gestalt of autopoietic systems, meaning appears as fonn, and as such it reveals itself in a sensually graspable manner. The mode of being of organisms has an irreducible aesthetic side in which this mode of being becomes visible. Nature thus displays a kind of transparency of its own functioning: in a nondiscursive way organisms show traces of their conditio vitae through their material self-presentation. Living beings hence always show a basic level of expressiveness as a necessary component of their organic mode of being. This is called the ecstatic dimension of nature (G. Böhme, R. Corrington). Autopoiesis in its full consequence then amounts to a view reminding of Paracelsus' idea of the signatura rerum (c. Glacken, H. Böhme): nature is transparent, not because it is organized digitally as a linguistic text or code, but rather because it displays analogically the kind of intentionality engendered by autopoiesis. Nature as a whole, as «living fonn" (S. Langer), is a symbol for organic intentionality. The most fundamental meaning of nature protection thus is to guarantee the «real presence" of our soul.
33
Handayani, Difha Sulistyawati. "Peranan Komunikasi Dalam Sistem Sosial : Analisis Teori Niklas Lukman." JKOMDIS : Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi Dan Media Sosial 4, no. 2 (June 6, 2024): 417–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.47233/jkomdis.v4i2.1682.
Full textAbstract:
The theory of communication as autopoiesis proposed by Niklas Luhmann offers a revolutionary perspective in understanding communication in social systems. Luhmann argues that communication is not just a tool for exchanging information, but is an independent process and has autonomous mechanisms to maintain and reproduce itself. This theory combines the concept of autopoiesis which originally came from biology, where a system can produce and maintain its own components through internal interactions. In Luhmann's theory, communication is seen as a basic element of a social system that has the ability to create and reproduce social structures through processes communication itself. Luhmann emphasized that communication occurs through three main elements: information, message, and understanding. This process not only transmits information, but also shapes and constructs social reality. Communication in Luhmann's view is a selective process that involves selecting the information to be communicated, the way the information is conveyed, and how the information is understood by the recipient. Apart from that, the theory of communication as autopoiesis is relevant in the context of modern communication which is increasingly complex and fragmented. In the digital era, where information spreads rapidly and in large quantities, understanding communication as an autopoietic process helps us understand how information is processed, selected, and internalized in social systems. It also helps in understanding the challenges and opportunities that have arisen from developments in communication technologies, such as social media and the internet, which have changed the way we communicate and interact with each other. Overall, Niklas Luhmann's theory of communication as autopoiesis provides a powerful theoretical framework for understanding communication as an independent and dynamic process in social systems. This theory not only provides insight into how communication functions in a social context, but also offers analytical tools for exploring the complexity and dynamics of communication in modern society. By understanding communication through the lens of autopoiesis, we can better capture the essence of the communication process and how it shapes our social reality.
34
Cabral, Ana Luiza Novais, Sidiney Duarte Ribeiro, and Álvaro Ricardo de Souza Cruz. "A aplicabilidade da teoria dos sistemas na fundamentação das decisões judiciais." REVISTA QUAESTIO IURIS 15, no. 1 (February 24, 2022): 238–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.12957/rqi.2022.54329.
Full textAbstract:
ResumoA presente pesquisa vislumbra analisar a teoria dos sistemas desenvolvida por Niklas Luhmann apontando suas principais peculiaridades, trazendo conceitos como a diferenciação entre sistema e entorno, sentido, complexidade e a comunicação, conteúdos indispensáveis para a compreensão do modo de operar do sistema e de sua autopoiese. Para tanto, o trabalho se opera por meio de uma revisão bibliográfica com a metodologia qualitativa, de modo a verificar como a teoria dos sistemas está presente no modo de operar das decisões judiciais, haja vista que o direito é um subsistema que se mantém em constante evolução.Palavras-chave: Teoria dos sistemas; Sistema social; Decisão Judicial; Autopoiese dos sistemas. AbstractThis research aims to analyze the systems theory developed by Niklas Luhmann, pointing out its main peculiarities, bringing concepts such as the differentiation between system, surroundings, sense, complexity and communication, essential contents for understanding the system's operation and its autopoiesis. To this end, the work operates through a bibliographic review with qualitative methodology, in order to verify how the theory of systems is present in the way of operating judicial decisions, given that law is a subsystem that remains in constant evolution.Keywords: Systems theory; Social system; Judicial decision; Autopoiesis of systems.
35
Räwel, Jörg. "The origin of species through system differentiation." Kybernetes 49, no. 10 (November 7, 2019): 2365–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/k-03-2019-0141.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Maturana and Mpodozis (2000) developed a theory of evolution that is based on the concept of autopoiesis and differs paradigmatically from the conventional theory derived from Darwin (1859). The present study aims to show that the authors have not exhausted the explanatory potential that the concept of autopoiesis can offer for the theory of evolution. Based on the critique of Maturana and Mpodozis, a system theoretic-oriented concept for the origin of species will be developed. Design/methodology/approach To render the explanatory potential of the concept of autopoiesis more fruitful for the theory of evolution, the proposition is made that the application of this concept is not limited to the molecular, or organismal level, as propounded by Maturana and Mpodozis, but should be also related to populations and species. By exempting the design of Maturana and Mpodozis from the rudiments of methodological individualism, a new field of application for the concept of autopoiesis is explored. Findings The proposed system theoretic concept of evolution theory makes it possible to shed new, constructive light on fundamental problems in the conventional biology of evolution. For example, with regard to the significance of the emergence of sexuality, or how phases of accelerated change in the course of evolution (e.g. the Cambrian explosion) are possible, or regarding the problem of the units of selection. Originality/value Although there have been attempts in the social sciences to interpret populations as autopoietic systems (for example by Niklas Luhmann), the proposed approach to evolutionary biology is new. Also original is a system theoretic conception of the evolutionary theory, in a strict renunciation of methodological individualism. This renunciation permits systems theories of evolution in social science and biology to be compared across disciplines.
36
ZARETZKY, ALBA N., and JUAN C. LETELIER. "METABOLIC NETWORKS FROM (ℳ, ℛ) SYSTEMS AND AUTOPOIESIS PERSPECTIVE." Journal of Biological Systems 10, no. 03 (September 2002): 265–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0218339002000573.
Full textAbstract:
This paper is the first one of a series devoted to the analysis of metabolic networks. Its aim is to establish the theoretical framework for this analysis. Two different lines of research are considered: the one about metabolism-repair systems ((ℳ, ℛ)), introduced by Robert Rosen as an abstract representation of cell metabolic activity, and the concept of autopoiesis developed by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela. Both concepts have been recently connected by Letelier et al., determining that the set of autopoietic systems is a subset of the set of general abstract (ℳ, ℛ) systems. In fact, every specific (ℳ, ℛ) system is an autopoietic one, being the boundary, which specifies each system as a unity, the main element of autopoietic systems which is not formalized in Rosen's representation. This paper introduces the definition of boundary — a physical boundary and a functional one — for (ℳ, ℛ) systems in the context of a representation using category theory. The concept of complete (ℳ, ℛ) system is also introduced by means of a process of completion in categories which is functorial, natural and universal.
37
Etxeberria, Arantza. "Autopoiesis and Natural Drift: Genetic Information, Reproduction, and Evolution Revisited." Artificial Life 10, no. 3 (June 2004): 347–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1064546041255575.
Full textAbstract:
The contribution of the theory of autopoiesis to the definition of life and biological theory affirms biological autonomy as a central notion of scientific and philosophical inquiry, and opposes other biological approaches, based on the notion of genetic information, that consider reproduction and evolution to be the central aspects of life and living phenomenology. This article reviews the autopoietic criticisms of genetic information, reproduction, and evolution in the light of a biology that can solve the problem of living organization.
38
Phillip McReynolds. "Autopoiesis and Transaction." Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 53, no. 2 (2017): 312. http://dx.doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.53.2.07.
Full text
39
Michailakis, Dimitris. "Autopoiesis och styrning." Sociologisk Forskning 39, no. 1 (January 1, 2002): 90–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.37062/sf.39.19430.
Full text
40
Verwey, Sonja. "Sociocybernetics and autopoiesis." Communicare: Journal for Communication Studies in Africa 30, no. 2 (October 17, 2022): 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.36615/jcsa.v30i2.1655.
Full textAbstract:
Contemporary debates in social disciplines are making increasing reference to theoreticalconcepts such as sociocybernetics and autopoiesis (Bailey, 1983, 1997, 2001; Bopry, 2007,Brier, 2005; Geyer, 1994, 1995, 2003; Glanville, 2004; Goldspink, 2001; Hernes & Bakken, 2003;Krippendorff, 1996; Letiche, 2007; Luhmann, 1996; Mingers, 2002b; Morgan, 1998; Scott, 1996,2001b, 2003; Smith & Higgins, 2003; Umpleby, 2005; Van der Zouwen, 1997; Von Foerster, 2003;Von Glasersfeld, 1996). It becomes apparent from these debates that certain paradigm shifts areimminent not so much as a result of new knowledge, but rather as a result of new metaphors thatpresent alternative perspectives for interdisciplinary corroboration.Thus far, debates on revisiting cybernetic concepts have largely been conducted in other socialsciences disciplines such as sociology, politics and semiology, this despite the challenges a cocreational perspective poses for communication in general and for organisational communicationspecifically. This paper aims to raise the debate amongst communication scholars, especiallysince communication scholars are conspicuously absent in the social-scientific debates withinother disciplines, and we are in danger of failing to challenge our own intellectual assumptions.As such, this paper discusses and explores the appropriateness and applicability of cyberneticsand autopoiesis as contemporary theoretical approaches to the study of organisations ascommunicatively enacted entities. It attempts to identify some of the intellectual challenges posedby extending the boundaries of our conversations beyond our recognised metaphors and concepts.The purpose of this paper is to initiate dialogue among communication scholars that may resonatewith the constructivist epistemology, and which constitutes both cybernetics and postmodernism.We argue that cybernetics in its entirety poses a challenge for the study of organisations from acommunication perspective. We argue, as Geyer (1995) has done, that it may be an intellectuallychallenging exercise to reposition the current modern and postmodern organisational metaphorswithin a single new emerging metaphor: the schismatic metaphor.
41
Adams, Suzi. "Castoriadis and Autopoiesis." Thesis Eleven 88, no. 1 (February 2007): 76–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513607072458.
Full text
42
Cooper, Melinda. "LIFE, AUTOPOIESIS, DEBT." Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 8, no. 1 (January 2007): 25–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1600910x.2007.9672937.
Full text
43
Münch, Richard. "Autopoiesis per Definitionen." ProtoSociology 3 (1992): 42–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/protosociology1992319.
Full text
44
Dougall, Colin. "Autopoiesis and Aristotle." Kybernetes 28, no. 6/7 (August 1999): 777–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684929910283196.
Full text
45
Escobar, Jorge M. "Autopoiesis and Darwinism." Synthese 185, no. 1 (January 21, 2011): 53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9875-y.
Full text
46
Scheper, Willem J., and Gert C. Scheper. "Autopsies on autopoiesis." Behavioral Science 41, no. 1 (January 1996): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830410101.
Full text
47
Kauffman, Louis H. "Autopoiesis and Eigenform." Computation 11, no. 12 (December 5, 2023): 247. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/computation11120247.
Full textAbstract:
This paper explores a formal model of autopoiesis as presented by Maturana, Uribe and Varela, and analyzes this model and its implications through the lens of the notions of eigenforms (fixed points) and the intricacies of Goedelian coding. The paper discusses the connection between autopoiesis and eigenforms and a variety of different perspectives and examples. The paper puts forward original philosophical reflections and generalizations about its various conclusions concerning specific examples, with the aim of contributing to a unified way of understanding (formal models of) living systems within the context of natural sciences, and to see the role of such systems and the formation of information from the point of view of analogs of biological construction. To this end, we pay attention to models for fixed points, self-reference and self-replication in formal systems and in the description of biological systems.
48
Miroshnichenko, M. D. "Not so Hard Problem: Francisco Varela on the Relations between Consciousness, Nature and Life." Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, no. 8 (November 28, 2018): 144–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.30727/0235-1188-2018-8-144-159.
Full textAbstract:
The author reconstructs the theory of F. Varela with relevance to the hard problem of consciousness. This problem was touched by Varela in relatively late period of his work. However, the implications for dissolution of this problem can be found in his earlier works with H. Maturana. Theory of autopoietic systems ties life and cognition together, resulting in natural historical comprehension of consciousness and its functioning. Autopoiesis, understood as network of processes of production of components used as resources for maintaining these processes, sets organizational invariances, distinguishing living system from its milieu. The main criterion of living system is an ability to maintain autopoietic organization while undergoing structural transformations with environment. Structural plasticity leads to multiple realizability of autopoietic organizations, which, in turn, leads to radical conclusion on nature of knowledge. One can distinguish the knower and the known only contingently, as the structure of knowledge reflects cognitive structure of the knower. This intertwinement permits Varela to introduce the enactivist program, which presupposes not simply reform in the scientific research of consciousness but also rethinking the implications of scientific knowledge itself. Cognition is a sensorimotor constitution of the world. Therefore, consciousness is not an object of material nature among other objects but provides our cognitive access to nature. Varela intended to abandon the theoretical approach to the problem of consciousness. His aim was not to provide a new argument. This is a consequence of the enactivist position which, according to theory of autopoiesis, must be applicable to the knower himself.
49
Ruiz-Mirazo, Kepa, and Alvaro Moreno. "Basic Autonomy as a Fundamental Step in the Synthesis of Life." Artificial Life 10, no. 3 (June 2004): 235–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/1064546041255584.
Full textAbstract:
In the search for the primary roots of autonomy (a pivotal concept in Varela's comprehensive understanding of living beings), the theory of autopoiesis provided an explicit criterion to define minimal life in universal terms, and was taken as a guideline in the research program for the artificial synthesis of biological systems. Acknowledging the invaluable contribution of the autopoietic school to present biological thinking, we offer an alternative way of conceiving the most basic forms of autonomy. We give a bottom-up account of the origins of “self-production” (or self-construction, as we propose to call it), pointing out which are the minimal material and energetic requirements for the constitution of basic autonomous systems. This account is, indeed, committed to the project of developing a general theory of biology, but well grounded in the universal laws of physics and chemistry. We consider that the autopoietic theory was formulated in highly abstract terms and, in order to advance in the implementation of minimal autonomous systems (and, at the same time, make major progress in exploring the origins of life), a more specific characterization of minimal autonomous systems is required. Such a characterization will not be drawn from a review of the autopoietic criteria and terminology (à la Fleischaker) but demands a whole reformulation of the question: a proper naturalization of the concept of autonomy. Finally, we also discuss why basic autonomy, according to our account, is necessary but not sufficient for life, in contrast with Varela's idea that autopoiesis was a necessary and sufficient condition for it.
50
Hernes, Tor, and Tore Bakken. "Implications of Self-Reference: Niklas Luhmann’s Autopoiesis and Organization Theory." Organization Studies 24, no. 9 (November 2003): 1511–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840603249007.
Full textAbstract:
This article reviews the potential of Niklas Luhmann’s autopoiesis as a contribution to organization theory. We consider organization theory to consist of three epistemological foundations, which we label equilibrium-based theory, process-based theory and recursivity-based theory. We review critically Luhmann’s autopoietic theory in relation to each of these three foundations. We suggest that whereas it deviates radically from equilibrium-based theory and deviates significantly from process-based theory, it holds potential in its complementarity with Giddens’s structuration theory in providing a promising basis for recursivity-based organization theory.