Везде
From a frog’s eye to the human mind: Transformations of the neocybernetic project in the theory of autopoiesis
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
From a frog’s eye to the human mind: Transformations of the neocybernetic project in the theory of autopoiesis
Annotation
PII
S2072-07260000616-6-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Maxim Miroshnichenko 
ORCID: 0000-0003-1374-1599
Edition
Volume 13 Issue 2
Pages
126-143
Abstract
The article considers the evolution of the theoretical views of the representatives of the “Santiago school” on the relationship between cognition and biological processes in the context of the neocybernetic movement. In contrast to the classic (first order) cyber­netics, neocybernetics concentrated on observing the cognitive activity of living organisms instead of engineering machines that imitated biological and/or cognitive processes. Build­ing on the synthesis of the data gathered in the studies of the visual perception of amphib­ians in the early 1970s, Humberto Maturana along with Francisco Varela proposed a the­ory of autopoiesis that treated living systems as cognitive systems. According to the theory of autopoiesis, cognition and life are two sides of one process of the living system’s self-production and maintenance. Due to its tensions with the genetic and evolutionary aspects of mainstream biology, this theory received almost no recognition among the biologists, but instead was widely accepted within the countercultural movement. In particular, it was the community around the magazine called CoEvolution Quarterly that was first to intro­duce questions of ecology, system thinking and holistic methodology in the social field. The further evolution of the “Santiago school” is associated with Varela’s project of “neo­cybernetic dialectics”, which aimed at dissolving the dualistic thinking. In this project, the elements of binary oppositions (such as “mind/body”) were assessed as two sides of a dy­namically emerging process. The present paper shows that Varela’s later studies devoted to the widening of the scope of cognitive science (enactivism), methodological solution of the “hard problem of consciousness” (neurophenomenology) and the reclaiming of the no­tion of teleology in biology develop the neocybernetic project that was initially launched by Maturana and was based on his criticism of classic cybernetic epistemology.
Keywords
autopoiesis, neocybernetics, systems theory, “Santiago school”, emergence, enactivism
Date of publication
01.06.2020
Number of purchasers
22
Views
621
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

    

  1. Bich, L. & Etxeberria, A. “Autopoietic Systems”, Encyclopedia of Systems Biology, ed. by W. Dubitzky, O. Wolkenhauer, K.-H. Cho, H. Yokota. New York; Heidelberg; Dordrecht; London: Springer, 2013, pp. 2110‒2113.
    2. 

  2. Capra, F. “The Santiago Theory of Life and Cognition”, La revista Be-Vision, 1986, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 59‒60.
    3. 

  3. Clarke, B. “Steps to an Ecology of Systems: Whole Earth and Systemic Holism”, Addressing Modernity: Social Systems Theory and U.S. Cultures, ed. by H. Bergthaller, C. Schinko. Amsterdam; New York: Rodopi, 2011, pp. 259‒288.
    4. 

  4. Clarke, B. “Planetary Immunity: Biolopolitics, Gaia Theory, the Holobiont, and the Systems Counterculture”, General Ecology: The New Ecological Paradigm, ed. by E. Hörl, J. Bur­ton. London; Oxford; New York; Delhi; Sydney: Bloomsbury, 2017, pp. 193‒215.
    5. 

  5. Clarke, B. & Hansen, M.B.N. “Introduction: Neocybernetic Emergence”, Emergence and Embodiment: New Essays on Second-Order Systems Theory, ed. by B. Clarke, M.B.N. Hansen. Durham; London: Duke University Press, 2009, pp. 1‒25.
    6. 

  6. Dupuy, J.-P. On the Origins of Cognitive Science: The Mechanization of the Mind. Cambridge; London: The MIT Press, 2009. 210 pp.
    7. 

  7. Froese, T. “From Second-Order Cybernetics to Enactive Cognitive Science: Varela’s Turn from Epistemology to Phenomenology”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2011, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 631‒645.
    8. 

  8. Hayles, N.K. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Infor­matics. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. 364 pp.
    9. 

  9. Heims, S.J. The Cybernetics Group. Cambridge, Mass.; London: The MIT Press, 1991. 348 pp.
    10. 

  10. “Interview with Heinz von Foerster. July 20, 2001, Pescadero, California”, Emergence and Embodiment: New Essays on Second-Order Systems Theory, ed. by B. Clarke, M.B.N. Hansen. Durham; London: Duke University Press, 2009, pp. 26‒33.
    11. 

  11. Knyazeva, E.N. Enaktivizm: novaya forma konstruktivizma v epistemologii[Enactivism: The New Form of Constructivism in Epistemology]. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Centr gu­manitarnykh iniciativ Publ., 2014. 352 pp. (In Russian)
    12. 

  12. Lettvin, J.Y., Maturana, H.R., McCulloch, W.S. & Pitts, W.H. “What the Frog’s Eye Tells the Frog’s Brain”, Proceedings of the IRE, 1959, Vol. 47, No. 11, pp. 1940‒1951.
    13. 

  13. Lettvin, J.Y., Maturana, H.R., McCulloch, W.S. & Pitts, W.H. “Anatomy and Physiology of Vi­sion in the Frog (Rana Pipiens)”, The Journal of General Physiology, 1960, Vol. 43, No. 6, pp. 129‒175.
    14. 

  14. Lovelock, J.E. & Margulis, L. “Atmospheric Homeostasis by and for the Biosphere: the Gaia Hypothesis”, Tellus, 1974, Vol. 26, No. 1‒2, pp. 2‒10.
    15. 

  15. Luisi, P.L. The Emergence of Life: From Chemical Origins to Synthetic Biology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. 315 pp.
    16. 

  16. Luisi, P.L. The Santiago School: Autopoiesis and the Biologics of Life [https://wsimag.com/​
    science-and-technology/19657-the-santiago-school, accessed on 16.12.2019].
    17. 

  17. Mak-Kallok, U.S. & Pitts, V. “Logicheskoe ischislenie idej, otnosyashhixsya k nervnoj ak­tivnosti” [A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity], trans. by Yu.T. Medvedev, Avtomaty [Automata], ed. by C. Shannon and J. McCarthy. Moscow: Inostrannaya literatura Publ., 1956, pp. 363‒384. (In Russian)
    18. 

  18. Maturana, H. “Reflections on My Collaboration with Francisco Varela”, Constructivist Founda­tions, 2012, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 155‒164.
    19. 

  19. Maturana, H. & Varela, F.J. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dodrecht; Boston; London: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1980. 143 pp.
    20. 

  20. Maturana, H.R., Uribe, G. & Frenk, S. “A Biological Theory of Relativistic Colour Coding in the Primate Retina”, Archivos de biologia y medicina experimentales, 1968, Vol. 1, pp. 1‒30.
    21. 

  21. Pickering, A. The Cybernetic Brain: Sketches of Another Future. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 2010. 526 pp.
    22. 

  22. Thompson, E. “Life and Mind: From Autopoiesis to Neurophenomenology”, Emergence and Embodiment: New Essays on Second-Order Systems Theory, ed. by B. Clarke, M.B.N. Hansen. Durham; London: Duke University Press, 2009, pp. 77‒93.
    23. 

  23. Varela, F.J. “Organism, Cognitive Science and the Emergence of Selfless Selves”, Revue euro­péenne des sciences sociales, 1991, Vol. 29, No. 89, pp. 173‒198.
    24. 

  24. Varela, F.J. “Neurophenomenology: A Methodological Remedy for the Hard Problem”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 1996, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 330‒349.
    25. 

  25. Varela, F.J. “The Specious Present: A Neurophenomenology of Time Consciousness”, Natu­ralizing Phenomenology, ed. by J. Petitot, F.J. Varela, B. Pachoud, J.-M. Roy. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999, pp. 266‒306.
    26. 

  26. Varela, F.J., Maturana, H.R. & Uribe, R. “Autopoiesis: The Organization of Living Systems, Its Characterization and a Model”, Biosystems, 1974, Vol. 5, pp. 187‒196.
    27. 

  27. Varela, F.J., Thompson, E. & Rosch E. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Ex­perience. Cambridge, Mass.; London: The MIT Press, 1991. 308 pp.
    28. 

  28. Varela, F.J. “Not One, Not Two: Position Paper for the Mind – Body Conference”, CoEvolution Quarterly, 1976, No. 11, pp. 62‒67.
    29. 

  29. Von Foerster, H. Observing Systems. Salinas: Intersystems Publications, 1984. 331 pp.
    30. 

  30. Vörös, S. & Bitbol, M. “Enacting Enaction: A Dialectic Between Knowing and Being”, Con­structivist Foundations, 2017, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 31‒34.
    31. 

  31. Weber, A. & Varela, F.J. “Life after Kant: Natural Purposes and the Autopoietic Foundations of Biological Individuality”, Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 2002, Vol. 1, pp. 97‒125.
    32. 

  32. Zeleny, M. (ed.) Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organization. New York: North Holland, 1981. 314 pp.
    33.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate