An organisational approach to biological communication
Acta Biotheoretica (2):103-128 (2019)
Abstract
This paper aims to provide a philosophical and theoretical account of biological communication grounded in the notion of organisation. The organisational approach characterises living systems as organised in such a way that they are capable to self-produce and self-maintain while in constant interaction with the environment. To apply this theoretical framework to the study of biological communication, we focus on a specific approach, based on the notion of influence, according to which communication takes place when a signal emitted by a sender triggers a change in the behaviour of the receiver that is functional for the sender itself. We critically analyse the current formulations of this account, that interpret what is functional for the sender in terms of evolutionary adaptations. Specifically, the adoption of this etiological functional framework may lead to the exclusion of several phenomena usually studied as instances of communication, and possibly even of entire fields of investigation such as synthetic biology. As an alternative, we reframe the influence approach in organisational terms, characterising functions in terms of contributions to the current organisation of a biological system. We develop a theoretical account of biological communication in which communicative functions are distinguished from other types of biological functions described by the organisational account (e.g. metabolic, ecological, etc.). The resulting organisational-influence approach allows to carry out causal analyses of current instances of phenomena of communication, without the need to provide etiological explanations. In such a way it makes it possible to understand in terms of communication those phenomena which realise interactive patterns typical of signalling interactions – and are usually studied as such in scientific practice – despite not being the result of evolutionary adaptations. Moreover, this approach provides operational tools to design and study communicative interactions in experimental fields such as synthetic biology.Author Profiles
DOI
10.1007/s10441-019-09342-2
My notes
Similar books and articles
Synthetic Modelling of Biological Communication: A Theoretical and Operational Framework for the Investigation of Minimal Life and Cognition.Leonardo Bich & Ramiro Frick - 2018 - Complex Systems 27 (3):267-287.
The role of regulation in the origin and synthetic modelling of minimal cognition.Leonardo Bich & Alvaro Moreno - 2016 - Biosystems 148:12-21.
Organism and artifact: Proper functions in Paley organisms.Sune Holm - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4b):706-713.
The function debate: between “cheap tricks” and evolutionary neutrality.Predrag Šustar & Zdenka Brzović - 2014 - Synthese 191 (12):2653-2671.
Reengineering Metaphysics: Modularity, Parthood, and Evolvability in Metabolic Engineering.Catherine Kendig & Todd T. Eckdahl - 2017 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 9 (8).
What makes biological organisation teleological?Matteo Mossio & Leonardo Bich - 2017 - Synthese 194 (4):1089-1114.
Creating parts that allow for rational design: Synthetic biology and the problem of context-sensitivity.Stephan Güttinger - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (2):199-207.
Biological pathology from an organizational perspective.Cristian Saborido & Alvaro Moreno - 2015 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 36 (1):83-95.
Towards a Behavioral-Matching Based Compilation of Synthetic Biology Functions.Angélique Stéphanou & Nicolas Glade - 2015 - Acta Biotheoretica 63 (3):325-339.
Synthetic Biology: A Bridge Between Functional and Evolutionary Biology.Michel Morange - 2009 - Biological Theory 4 (4):368-377.
Synthetic Biology: Programming Cells for Biomedical Applications.Maximilian Hörner, Nadine Reischmann & Wilfried Weber - 2012 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 55 (4):490-502.
Biological Autonomy: A Philosophical and Theoretical Enquiry.Alvaro Moreno & Matteo Mossio - 2015 - Dordrecht: Springer.
Synthetic biology and its alternatives. Descartes, Kant and the idea of engineering biological machines.Werner Kogge & Michael Richter - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (2):181-189.
Biological regulation: controlling the system from within.Leonardo Bich, Matteo Mossio, Kepa Ruiz-Mirazo & Alvaro Moreno - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (2):237-265.
Analytics
Added to PP
2019-02-04
Downloads
329 (#35,808)
6 months
66 (#17,576)
2019-02-04
Downloads
329 (#35,808)
6 months
66 (#17,576)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
Citations of this work
Mechanism, autonomy and biological explanation.Leonardo Bich & William Bechtel - 2021 - Biology and Philosophy 36 (6):1-27.
The fanciest sort of intentionality: Active inference, mindshaping and linguistic content.Remi Tison - forthcoming - Philosophical Psychology:1-41.
Interactive Models in Synthetic Biology: Exploring Biological and Cognitive Inter-Identities.Leonardo Bich - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
The Cognitive Philosophy of Communication.Trond A. Tjøstheim, Andreas Stephens, Andrey Anikin & Arthur Schwaninger - 2020 - Philosophies 5 (39):39-0.
References found in this work
Sociobiology: The New Synthesis.Edward O. Wilson - 1975 - Journal of the History of Biology 33 (3):577-584.
Biological Autonomy: A Philosophical and Theoretical Enquiry.Alvaro Moreno & Matteo Mossio - 2015 - Dordrecht: Springer.