[Fis] Current remarks/Autopoiesis (& KARL SESSION)

[joe.brenner at bluewin.ch]

Yes, but as Lupasco asked, what is a structure? Is it always the same or does it change and if so how?
Information changes, and so I argue it follows the rules of change and process.
Joe



Envoyé avec l’application blue News & E-Mail

Le 15 décembre 2025 à 07:21, Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> a écrit
>Dear Folks,
>I maintain that there still continues a confusion about the aim of the
>cybernetic work of Maturana,Uribe and Varela, particularly if the
>criticisms are in the form of
>the clear need for detailed understanding of just how life processes
>work.
>Who can deny that? MUV point out that a living organism consists in an
>organization that keeps replenishing its materiality while at the same
>time
>maintaining its organization. They further raise the question about how
>such organization can arise in the first place, giving a very
>elementary
>example of such an emergence. In this way they provide a framework for
>thinking about organization and process that is more general than
>biology
>and that lets one think about these matters without dogma. In order to
>do
>so, one must avoid making dogma out of MUV and now we arrive at the
>problem. The problem, as I see it, is in academic discussion -- which
>normally depends on making references to previously published work,
>each
>such work being regarded as some kind of steppingstone to the building
>of
>an imagined edifice of thought. But you just cannot maintain that sort
>of
>structure unless you have the kind of foundational criticism as occurs
>in
>some parts of science such as in physics an mathematics but is
>unfortunately not present elsewhere. One can eventually discard the
>shells
>of useless thought (like phlogiston). MUV is not providing us with a
>possible phlogiston. They are providing us with general principles of
>organization for structures that persist in time. It is not time yet to
>discard these ideas.
>Best,
>Lou
>
>
>On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 3:39 PM Pedro C. Marijuán
><pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Dear List,
>>
>> Let me start by recognizing Kate Peil and Lou Kauffman for their work
>in
>> the session on Karl's legacy. Kate has written a thoughtful summary
>of
>> Karl's main views that can be downloaded from fis web pages, at:
>*https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://fis.sciforum.net/resources/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXbNVnkdU$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://fis.sciforum.net/resources/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXbNVnkdU$ >  * Have a glance, "merece la
>pena"
>> as we say in Spanish. Also, the session was recorded and will appear
>in
>> IAIS Dialogs: *https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/@IAISDIALOGUES__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXpsBDLMg$ 
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/@IAISDIALOGUES__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXpsBDLMg$ >*
>>
>> About AP, please note that it was proposed as a pandisciplinary or
>> metatheory of cognition for the whole living. Interesting in the 70s
>in
>> spite of its evident lack of biological substance, but 50 years ago
>the
>> accumulation of anomalies (I telegraphed a few of them) have made its
>> maintenance really problematic--as Kuhn would have said. That it can
>be
>> supported by people working in mathematical or logical or
>philosophical
>> grounds is OK, but remember please that "the tree of knowledge"  was
>> proposed not exactly for those fields but for the entire life. As
>wikipedia
>> blandly acknowledges: "The influence of *Autopoiesis* in mainstream
>> biology was limited. Autopoiesis is not commonly used as the
>criterion for
>> life...", citing from an aggiornamento proposed by Razeto-Barry,
>Pablo
>> (October 2012). "Autopoiesis 40 Years Later. A Review and A
>Reformulation"
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232231194__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXjWnJqDc$ >. *Origins of
>Life*.
>> *42* (6): 543–567.
>>
>> Best --Pedro
>>
>> El 14/12/2025 a las 11:59, joe.brenner at bluewin.ch escribió:
>>
>> The recognition that “autopoiesis” is not some kind of monolithic,
>> spontaneous, *sui generis* process has been long in coming. For me,
>it is
>> at best an appearance-reality duality, without explanatory power.
>>
>> If one agrees that “autopoiesis” does not operate like an on-off
>switch,
>> then there must be some intermediate stages or structures, as well as
>some
>> movement between them. The “auto-“ is then clearly a misnomer but let
>us go
>> on. It is these details of real processes that is, of any real change
>for
>> which Stéphane Lupasco proposed a movement between primarily actual
>to
>> primarily potential and *vice versa*, alternately and reciprocally.
>This
>> sinusoidal view of process is certainly to be found elsewhere, at
>least in
>> “potential” form, but Lupasco deserves the historical credit for
>having
>> formulated it. Identities – “my theory” – thus appear for what they
>are,
>> idealizations cut off from their opposites or, in reality, not
>> contradictions but  counteractions. *Pace *Steve, one must be able to
>> deal with *discontinuous *exchange, as well a continuous.
>>
>> There is still no accepted “language” in which to express these
>> principles. I have tried, of course, a language of energy, following
>> Lupasco. Modern, post-Bertalanffy systems theory comes perhaps close,
>as
>> does Steve’s Autopoietic Ecology, since it recognizes the limitations
>of
>> static formulations of the dynamic real  world,* including *its
>domains
>> that are binary to all intentas and purposes.
>>
>> I hope a renewed dialogue is possible, without recourse to the “baby”
>> diagrams of Peirce and Wittgenstein
>>
>> Thanks and  best,
>> Joseph
>>
>> Le 13.12.2025 20:10 CET, Steve Watson <sw10014 at cam.ac.uk>
>> <sw10014 at cam.ac.uk> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Dear Lou, dear colleagues,
>>
>> Thank you for posting the 1974 Varela, Maturana, and Uribe paper — it
>is
>> extremely helpful to have the discussion re-anchored in the original
>> formulation.
>>
>> I fully agree with the point you emphasise: autopoietic systems are
>not
>> materially or energetically closed. They exist only through
>continuous
>> exchange with their environment, while preserving an organisational
>> invariance across that exchange. The simple protocell model in the
>paper
>> remains one of the clearest demonstrations of this idea.
>>
>> This is also the sense in which I use expressions such as O ≈ F(O):
>not as
>> a claim about self-containment, energetic closure, or perpetual
>motion, but
>> as a shorthand for organisational persistence across transformation.
>I
>> should probably make that explicit more often, as the notation
>clearly
>> invites misreadings.
>>
>> For avoidance of doubt, Autopoietic Ecology does not treat
>autopoiesis as
>> a universal or exclusive explanatory principle. It treats it as one
>type of
>> organisational dynamic that becomes interesting precisely when
>systems are
>> open, fragile, metabolically dependent, and capable of breakdown as
>well as
>> persistence. The ecological emphasis is meant to foreground coupling,
>> constraint, and reorganisation rather than purity or closure.
>>
>> I appreciate your reminder of how carefully these distinctions were
>drawn
>> in the original work. It helps keep the discussion focused on what
>> autopoiesis was actually intended to say — and what later extensions
>should
>> remain accountable to.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>> Steve
>> Sent from Outlook for iOS
>>
><https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/o0ukef__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RkQN2OV63tPC5SkQehKl68utm5y4RNCuvAzahTMs7Guc-nNsFbJ1xenO8zci4NCEraNL98_xj7uBmedwO4jb$>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Fis <fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es>
><fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es>
>> on behalf of Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> <loukau at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 13, 2025 5:43:58 PM
>> *To:* Pedro C. Marijuán <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com>
>> <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* fis at listas.unizar.es <fis at listas.unizar.es>
><fis at listas.unizar.es>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] Current remarks/Autopoiesis
>>
>> It is still worth while to read the original paper by Maturana,
>Varela and
>> Uribe.
>>
>https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://monoskop.org/images/d/dd/Varela_Maturana_Uribe_1974_Autopoiesis.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QgJ1_xJYWDFXHfmZsf2_sZRaQB9lXGF4Gnk-BnJ2_ScbM3DKpA_sDbm9IQH5UdftG9Bspuw3hl0HTMBaYAPXlGwzZs8$ 
>>
><https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://monoskop.org/images/d/dd/Varela_Maturana_Uribe_1974_Autopoiesis.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WyWMlWnFm0o4ncLeSN2bah-w8NstuK2jGIYI4dDC6K3eiM--0f70muEN4SkRLS50fLMhSd0qnVj-BUy1$>
>> Here is a link to that paper.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 3:16 PM Pedro C. Marijuán <
>> pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear List,
>>
>> When I hear on autopiesis, my impression is that many people continue
>to
>> be blindly tied to a conceptualization, interesting in its origins
>and
>> counterpoise to then dominant reductionist stances, but
>inconsequential
>> with its biological-cellular grounding --even in that very time, but
>even
>> more in our times. I argued past months on the AP weakness regarding
>> apoptosis & protein degradation, many genes rarely expressed along
>the life
>> cycle, openness to obtain foreign dna from the environment, plasmids
>&
>> phages uptake, horizontal gene transmission, multiple generation of
>gene
>> novelties, sex & recombinations, etc. About information in AP,
>"signaling"
>> is not accepted as such, but as "structural coupling with the niche"
>(so,
>> nothing about an external information flow or the like). About the
>obvious
>> need of, say, an energy flow there is no realization that a previous
>> sensing of ALL those items is needed. The revolution in prokaryotic
>> signaling brought by the discovery of "One Component Systems" (in the
>> hundreds in each bacteria) in last two decades clarify that
>point--how the
>> external substances are first "tasted" and later introjected. The
>> interception of an information flow best adapted to the ongoing life
>cycle
>> is continuously made.  So, the living cell is just "informational":
>in its
>> self-production, in its relationship with the environment, and in its
>> generation of multi-cell complexity.
>> To be continued one of these days.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --Pedro
>>
>>  .   El 10/12/2025 a las 23:08, Krassimir Markov escribió:
>>
>> Dear Steve,
>>
>> I respect your opinion and understanding of the world through AE, but
>> still there are some reasonable scientific boundaries that should not
>be
>> crossed. Here is a small example.
>>
>> Air existed before we were born and, I hope, if there is no
>destructive
>> war instigated by russia, it will continue to exist after our death.
>At the
>> same time, without air we cannot live, i.e. we are an open system
>that
>> constantly exchanges resources with the environment. In other words,
>living
>> organisms are not autopoietic systems. To convince yourself of this
>> statement, just stop breathing. The conviction in the truth of the
>> statement will come to you only after a minute or two and you will
>probably
>> accept that your operator should be written
>>
>> O=F(O, Input, Output).
>>
>> I am writing this in connection with your statement that "Material
>> processes and interpretive activity are not alternatives; they are
>two
>> sides of the same ecological dynamic. Neither can be shown to precede
>the
>> other.” which I cannot accept as true.
>>
>> Just as there are no closed autopoietic systems, so there is no
>reality
>> that cannot exist without interpretation.
>>
>> The ecological dynamic you are talking about is a mental structure
>and, of
>> course, in it properly the mental structures that reflect the
>material
>> processes and the mental structures that interpret them are
>dialectically
>> connected in consciousness, and yes - they are two sides of a common
>mental
>> structure, if we can even talk about sides in mental structures.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> I completely agree with your thoughts. Indeed, the study of the
>processes
>> of interaction between people is very important and has great
>significance.
>> Unfortunately, my impression is that most researchers adhere to the
>deeply
>> erroneous and inapplicable to humans Shannon's paradigm.
>>
>> Yes, the theory of signal transmission is wonderfully applied in
>technical
>> data transmission systems, where the basic principle is "copy/paste".
>In
>> other words, the image that is formed in the recipient's memory
>completely
>> (100%!!!) coincides with the image in the sender's memory. Any
>deviation is
>> considered an error and requires re-sending the data, as well as the
>> application of error-resistant codes during transmission.
>>
>> In humans, this is absolutely impossible and inapplicable.
>"Copy/paste"
>> cannot happen due to the nature of the interaction between people,
>which is
>> at the level of meaning, and not at the level of signals
>(reflections). The
>> sender (a person or group of people) externalizes their mental
>structures
>> (for example, this letter), and the recipient reflects what they have
>> received and gives it their own meaning. It is impossible in this
>process
>> to obtain an exact copy of the image from the source's memory in the
>> receiver's memory. Therefore, it is correct to speak of "information
>> interaction" in people, and of "communication" in technical systems.
>I am
>> attaching a slide from my lecture at the IS4SI 2025 Summit, which
>contains
>> the brilliant thought of the Bulgarian poet Pencho Slaveykov,
>expressed
>> more than a century ago.
>>
>>
>>
>> With respect,
>>
>> Krassimir
>>
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
><https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QTuKkbEq3o-edqcFbLUT6Fj6mBkdCrLywyifmxx0aOnY7XGPCXlscdrBh4P_vF2wg7E_72E8WBjjtvbtkLc$>
>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>
><https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!QTuKkbEq3o-edqcFbLUT6Fj6mBkdCrLywyifmxx0aOnY7XGPCXlscdrBh4P_vF2wg7E_72E8WBjjtvbtkLc$>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing
>listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo
>gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en
>el siguiente enlace:
>https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas 
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse
>de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo
>desee.http://listas.unizar.es 
>> ----------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis 
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo
>gestionada por
>> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en
>el
>> siguiente enlace:
>>
>https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas 
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse
>de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es 
>> ----------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis 
>> ----------
>> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>>
>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo
>gestionada por
>> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en
>el
>> siguiente enlace:
>>
>https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas 
>> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse
>de
>> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
>> http://listas.unizar.es 
>> ----------
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20251215/ce51d30d/attachment-0001.html>