Abstract
Biosemiotics distinguishes life from inanimate matter by its dependence on material construction controlled by coded symbolic information. This irreducible primitive distinction between matter and symbol is necessary for open-ended evolvability and the origin of life as we know it. This type of subject/object distinction is reestablished at many levels throughout all of evolution. In physics this becomes the distinction between material laws and symbolic measurements and models; in philosophy this is the distinction between brain and mind. These are all emergent epistemic distinctions, not ontological dualisms. The origin of life requires understanding the origin of this symbolic control and how inanimate molecules become functional messages. I discuss the necessary physical conditions that would allow such evolvable symbolic control of matter to arise.
Reprinted from Introduction to Biosemiotics, Marcello Barbieri, Ed. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, pp. 115–132.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barbieri, M. (2003). The organic codes. An introduction to semantic biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barbieri, M. (2004). Life is “artifact-making”. Journal of Biosemiotics, 1(1), 81–101.
Crutchfield, J. P., & Schuster, P. (Eds.). (2003). Evolutionary dynamics: Exploring the interplay of selection, accident, neutrality, and function. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eigen, M. (1971). Self organization of matter and the evolution of biological macromolecules. Naturwissenschaften, 58, 465–523.
Eigen, M., & Schuster, P. (1979). The hypercycle – a principle of natural self-organization. Berlin: Springer.
Frauenfelder, H., & Wolynes, P. G. (1994). Biomolecules: Where the physics of complexity and simplicity meet. Physics Today, 47, 58–64.
Ghiselin, M. T. (1997). Metaphysics and the origin of species. Albany: University of New York Press.
Hoffmeyer, J. (1998). The unfolding semiosphere. In G. Vijver, S. Salthe, & M. Delpos (Eds.), Biological and epistemological perspectives on selection and self-organization. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hoffmeyer, J. (2000). Code-duality and the epistemic cut. In C. Jerry & G. Van de Vijver (Eds.), Closure. Emergent organizations and their dynamics (pp. 175–186). New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
Hoffmeyer, J., & Emmeche, C. (1991). Code duality and the semiotics of nature. In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (Eds.), On semiotic modeling. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jakobson, R. (1970). Linguistics. In Main trends of research in the social and human sciences I (p. 438). Paris/The Hague: Mouton-UNESCO.
Juarrero, A. (1998). Causality as constraint. In G. Vijver, S. Salthe, & M. Delpos (Eds.), Evolutionary systems. Biological and epistemological perspectives on selection and self-organization. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kanerva, P. (1988). Sparse distributed memory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Kimura, M. (1983). The neutral theory of molecular evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Monod, J. (1971). Chance and necessity. New York: Knopf.
Pattee, H. H. (1972). Laws and constraints, symbols and languages. In C. H. Waddington (Ed.), Toward a theoretical biology 4. Essays (pp. 248–258). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Pattee, H. H. (1980). Clues from molecular symbol systems. In U. Bellugi & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.) Signed and spoken languages: Biological constraints on linguistic forms (pp. 261–273). Dahlem Konferenzen, Berlin: Verlag Chemie GmbH.
Pauli, W. (1994). The philosophical significance of the idea of complementarity. In C. P. Enz & K. von Meyenn (Eds.), Writings on physics and philosophy (pp. 35–48). Berlin: Springer, (see p. 41). First published under the title “Die philosophische Bedeutung der Idee der Komplementarität” in Experientia 6(Heft 2), pp. 72–75, 1950.
Polanyi, M. (1968). Life’s irreducible structure. Science, 160, 1308–1312.
Rocha, L. (2001). Evolution with material symbol systems. Biosystems, 60(1–3), 95–121.
Schuster, P. (1998). Evolution in an RNA world. In M. G. Ord & L. A. Stocken (Eds.), Foundations of modern biochemistry, Vol. IV: More landmarks in biochemistry (pp. 159–198). Stamford: JAI Press.
Schuster, P., Fontana, W., Stadler, P. F., & Hofacker, I. L. (1994). From sequences to shapes and back: A case study in RNA secondary structures. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 255, 279–284.
Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Von Neumann, J. (1955). Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics (pp. 418–421). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Von Neumann, J. (1966). Theory of self-reproducing Automata (pp.74–87 and pp. 121–123). Edited and completed by A. W. Burks, Urbana/London: University of Illinois Press. (Original lectures ca. 1952).
Wolynes, P. G., Onuchic, J. N., & Thirumalai, D. (1995). Navigating the folding routes. Science, 267, 1.
Zurek, W. H. (1990). Complexity, entropy, and the physics of information. Redwood City: Addison-Wesley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pattee, H.H. (2012). The Necessity of Biosemiotics: Matter-Symbol Complementarity. In: LAWS, LANGUAGE and LIFE. Biosemiotics, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5161-3_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5161-3_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5160-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5161-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)