Skip to main content
Log in

The biosphere as a morphoprocess and a new look at the concepts of organism and individuality

  • Theoretical Concepts, Methodological and Philosophical Analysis
  • Published:
Senckenbergiana lethaea Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consistent with the ideas of V. N.Beklemishev, the concept of individuality of morphoprocess is introduced and utilized for the characterization of the biosphere. Morphoprocess is defined as a regular growth and change of the indefinitely lasting form amid a flow of stochastic changes. Any living system is a part of theglobal morphoprocess, which is never interrupted even when the subsystems transform or disintegrate. Accordingly, there are no ‘organisms’ from this viewpoint, there are only more or less individualised biosystems representing only the moments in the development of the global morphoprocess. That is why life can be defined only as a planetary phenomenon.

The concept of individuality expresses a degree of organization of biological phenomena. There are three basic criteria of the individuality of the morphoprocess: (1) the degree of the functional harmony; (2) the rhythm of a morphoprocess; (3) the degree of the morphogenetical secludedness.

The biosphere, examined from this viewpoint, appears as a living system of the highest order and “the largest unit of life”. At the same time the biosphere, being both arhythmic and morphogenetically open, is a faintly individualised morphoprocess. The low grade of individuality of the biosphere is a cost of its high complexity and distinguishes the biosphere from most of the ‘trivial’, Linnaean individuals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beklemishev V. N. (1994 [written in 1928]): Methodology of Systematics. — Moscow (KMK Scientific Press Ltd.). 250 p. [in Russ]

    Google Scholar 

  • Beklemishev V.N. (1964): On General Principles of Organisation of Life. — Bulletin of MOIP, Section Biology69 (2): 22–38. [in Russ]

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorbushina, A A &Krumbein, W. E. (2000): Rock Dwelling Fungal Communities: Diversity of Life Styles and Colony Structures. — In:Seckbach J. [ed]: Journey to Diverse Microbial Words: 317–334. Kluwer.

  • Griffiths, P. &Gray, R. (1998): Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation. — In:Hull &Ruse [eds]: Philosophy of Biology: 117–147. Oxford University Press.

  • Krumbein, W. E. &Schellnhuber, H.-J. (1992) Geophysiology and Mineral Deposits — a Model for a Biological Driving Force of Global Changes Through Earth History. — Terra Nova4: 351–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozo-Poljanskij, B. D. (1924): Novyj prinzyp biologii (A new principle of biology). — Putchina. Leningrad-Moscow. 147 p.

  • Lovelock J. E. (1989): Gaia: a New Look at life on Earth. — Oxford University Press. 157 p.

  • Lovelock J. E. (1996): The Gaia Hypothesis. — In:Bunyard, P. [Ed]: Gaia in Action: 15–33. Edinburgh (Floris Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Margulis, L. (1993): Symbiosis in cell evolution: microbial communities in the Archean and Proterozoic eons. — 2. ed. New York (Freeman). 452 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahner, M. &Bunge, M. (1997): Foundations of Biophilosophy. — Springer. 423 p.

  • Margulis L., Guerrero, R. &P. Bunyard (1996): We are all Symbionts. — In:Bunyard, P. [ed]: Gaia in Action: 167–184. Edinburgh (Floris Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Margulis L. &Sagan, D. (1997): Microcosmos. — University of California Press. 300 p.

  • McShea, D. (2001): The Minor Transitions in Hierarchichal Evolution and the Question of a Directional Bias. — J. Evol. Biol.14: 502–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterelny K. &Griffiths P. (1999) Sex and Death. An introduction to philosophy of biology. — The University of Chicago Press. 440 p.

  • Oyama, S. (1985): The Ontogeny of Information. — Cambridge University Press. 206 p.

  • Ruiz-Mirazo, K, Etxeberria A., Moreno, A. &J. Ibáñez (2000): Organisms and their place in biology. — Theory Biosci.(119): 209–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernadsky, V. I. (1926)Biosfera. Leningrad, NHTI. (English version: Vernadsky V. I. (1998)The Biosphere. A Peter A. Nevraumont Book, N.Y., 192 p.

  • Vernadsky, V.I. (1965): The Chemical Structure of the Biosphere of the Earth and of its Environment. — Moscow. Nauka. 374 p. [in Russ].

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernadsky, V.I. (1997): Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon. — Nongovernmental Ecological V.I. Vernadsky Foundation, Moscow. 1997. 265 S.

  • Wilson, J. (1999): Biological Individuality: The Identity and Persistence of Living Entities. -Cambridge University Press. 137 p.

  • Zavarzin, G.A. (1999): Individualistic and systematic approaches to biology. — Voprosy Filosofii//The Problems of Philosophy4: 89–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zavarzin, G.A. &Kolotilova, N. N. (2001): Vvedenije v prorodovedtcheskuju mikrobiologiju (Introduction into the biospheric microbiology). — Knizhnyj Dom “Universitaet”. Moscow. 256 p.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Levit, G.S., Scholz, J. The biosphere as a morphoprocess and a new look at the concepts of organism and individuality. Senckenbergiana lethaea 82, 367–372 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03043795

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03043795

Key words

Navigation