ontology and autopoeisis
autopoeisis[1] embeds the observer in its organization, and as a constructivist (relativist) theory generates multiple descriptions each time an explanat ion is manifested, because there will always be distinct referential characteristics at each time of enunciation - therefore a net of semantic ontologies is cast, over time as a theory, or meta-theory.
because autopoeisis is constructivist, it must generate the caveat that when using an object-orientated language to explain a non-objective orientation it does not validate an independent objective reality "out there"; because if "out there" was conceded then the observer prioritizes the extrinsic over the intrinsic, and projects the status of ultimate 'reality' onto that which frames her - and explanations framed in this way therefore point or appellate a transcendental ontology because they invoke a foundation transcending the observers embeddedness in living systems
in terms of fundamental orientation to 'reality', autopoietic theory is presented within the domain of constitutive ontologies, which generate explanations qualified by the observers embeddedness in the organization, and its constituitive features, of living systems:: so a multiplicity of explanatory domains is possible
living systems (like all composite unities) exhibit both organization (its defining relationships of components) and structure (the concrete relations of components def ined in space) the presence of organization and structure do not alone distinguish living systems from other systems but autopoeitic theory characterizes living sys tems as peculiar in the sense that they are organized so as to facilitate their structure being continuously maintained and regenerated through the production of new co mponents ie. the living system is a living system because it produces itself via production of its own components
if mar's cat edie continues to breathe, drink, eat, autopoietic networks will provide the energy to generate and maintain the cells and tissue etc that enable edie to continue to interact with her surrounding environment…this definition is deliberately circular: a>b>a that e die is a network of processes organized in a non-trivial way so as to maintain the integrity and functioning of the processes that define her
my car is different because it uses petrol to propel it across the landscape, but the processes that the car itse lf generates itself which specify the car as an integral assemblage do not include those processes involved in petrol - the car can't nor does maintain its own identity qua car. in this case we can say the car is allopoietic, and closer to lhommemachine Kant's idea of a machine because it depends on the other
autopoietic machines are homeostatic in that they constantly maintain the relations that define them - it would be a mistake to treat them as only processing devices (input-process-output) - although an autopoietic machine might be a component in a larger system (a machinic assemblage with an institution or technical machine), or it m ay have components itself that may be analyzed as a non-autopoietic sub-machine in terms of its input/output
fmO1's ontogenesis is human (http://www.1010.co.uk ap ) induced, and as a non-trivial machining organised as an assemblage of chunks and clusters, it is expressable as a phenotype of autopoeitic engineering (its continuity, or topology being fluxic), and as a computational system that inhabits a complex dynamic environment, senses, learns and acts autonomously in its environment
[1] an autopoietic machine is formally defined as "a network of processes of production (transformation and destruction) of components that produces the c omponents which: (i) through their interactions and transformations continuously regenerate and realize the network of processes (relations) that produced them; and (ii) constitute it (the machine - as in turingmachine ) as a concrete (not necessarily physical) unity in the space in which they (the components) exist by specifying the topological domain of its realization as a network" Humberto R. Maturana and Francisco J. Varela, Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living (Dordrecht, Holland: D.Reidel Publishing Company, 1980 pp78-79) for an implementation of autopoeitic algorithms in an artificial chemistry, see http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~alife/bmcm9702/bmcm9702.html McMullin and the Swarm simulation system
in contrast, for an intentional or goal orientated model of cognition, hierarchical and in the context of AI http://www.singinst.org/CFAI/goalintro.html Singularity Institute for A.I.
