Cosmos and History 19 (1):31-90 (2019)

Authors
Arran Gare
Swinburne University of Technology
Abstract
The fracture in the emerging discipline of biosemiotics when the code biologist Marcello Barbieri claimed that Peircian biosemiotics is not genuine science raises anew the question: What is science? When it comes to radically new approaches in science, there is no simple answer to this question, because if successful, these new approaches change what is understood to be science. This is what Galileo, Darwin and Einstein did to science, and with quantum theory, opposing interpretations are not merely about what theory is right, but what is real science. Peirce's work, as he acknowledged, is really a continuation of efforts of Schelling to challenge the heritage of Newtonian science for the very good reason that the deep assumptions of Newtonian science had made sentient life, human consciousness and free will unintelligible, the condition for there being science. Pointing out the need for such a revolution in science has not succeeded as a defence of Peircian biosemiotics, however. In this paper, I will defend the scientific credentials of Peircian biosemiotics by relating it to the theoretical biology of the bio-mathematician, Robert Rosen. Rosen's relational biology, focusing on anticipatory systems and giving a place to final causes, should also be seen as a rigorous development of the Schellingian project to conceive nature in such a way that the emergence of sentient life, mind and science are intelligible. Rosen has made a very strong case for the characterization of his ideas as a real advance not only in science, but in how science should be understood, and I will argue that it is possible to provide a strong defence of Peircian biosemiotics as science through Rosen's defence of relational biology. In the process, I will show how biosemiotics can and should become a crucial component of anticipatory systems theory.
Keywords Biosemiotics  Anticipatory Systems  C.S. Peirce  Robert Rosen
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasoning and the Logic of Things.Charles Sanders Peirce, Kenneth Laine Ketner & Hilary Putnam - 1994 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 30 (1):167-179.

View all 23 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Report on the 19th Annual Gathering in Biosemiotics in Moscow.Arran Gare - 2019 - Sign Systems Studies 47 (3-4):627-640.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Short History of Biosemiotics.Marcello Barbieri - 2009 - Biosemiotics 2 (2):221-245.
From the Logic of Science to the Logic of the Living.Tommi Vehkavaara - 2007 - In Marcello Barbieri (ed.), Introduction to biosemiotics. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 257-282.
Various Shapes of Cultural Biosemiotics.Jonathan Hope - 2017 - Biosemiotics 10 (3):397-411.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-09-18

Total views
305 ( #31,057 of 2,455,873 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
59 ( #12,765 of 2,455,873 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes