This paper attempts to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic descripti... more This paper attempts to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic description of the living, which in turn is derived from an autopoietic theory of organism (p. Varela). An autopoietic system's reaction to material constraints is the unfolding of a dimension of meaning. In the outward Gestalt of autopoietic systems, meaning appears as fonn, and as such it reveals itself in a sensually graspable manner. The mode of being of organisms has an irreducible aesthetic side in which this mode of being becomes visible. Nature thus displays a kind of transparency of its own functioning: in a nondiscursive way organisms show traces of their conditio vitae through their material self-presentation. Living beings hence always show a basic level of expressiveness as a necessary component of their organic mode of being. This is called the ecstatic dimension of nature (G. Böhme, R. Corrington). Autopoiesis in its full consequence then amounts to a view reminding of Paracels...
This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biological sciences. Si... more This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biological sciences. Since Kant, it has become customary to view purposiveness in organisms as a bias added by the observer; the recent notion of teleonomy expresses well this “as-if” character of natural purposes. In recent developments in science, however, notions such as self-organization (or complex systems) and the
There is an all-enclosing commons-economy which has been successful for billions of years: the bi... more There is an all-enclosing commons-economy which has been successful for billions of years: the biosphere. Its ecology is the terrestrial household of energy, matter, beings, relationships and meanings which contains any manmade economy and only allows for it to exist. Nature embodies the commons paradigm par excellence. Ecological relations within nature follow the rules of the commons. Therefore, nature can provide us with a powerful methodology of the commons as a natural and social ecology.
The late Chile born biologist Francisco J. Varela has been influential in theoretical biology thr... more The late Chile born biologist Francisco J. Varela has been influential in theoretical biology throughout the last three decades of the 20. century. His thinking shows a marked development from a biologically founded constructivism (developed together with his fellow citizen, Humberto Maturana, with the main key word being “autopoiesis theory”) to a more phenomenological oriented standpoint, which Varela called himself the philosophy of embodiment, or “enactivism”. In this paper, I want to show that major arguments in this latter position can be fruitful for a biosemiotic approach to organism. Varela himself already applies concepts as e.g. “signification”, “relevance”, “meaning” which are de facto biosemiotic. He derives these concepts from a compact theory of organism, which he understands as the process of self-realization of a materially embodied subject. This presumption stems, though somewhat modified, from Autopoiesis theory and so attempts a quasi-empirical description of the living in terms of self-organisation. Varela’s thinking might count as an exemplary model for a biosemiotic approach in a theory of organism. In particular, Varela’s link to down-to-earth biological research offers means to associate biosemiotics with the ongoing debate about the status of a biological system within genetics and proteomics research.
Der vorscholastische Philosoph Johannes Scotus Eriugena lehrte im 9. Jahr-hundert, dass jede Kre... more Der vorscholastische Philosoph Johannes Scotus Eriugena lehrte im 9. Jahr-hundert, dass jede Kreatur Gott zu enthüllen vermag: im Angesicht dessen, der sie mit Liebe schaue, setze sie das von ihr aufgefangene göttliche Licht wieder frei. Jedes Lebewesen wird in einer solchen Sichtweise zum Zentrum des Universums, zu einer Singularität, in der sich das Wesen der Schöpfung ganz enthüllt.
This paper analizes the biological paradigm shift engendered by “Consilience”. Consilience attemp... more This paper analizes the biological paradigm shift engendered by “Consilience”. Consilience attempts to unify human and biological sciences by a Darwinist framework. Still, contrary to its reductionist claims, the emerging paradigm of consilience will be non-reductionist, hybrid, and pluralist. In this essay I argue that sociobiology and „evolutionary psychology“ mix objects and agents, things and discourses in spite of their claim to be “pure biology”. Sociobiological categories therefore are paradigms for epistemological quasi-objects sensu Latour. Their confusion of categories is, as Latour argues, typical of modern science despite its attempt to seperate subjects and matter in dualistic conceptions. A deeper analysis of the sociobiological program shows that its theories hide culturally constructed axioms beneath their reductionist concepts. This leads to major contradictions, e.g. as the dual description of genetic action in semiotic and causal terms. To prove my hypothesis, in this paper I propose a biological, but non-Darwinist corollary for Latour’s idea of hybridity. I argue that sociobiology involuntarily has discovered a crucial fact central to organic embodiment: that the creation of meaning is basic to biological cognition, and particularly central to the worldmaking of the human animal. I will hence try to locate Latour’s symmetrical semiotics in a biosemiotic framework which can account for the general hybrid nature of living beings
In this paper I pursue the influences of Jakob von Uexküll’s biosemiotics on the anthropology of ... more In this paper I pursue the influences of Jakob von Uexküll’s biosemiotics on the anthropology of Ernst Cassirer. I propose that Cassirer in his Philosophy of the Symbolic Forms has written a cultural semiotics which in certain core ideas is grounded on biosemiotic presuppositions, some explicit (as the “emotive basic ground” of experience), some more implicit. I try to trace the connecting lines to a biosemiotic approach with the goal of formulating a comprehensive semiotic anthropology which understands man as embodied being and culture as a phenomenon of general semioses.
This paper describes the semiotic approach to organism in two proto-biosemiotic thinkers, Susanne... more This paper describes the semiotic approach to organism in two proto-biosemiotic thinkers, Susanne K. Langer and Hans Jonas. Both authors develop ideas that have become central terms of biosemiotics: the organism as subject, the realisation of the living as a closed circular self, the value concept, and, in the case of Langer, the concept of symbol. Langer tries to develop a theory of cultural symbolism based on a theory of organism as a self-realising entity creating meaning and value. This paper deals mainly with what both authors independently call “feeling”. Both authors describe “feeling” as a value-based perspective, established as a result of the active self interest manifested by an organic system. The findings of Jonas and Langer show the generation of a subject pole, or biosemiotic agent, under a more precise accent, as e.g. Uexküll does. Their ideas can also be affiliated to the interpretation of autopoiesis given by the late Francisco Varela (embodied cognition or “enactivism”). A synthesis of these positions might lead to insights how symbolic expression arises from biological conditions of living.
Wir Menschen sehen mit Tieren, so wie Dichter mit Worten sehen. Nur die anderen Lebewesen ermögli... more Wir Menschen sehen mit Tieren, so wie Dichter mit Worten sehen. Nur die anderen Lebewesen ermöglichen uns die eigene Wahrneh- mung. Ohne die Kreaturen sind wir blind, taub und stumm – unserer Sinnesorgane für das Sein beraubt. Ohne sie sind wir nicht, denn alles Sein ist Gegenseitigkeit und Widerspiegelung. Wir sind erst mit den anderen lebendig, im belebten Fleisch dieser Erde gegenwärtig, die uns hervorgebracht hat und die uns trägt. Das ist ein Umstand, den wir zu schnell vergessen haben...
In this paper I want to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic descript... more In this paper I want to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic description of the living, which in turn is derived from an autopoietic theory of organism (F. Varela). An autopoietic system’s reaction to material constraints is the unfolding of a dimension of meaning. In the outward Gestalt of autopoietic systems, meaning appears as form, and as such it reveals itself in a sensually seizable manner. The mode of being of organisms has an irreducible aesthetic side in which this mode of being becomes visible. Nature thus displays a kind of transparency of its own functioning: in a nondiscursive way organisms show traces of their conditio vitae through their material self-presentation. Living beings hence always show a basic level of expressiveness as a necessary component of their organic mode of being. This is called the ecstatic dimension of nature (G. Böhme, R. Corrington). Autopoiesis in its full consequence then amounts to a view reminding of Paracelsus’ idea of the signatura rerum (Glacken 1967; H. Böhme): nature is transparent, not because it is organized digitally as a linguistic text or code, but rather because it displays analogically the kind of intentionality engendered by autopoiesis. Nature as a whole, as “living form” (Langer 1953), hence is a symbol for organic intentionality. The most fundamental meaning of nature protection thus is to guarantee the “real presence” of our soul.
This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biologi- cal sciences. ... more This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biologi- cal sciences. Since Kant, it has become customary to view purposiveness in organisms as a bias added by the observer; the recent notion of teleonomy expresses well this “as-if” char- acter of natural purposes. In recent developments in science, however, notions such as self- organization (or complex systems) and the autopoiesis viewpoint, have displaced emergence and circular self-production as central features of life. Contrary to an often superficial read- ing, Kant gives a multi-faceted account of the living, and anticipates this modern reading of the organism, even introducing the term “self-organization” for the first time. Our re-reading of Kant in this light is strengthened by a group of philosophers of biology, with Hans Jonas as the central figure, who put back on center stage an organism-centered view of the living, an autonomous center of concern capable of providing an interior perspective. Thus, what is present in nuce in Kant, finds a convergent development from this current of philosophy of biology and the scientific ideas around autopoeisis, two independent but parallel develop- ments culminating in the 1970s. Instead of viewing meaning or value as artifacts or illusions, both agree on a new understanding of a form of immanent teleology as truly biological fea- tures, inevitably intertwined with the self-establishment of an identity which is the living process.
In this paper I propose to understand the current paradigm shift in biology as the origination of... more In this paper I propose to understand the current paradigm shift in biology as the origination of a biology of subjects. A description of living beings as experiencing selves has the potential to transform the current mechanistic approach of biology into an embodied-hermeneutic one, culminating in a poetics of nature. We are at the right moment for that: The findings of complex systems research, autopoiesis theory, and evolutionary developmental biology are converging into a picture where the living can not longer be described in terms of causal mechanisms (as is, e. g., the Watson-Crick “central dogma”). Instead, organisms bring forth themselves physically and thereby generate a hermeneutic standpoint, interpreting external and internal stimuli interfering with their auto-creation according to embodied values. This can be observed empirically during embryonic develoment, where genetic instructions do not act as orders, but rather as perturbations being interpreted by an auto-maintaining developmental centre. The notion of organic subjectivity opens the living realm to a hermeneutic perspective. Since any encounter has a meaning and is interpreted accordingly, it creates a perspective of innerness or self. This self experiences all external and internal stimuli as values. The innerness is coextensive with the material dimensions of biochemical processes as their other, or symbolic, side. By this process the subjective perspective of organisms is open to other’s experience. Meaning and value become visible, as they are generated in material, embodied form. Instead of being separate from nature as pure “mind” or “language”, man shares with any other being the same “conditio vitae” of experienced meaning and expressive feeling.
People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that tu... more People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that turns everything, including life itself, into a commodity. But it is impossible to alter our prevailing "operating system" for economics, politics and culture if the underlying "bios" – our unexamined, foundational assumptions about reality – remain the same. And that is literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.
In Healing Ecology author Andreas Weber proposes a new approach to the biological sciences that p... more In Healing Ecology author Andreas Weber proposes a new approach to the biological sciences that puts the human back in nature. He argues that feelings and emotions, far from being superfluous to the study of organisms, are the very foundation of life. From this basic premise flows the development of a "poetic ecology" which intimately connects our species to everything that surrounds us, showing that subjectivity and imagination are the prerequisites of biological existence.
Die Selbstrealisation des Lebendigen ist immer prekär. Sie ist das Paradox einer Herrschaft der F... more Die Selbstrealisation des Lebendigen ist immer prekär. Sie ist das Paradox einer Herrschaft der Form über die Materie, an die jene doch zurückfallen muß. Leben heißt Antinomie als biologisches Prinzip. Gerade deshalb kann Natur nicht als utopisches Ideal gedacht werden. Aber Natur verkörpert in ihrer Form die inneren Lebensbedingungen und die organische Erfahrung auch des Menschen. Natur ist das räumlich extensive Korrelat organischen Erlebens, sein Spiegel und seine symbolische Vermittlung. Sie steht als das Außen dessen, was Rilke als „Weltinnenraum“ bezeichnet. Natur ist notwendig gerade in ihrem Verstelltsein. Nicht als Heile. Sie ist Ausdruck unserer eigenen paradoxen Vermitteltheit, die im körperlichen Grund der Sub- jektivität verborgen liegt. Natur ist notwendig als Vermittlerin der Bedingungen von Vermitteltsein. Worin Menschen Natur lieben, ihr Schönes, ist darum nicht das Heile des Ursprungs. Ihre Chiffren sind zweischneidig. Das Entzifferungserlebnis ist ein Lesen dieser Ambivalenz in ihrem gelingenden Erscheinen und darin nur schön.
People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that tu... more People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that turns everything, including life itself, into a commodity. But it is impossible to alter our prevailing "operating system" for economics, politics and culture if the underlying "bios" – our unexamined, foundational assumptions about reality – remain the same. And that is literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.
This paper attempts to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic descripti... more This paper attempts to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic description of the living, which in turn is derived from an autopoietic theory of organism (p. Varela). An autopoietic system's reaction to material constraints is the unfolding of a dimension of meaning. In the outward Gestalt of autopoietic systems, meaning appears as fonn, and as such it reveals itself in a sensually graspable manner. The mode of being of organisms has an irreducible aesthetic side in which this mode of being becomes visible. Nature thus displays a kind of transparency of its own functioning: in a nondiscursive way organisms show traces of their conditio vitae through their material self-presentation. Living beings hence always show a basic level of expressiveness as a necessary component of their organic mode of being. This is called the ecstatic dimension of nature (G. Böhme, R. Corrington). Autopoiesis in its full consequence then amounts to a view reminding of Paracels...
This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biological sciences. Si... more This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biological sciences. Since Kant, it has become customary to view purposiveness in organisms as a bias added by the observer; the recent notion of teleonomy expresses well this “as-if” character of natural purposes. In recent developments in science, however, notions such as self-organization (or complex systems) and the
There is an all-enclosing commons-economy which has been successful for billions of years: the bi... more There is an all-enclosing commons-economy which has been successful for billions of years: the biosphere. Its ecology is the terrestrial household of energy, matter, beings, relationships and meanings which contains any manmade economy and only allows for it to exist. Nature embodies the commons paradigm par excellence. Ecological relations within nature follow the rules of the commons. Therefore, nature can provide us with a powerful methodology of the commons as a natural and social ecology.
The late Chile born biologist Francisco J. Varela has been influential in theoretical biology thr... more The late Chile born biologist Francisco J. Varela has been influential in theoretical biology throughout the last three decades of the 20. century. His thinking shows a marked development from a biologically founded constructivism (developed together with his fellow citizen, Humberto Maturana, with the main key word being “autopoiesis theory”) to a more phenomenological oriented standpoint, which Varela called himself the philosophy of embodiment, or “enactivism”. In this paper, I want to show that major arguments in this latter position can be fruitful for a biosemiotic approach to organism. Varela himself already applies concepts as e.g. “signification”, “relevance”, “meaning” which are de facto biosemiotic. He derives these concepts from a compact theory of organism, which he understands as the process of self-realization of a materially embodied subject. This presumption stems, though somewhat modified, from Autopoiesis theory and so attempts a quasi-empirical description of the living in terms of self-organisation. Varela’s thinking might count as an exemplary model for a biosemiotic approach in a theory of organism. In particular, Varela’s link to down-to-earth biological research offers means to associate biosemiotics with the ongoing debate about the status of a biological system within genetics and proteomics research.
Der vorscholastische Philosoph Johannes Scotus Eriugena lehrte im 9. Jahr-hundert, dass jede Kre... more Der vorscholastische Philosoph Johannes Scotus Eriugena lehrte im 9. Jahr-hundert, dass jede Kreatur Gott zu enthüllen vermag: im Angesicht dessen, der sie mit Liebe schaue, setze sie das von ihr aufgefangene göttliche Licht wieder frei. Jedes Lebewesen wird in einer solchen Sichtweise zum Zentrum des Universums, zu einer Singularität, in der sich das Wesen der Schöpfung ganz enthüllt.
This paper analizes the biological paradigm shift engendered by “Consilience”. Consilience attemp... more This paper analizes the biological paradigm shift engendered by “Consilience”. Consilience attempts to unify human and biological sciences by a Darwinist framework. Still, contrary to its reductionist claims, the emerging paradigm of consilience will be non-reductionist, hybrid, and pluralist. In this essay I argue that sociobiology and „evolutionary psychology“ mix objects and agents, things and discourses in spite of their claim to be “pure biology”. Sociobiological categories therefore are paradigms for epistemological quasi-objects sensu Latour. Their confusion of categories is, as Latour argues, typical of modern science despite its attempt to seperate subjects and matter in dualistic conceptions. A deeper analysis of the sociobiological program shows that its theories hide culturally constructed axioms beneath their reductionist concepts. This leads to major contradictions, e.g. as the dual description of genetic action in semiotic and causal terms. To prove my hypothesis, in this paper I propose a biological, but non-Darwinist corollary for Latour’s idea of hybridity. I argue that sociobiology involuntarily has discovered a crucial fact central to organic embodiment: that the creation of meaning is basic to biological cognition, and particularly central to the worldmaking of the human animal. I will hence try to locate Latour’s symmetrical semiotics in a biosemiotic framework which can account for the general hybrid nature of living beings
In this paper I pursue the influences of Jakob von Uexküll’s biosemiotics on the anthropology of ... more In this paper I pursue the influences of Jakob von Uexküll’s biosemiotics on the anthropology of Ernst Cassirer. I propose that Cassirer in his Philosophy of the Symbolic Forms has written a cultural semiotics which in certain core ideas is grounded on biosemiotic presuppositions, some explicit (as the “emotive basic ground” of experience), some more implicit. I try to trace the connecting lines to a biosemiotic approach with the goal of formulating a comprehensive semiotic anthropology which understands man as embodied being and culture as a phenomenon of general semioses.
This paper describes the semiotic approach to organism in two proto-biosemiotic thinkers, Susanne... more This paper describes the semiotic approach to organism in two proto-biosemiotic thinkers, Susanne K. Langer and Hans Jonas. Both authors develop ideas that have become central terms of biosemiotics: the organism as subject, the realisation of the living as a closed circular self, the value concept, and, in the case of Langer, the concept of symbol. Langer tries to develop a theory of cultural symbolism based on a theory of organism as a self-realising entity creating meaning and value. This paper deals mainly with what both authors independently call “feeling”. Both authors describe “feeling” as a value-based perspective, established as a result of the active self interest manifested by an organic system. The findings of Jonas and Langer show the generation of a subject pole, or biosemiotic agent, under a more precise accent, as e.g. Uexküll does. Their ideas can also be affiliated to the interpretation of autopoiesis given by the late Francisco Varela (embodied cognition or “enactivism”). A synthesis of these positions might lead to insights how symbolic expression arises from biological conditions of living.
Wir Menschen sehen mit Tieren, so wie Dichter mit Worten sehen. Nur die anderen Lebewesen ermögli... more Wir Menschen sehen mit Tieren, so wie Dichter mit Worten sehen. Nur die anderen Lebewesen ermöglichen uns die eigene Wahrneh- mung. Ohne die Kreaturen sind wir blind, taub und stumm – unserer Sinnesorgane für das Sein beraubt. Ohne sie sind wir nicht, denn alles Sein ist Gegenseitigkeit und Widerspiegelung. Wir sind erst mit den anderen lebendig, im belebten Fleisch dieser Erde gegenwärtig, die uns hervorgebracht hat und die uns trägt. Das ist ein Umstand, den wir zu schnell vergessen haben...
In this paper I want to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic descript... more In this paper I want to put forward an aesthetic theory of nature based on a biosemiotic description of the living, which in turn is derived from an autopoietic theory of organism (F. Varela). An autopoietic system’s reaction to material constraints is the unfolding of a dimension of meaning. In the outward Gestalt of autopoietic systems, meaning appears as form, and as such it reveals itself in a sensually seizable manner. The mode of being of organisms has an irreducible aesthetic side in which this mode of being becomes visible. Nature thus displays a kind of transparency of its own functioning: in a nondiscursive way organisms show traces of their conditio vitae through their material self-presentation. Living beings hence always show a basic level of expressiveness as a necessary component of their organic mode of being. This is called the ecstatic dimension of nature (G. Böhme, R. Corrington). Autopoiesis in its full consequence then amounts to a view reminding of Paracelsus’ idea of the signatura rerum (Glacken 1967; H. Böhme): nature is transparent, not because it is organized digitally as a linguistic text or code, but rather because it displays analogically the kind of intentionality engendered by autopoiesis. Nature as a whole, as “living form” (Langer 1953), hence is a symbol for organic intentionality. The most fundamental meaning of nature protection thus is to guarantee the “real presence” of our soul.
This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biologi- cal sciences. ... more This paper proposes a basic revision of the understanding of teleology in biologi- cal sciences. Since Kant, it has become customary to view purposiveness in organisms as a bias added by the observer; the recent notion of teleonomy expresses well this “as-if” char- acter of natural purposes. In recent developments in science, however, notions such as self- organization (or complex systems) and the autopoiesis viewpoint, have displaced emergence and circular self-production as central features of life. Contrary to an often superficial read- ing, Kant gives a multi-faceted account of the living, and anticipates this modern reading of the organism, even introducing the term “self-organization” for the first time. Our re-reading of Kant in this light is strengthened by a group of philosophers of biology, with Hans Jonas as the central figure, who put back on center stage an organism-centered view of the living, an autonomous center of concern capable of providing an interior perspective. Thus, what is present in nuce in Kant, finds a convergent development from this current of philosophy of biology and the scientific ideas around autopoeisis, two independent but parallel develop- ments culminating in the 1970s. Instead of viewing meaning or value as artifacts or illusions, both agree on a new understanding of a form of immanent teleology as truly biological fea- tures, inevitably intertwined with the self-establishment of an identity which is the living process.
In this paper I propose to understand the current paradigm shift in biology as the origination of... more In this paper I propose to understand the current paradigm shift in biology as the origination of a biology of subjects. A description of living beings as experiencing selves has the potential to transform the current mechanistic approach of biology into an embodied-hermeneutic one, culminating in a poetics of nature. We are at the right moment for that: The findings of complex systems research, autopoiesis theory, and evolutionary developmental biology are converging into a picture where the living can not longer be described in terms of causal mechanisms (as is, e. g., the Watson-Crick “central dogma”). Instead, organisms bring forth themselves physically and thereby generate a hermeneutic standpoint, interpreting external and internal stimuli interfering with their auto-creation according to embodied values. This can be observed empirically during embryonic develoment, where genetic instructions do not act as orders, but rather as perturbations being interpreted by an auto-maintaining developmental centre. The notion of organic subjectivity opens the living realm to a hermeneutic perspective. Since any encounter has a meaning and is interpreted accordingly, it creates a perspective of innerness or self. This self experiences all external and internal stimuli as values. The innerness is coextensive with the material dimensions of biochemical processes as their other, or symbolic, side. By this process the subjective perspective of organisms is open to other’s experience. Meaning and value become visible, as they are generated in material, embodied form. Instead of being separate from nature as pure “mind” or “language”, man shares with any other being the same “conditio vitae” of experienced meaning and expressive feeling.
People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that tu... more People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that turns everything, including life itself, into a commodity. But it is impossible to alter our prevailing "operating system" for economics, politics and culture if the underlying "bios" – our unexamined, foundational assumptions about reality – remain the same. And that is literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.
In Healing Ecology author Andreas Weber proposes a new approach to the biological sciences that p... more In Healing Ecology author Andreas Weber proposes a new approach to the biological sciences that puts the human back in nature. He argues that feelings and emotions, far from being superfluous to the study of organisms, are the very foundation of life. From this basic premise flows the development of a "poetic ecology" which intimately connects our species to everything that surrounds us, showing that subjectivity and imagination are the prerequisites of biological existence.
Die Selbstrealisation des Lebendigen ist immer prekär. Sie ist das Paradox einer Herrschaft der F... more Die Selbstrealisation des Lebendigen ist immer prekär. Sie ist das Paradox einer Herrschaft der Form über die Materie, an die jene doch zurückfallen muß. Leben heißt Antinomie als biologisches Prinzip. Gerade deshalb kann Natur nicht als utopisches Ideal gedacht werden. Aber Natur verkörpert in ihrer Form die inneren Lebensbedingungen und die organische Erfahrung auch des Menschen. Natur ist das räumlich extensive Korrelat organischen Erlebens, sein Spiegel und seine symbolische Vermittlung. Sie steht als das Außen dessen, was Rilke als „Weltinnenraum“ bezeichnet. Natur ist notwendig gerade in ihrem Verstelltsein. Nicht als Heile. Sie ist Ausdruck unserer eigenen paradoxen Vermitteltheit, die im körperlichen Grund der Sub- jektivität verborgen liegt. Natur ist notwendig als Vermittlerin der Bedingungen von Vermitteltsein. Worin Menschen Natur lieben, ihr Schönes, ist darum nicht das Heile des Ursprungs. Ihre Chiffren sind zweischneidig. Das Entzifferungserlebnis ist ein Lesen dieser Ambivalenz in ihrem gelingenden Erscheinen und darin nur schön.
People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that tu... more People often call for "changing the system" and seek to reform the "free market" approach that turns everything, including life itself, into a commodity. But it is impossible to alter our prevailing "operating system" for economics, politics and culture if the underlying "bios" – our unexamined, foundational assumptions about reality – remain the same. And that is literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.
Uploads
literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences
and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal
macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.
literally our biggest problem today: our understanding of "bios" -- the nature of life itself –- is wrong. Our civilisation operates as if reality is all about organising inert, dead matter in more efficient ways. This is the heritage of the Enlightenment, which claims that physical bodies are entirely separate from immaterial minds. Once this assumption is made, no serious systemic change is really possible, as much as we might try. This viewpoint has profound implications for what we call "environmental protection." To suggest a more promising, alternative future, this essay proposes a new paradigm of "bios" called "Enlivenment." Based on recent research findings in the biological sciences, the idea of Enlivenment explains how nature -- and our role in it -- is irrefutably individualistic, cooperative, and centered on experiences
and meaning. The world is not simply an elaborate machine driven by impersonal
macro-forces. It is alive! From an Enlivenment perspective, nature itself is a living commons. The biosphere is not just about various forms of competition, but equally about the commoning activities of a myriad of individual agents living in an ecosystem. This new perspective can help us realize that only an "enlivened" economy will be truly sustainable. Humans and the more-than-human world must realize that they both must struggle, always, to achieve a fuller aliveness.