Living systems: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverting possible vandalism by 86.175.77.253 to version by Cambalachero. Report False Positive? Thanks, ClueBot NG. (4246485) (Bot)
gosh what a mess; and Miller's is just one of many competing Living Systems theories, too ... moved from Life, see there for attrib.
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Multiple interactions and regulation of life forms with their environment}}
{{Short description|Multiple interactions and regulation of life forms with their environment}}
{{More citations needed|date=September 2010}}
{{More citations needed|date=September 2010}}
'''Living systems''' are [[Open system (systems theory)|open]] [[Self-organization|self-organizing]] life forms that interact with their environment. These systems are maintained by flows of [[information]], [[energy flow (ecology)|energy]] and [[matter]].
'''Living systems''' are [[Open system (systems theory)|open]] [[Self-organization|self-organizing]] life forms that interact with their environment. These systems are maintained by flows of [[information]], [[energy flow (ecology)|energy]] and [[matter]]. Multiple theories of living systems have been proposed. Such theories attempt to map general principles for how all living systems work.


== Miller ==<!--this is verbose and primary, need rework-->
In the last few decades, some scientists have proposed that a general living systems theory is required to explain the nature of [[life]].<ref>{{Cite book| last = Woodruff | first = T. Sullivan |author2=John Baross | title = Planets and Life: The Emerging Science of Astrobiology | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | date = October 8, 2007 }}
⚫
Cleland and Chyba wrote a chapter in Planets and Life: "In the absence of such a theory, we are in a position analogous to that of a 16th-century investigator trying to define 'water' in the absence of molecular theory." [...] "Without access to living things having a different historical origin, it is difficult and perhaps ultimately impossible to formulate an adequately general theory of the nature of living systems".</ref> Such a general theory, arising out of the [[Ecology|ecological]] and [[Biology|biological sciences]], attempts to map general principles for how all living systems work. Instead of examining phenomena by attempting to break things down into components, a general living systems theory explores phenomena in terms of dynamic patterns of relationships of organisms with their environment.


⚫
[[James Grier Miller]]'s 1978 living systems theory is a general theory about the existence of all living systems, their [[structure]], [[Biological interaction|interaction]], [[behavior]] and [[developmental biology|development]], intended to formalize the concept of life. According to Miller's original conception as spelled out in his [[masterpiece|magnum opus]] ''Living Systems'', a "living system" must contain each of twenty "critical subsystems", which are defined by their functions and visible in numerous systems, from simple cells to organisms, countries, and societies. In ''Living Systems'' Miller provides a detailed look at a number of systems in order of increasing size, and identifies his subsystems in each.
==Theory==
⚫
The living systems theory is a general theory about the existence of all living systems, their [[structure]], [[Biological interaction|interaction]]{{dn|date=January 2023}}, [[behavior]] and [[developmental biology|development]]. This work is created by [[James Grier Miller]], which was intended to formalize the concept of life. According to Miller's original conception as spelled out in his [[masterpiece|magnum opus]] ''Living Systems'', a "living system" must contain each of twenty "critical subsystems", which are defined by their functions and visible in numerous systems, from simple cells to organisms, countries, and societies. In ''Living Systems'' Miller provides a detailed look at a number of systems in order of increasing size, and identifies his subsystems in each.
Miller considers living systems as a subset of all [[system]]s. Below the level of living systems, he defines [[space]] and [[time]], [[matter]] and [[energy]], [[information]] and [[entropy]], levels of [[organization]], and physical and conceptual factors, and above living systems ecological, planetary and solar systems, galaxies, etc.<ref>Seppänen, 1998, p. 198</ref>
Miller considers living systems as a subset of all [[system]]s. Below the level of living systems, he defines [[space]] and [[time]], [[matter]] and [[energy]], [[information]] and [[entropy]], levels of [[organization]], and physical and conceptual factors, and above living systems ecological, planetary and solar systems, galaxies, etc.<ref>Seppänen, 1998, p. 198</ref>


Living systems according to Parent (1996) are by definition "open self-organizing [[system]]s that have the special characteristics of life and interact with their [[social environment|environment]]. This takes place by means of information and material-energy exchanges. Living systems can be as simple as a single [[cell (biology)|cell]] or as complex as a supranational [[organization]] such as the European Union. Regardless of their [[complexity]], they each depend upon the same essential twenty subsystems (or processes) in order to survive and to continue the propagation of their species or types beyond a single generation".<ref>Elaine Parent, [http://projects.isss.org/the_living_systems_theory_of_james_grier_miller ''The Living Systems Theory of James Grier Miller''], Primer project ISSS, 1996.</ref>
Living systems according to Parent (1996) are by definition "open self-organizing [[system]]s that have the special characteristics of life and interact with their [[social environment|environment]]. This takes place by means of information and material-energy exchanges. Living systems can be as simple as a single [[cell (biology)|cell]] or as complex as a supranational [[organization]] such as the European Union. Regardless of their [[complexity]], they each depend upon the same essential twenty subsystems (or processes) in order to survive and to continue the propagation of their species or types beyond a single generation".<ref>Elaine Parent, [http://projects.isss.org/the_living_systems_theory_of_james_grier_miller ''The Living Systems Theory of James Grier Miller''], Primer project ISSS, 1996.</ref>


Miller said that systems exist at eight "nested" hierarchical levels: cell, organ, organism, group, organization, community, society, and supranational system. At each level, a system invariably comprises twenty critical subsystems, which process matter–energy or information except for the first two, which process both matter–energy and information: reproducer and boundary.
Miller's central thesis is that the systems in existence at all eight levels are [[Open system (systems theory)|open systems]] composed of twenty critical subsystems that process inputs, throughputs, and outputs of various forms of matter–energy and information. Two of these subsystems—reproducer and boundary—process both matter–energy and information. Eight of them process only matter–energy. The other ten process information only.

The processors of matter–energy are:
* ingestor, distributor, converter, producer, storage, extruder, motor, supporter

The processors of information are:
* input transducer, internal transducer, channel and net, timer (added later), decoder, associator, memory, decider, encoder, output transducer

==Miller's living systems theory==
James Grier Miller in 1978 wrote a 1,102-page volume to present his living systems theory. He constructed a general theory of living [[system]]s by focusing on concrete systems—nonrandom accumulations of matter–energy in physical space–time organized into interacting, interrelated [[subsystem]]s or components. Slightly revising the original model a dozen years later, he distinguished eight "nested" hierarchical levels in such complex structures. Each level is "nested" in the sense that each higher level contains the next lower level in a nested fashion.

His central thesis is that the systems in existence at all eight levels are [[Open system (systems theory)|open systems]] composed of twenty critical subsystems that process inputs, throughputs, and outputs of various forms of matter–energy and information. Two of these subsystems—reproducer and boundary—process both matter–energy and information. Eight of them process only matter–energy. The other ten process information only.
<blockquote>All nature is a continuum. The endless complexity of life is organized into patterns which repeat themselves—theme and variations—at each level of system. These similarities and differences are proper concerns for science. From the ceaseless streaming of protoplasm to the many-vectored activities of supranational systems, there are continuous flows through living systems as they maintain their highly organized steady states.<ref>(Miller, 1978, p. 1025)</ref></blockquote>
<blockquote>All nature is a continuum. The endless complexity of life is organized into patterns which repeat themselves—theme and variations—at each level of system. These similarities and differences are proper concerns for science. From the ceaseless streaming of protoplasm to the many-vectored activities of supranational systems, there are continuous flows through living systems as they maintain their highly organized steady states.<ref>(Miller, 1978, p. 1025)</ref></blockquote>
Seppänen (1998) says that Miller applied [[general systems theory]] on a broad scale to describe all aspects of living systems.<ref>Seppänen 1998, pp. 197–198.</ref>
Seppänen (1998) says that Miller applied [[general systems theory]] on a broad scale to describe all aspects of living systems.<ref>Seppänen 1998, pp. 197–198.</ref>


===Topics in living systems theory===
Miller's theory posits that the mutual interrelationship of the components of a system extends across the hierarchical levels. Examples: Cells and organs of a living system thrive on the food the organism obtains from its suprasystem; the member countries of a supranational system reap the benefits accrued from the communal activities to which each one contributes. Miller says that his eclectic theory "ties together past discoveries from many disciplines and provides an outline into which new findings can be fitted".<ref>(Miller, 1978, p. 1025)</ref>
Miller's theory posits that the mutual interrelationship of the components of a system extends across the hierarchical levels. Examples: Cells and organs of a living system thrive on the food the organism obtains from its suprasystem; the member countries of a supranational system reap the benefits accrued from the communal activities to which each one contributes. Miller says that his eclectic theory "ties together past discoveries from many disciplines and provides an outline into which new findings can be fitted".<ref>(Miller, 1978, p. 1025)</ref>

Miller says the concepts of space, time, matter, energy, and information are essential to his theory because the living systems exist in space and are made of matter and energy organized by information. Miller's theory of living systems employs two sorts of spaces: physical or geographical space, and conceptual or abstracted spaces. Time is the fundamental "fourth dimension" of the physical space–time continuum/spiral. Matter is anything that has mass and occupies physical space. Mass and energy are equivalent as one can be converted into the other. Information refers to the degrees of freedom that exist in a given situation to choose among signals, symbols, messages, or patterns to be transmitted.

Other relevant concepts are system, structure, process, type, level, echelon, suprasystem, subsystem, transmissions, and steady state. A system can be conceptual, concrete or abstracted. The structure of a system is the arrangement of the subsystems and their components in three-dimensional space at any point of time. Process, which can be reversible or irreversible, refers to change over time of matter–energy or information in a system. Type defines living systems with similar characteristics. Level is the position in a hierarchy of systems. Many complex living systems, at various levels, are organized into two or more echelons. The suprasystem of any living system is the next higher system in which it is a subsystem or component. The totality of all the structures in a system which carry out a particular process is a subsystem. Transmissions are inputs and outputs in concrete systems. Because living systems are open systems, with continually altering fluxes of matter–energy and information, many of their equilibrium are dynamic—situations identified as steady states or flux equilibrium.

Miller identifies the comparable matter–energy and information processing critical subsystems. Elaborating on the eight hierarchical levels, he defines society, which constitutes the seventh hierarchy, as "a large, living, concrete system with [community] and lower am levels of living systems as subsystems and components".<ref>Miller 1978, p. 747.</ref> Society may include small, primitive, tot potential communities; ancient city–states, and kingdoms; as well as modern nation–states and empires that are not supranational systems. Miller provides general descriptions of each of the subsystems that fit all eight levels.


A supranational system, in Miller's view, "is composed of two or more societies, some or all of whose processes are under the control of a decider that is superordinate to their highest echelons".<ref>Miller 1978, p. 903</ref> However, he contends that no supranational system with all its twenty subsystems under control of its decider exists today. The absence of a supranational decider precludes the existence of a concrete supranational system. Miller says that studying a supranational system is problematical because its subsystems
A supranational system, in Miller's view, "is composed of two or more societies, some or all of whose processes are under the control of a decider that is superordinate to their highest echelons".<ref>Miller 1978, p. 903</ref> However, he contends that no supranational system with all its twenty subsystems under control of its decider exists today. The absence of a supranational decider precludes the existence of a concrete supranational system. Miller says that studying a supranational system is problematical because its subsystems
<blockquote>...tend to consist of few components besides the decoder. These systems do little matter-energy processing. The power of component societies [nations] today is almost always greater than the power of supranational deciders. Traditionally, theory at this level has been based upon intuition and study of history rather than data collection. Some quantitative research is now being done, and construction of global-system models and simulations is currently burgeoning.<ref>Miller, 1978, p. 1043.</ref></blockquote>
<blockquote>...tend to consist of few components besides the decoder. These systems do little matter-energy processing. The power of component societies [nations] today is almost always greater than the power of supranational deciders. Traditionally, theory at this level has been based upon intuition and study of history rather than data collection. Some quantitative research is now being done, and construction of global-system models and simulations is currently burgeoning.<ref>Miller, 1978, p. 1043.</ref></blockquote>


[[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Bailey]] states that Miller's theory covers:<ref>[[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Kenneth D. Bailey]], (2006)</ref>
At the supranational system level, Miller's emphasis is on international organizations, associations, and groups comprising representatives of societies (nation–states). Miller identifies the subsystems at this level to suit this emphasis. Thus, for example, the reproducer is "any multipurpose supranational system which creates a single purpose supranational organization" (p.&nbsp;914); and the boundary is the "supranational forces, usually located on or near supranational borders, which defend, guard, or police them" (p.&nbsp;914).

===Strengths of Miller's theory===
Not just those specialized in international communication, but all communication science scholars could pay particular attention to the major contributions of living systems theory (LST) to social systems approaches that [[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Bailey]]<ref>[[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Kenneth D. Bailey]], (2006)</ref> has pointed out:
* The specification of the twenty critical subsystems in any living system.
* The specification of the twenty critical subsystems in any living system.
* The specification of the eight hierarchical levels of living systems.
* The specification of the eight hierarchical levels of living systems.
Line 50: Line 27:
* Cross-level, cross-subsystem research.
* Cross-level, cross-subsystem research.


[[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Bailey]] says that LST, perhaps the "most integrative" social systems theory, has made many more contributions that may be easily overlooked, such as: providing a detailed analysis of types of systems; making a distinction between concrete and abstracted systems; discussion of physical space and time; placing emphasis on information processing; providing an analysis of entropy; recognition of totipotential systems, and party potential systems; providing an innovative approach to the structure–process issue; and introducing the concept of joint subsystem—a subsystem that belongs to two systems simultaneously; of dispersal—lateral, outward, upward, and downward; of inclusion—inclusion of something from the environment that is not part of the system; of artifact—an animal-made or human-made inclusion; of adjustment process, which combats stress in a system; and of critical subsystems, which carry out processes that all living systems need to survive.<ref>Kenneth D. Bailey 2006, pp.292–296.</ref>
Bailey says that Miller's living systems theory, perhaps in his view the "most integrative" social systems theory, has made many more contributions that may be easily overlooked, such as: providing a detailed analysis of types of systems; making a distinction between concrete and abstracted systems; discussion of physical space and time; placing emphasis on information processing; providing an analysis of entropy; recognition of totipotential systems, and party potential systems; providing an innovative approach to the structure–process issue; and introducing the concept of joint subsystem—a subsystem that belongs to two systems simultaneously; of dispersal—lateral, outward, upward, and downward; of inclusion—inclusion of something from the environment that is not part of the system; of artifact—an animal-made or human-made inclusion; of adjustment process, which combats stress in a system; and of critical subsystems, which carry out processes that all living systems need to survive.<ref>Kenneth D. Bailey 2006, pp.292–296.</ref>


LST's analysis of the twenty interacting subsystems, [[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Bailey]] adds, clearly distinguishing between matter–energy-processing and information-processing, as well as LST's analysis of the eight interrelated system levels, enables us to understand how social systems are linked to biological systems. LST also analyzes the irregularities or "organizational pathologies" of systems functioning (e.g., system stress and strain, feedback irregularities, information–input overload). It explicates the role of entropy in social research while it equates [[negentropy]] with information and order. It emphasizes both structure and process, as well as their interrelations.<ref>Kenneth D. bailey, 1994, pp. 209–210.</ref>
LST's analysis of the twenty interacting subsystems, [[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Bailey]] adds, clearly distinguishing between matter–energy-processing and information-processing, as well as LST's analysis of the eight interrelated system levels, enables us to understand how social systems are linked to biological systems. LST also analyzes the irregularities or "organizational pathologies" of systems functioning (e.g., system stress and strain, feedback irregularities, information–input overload). It explicates the role of entropy in social research while it equates [[negentropy]] with information and order. It emphasizes both structure and process, as well as their interrelations.<ref>Kenneth D. bailey, 1994, pp. 209–210.</ref>


== Living systems theories ==
===Limitations===

It omits the analysis of subjective phenomena, and it overemphasizes concrete Q-analysis (correlation of objects) to the virtual exclusion of R-analysis (correlation of variables). By asserting that societies (ranging from [[Totipotent#Totipotency|totipotential]] communities to nation-states and non-supranational systems) have greater control over their subsystem components than supranational systems have, it dodges the issue of transnational power over the contemporary social systems. Miller's supranational system bears no resemblance to the modern world-system that [[Immanuel Wallerstein]] (1974) described, although both of them were looking at the same living (dissipative) structure.
{{main|Living systems}}

[[File:Definition of cellular life NB.jpg|thumb|upright=1.5|Definition of cellular life according to [[Nediljko Budisa|Budisa]], Kubyshkin and Schmidt]]

Living systems are open [[self-organization|self-organizing]] living things that interact with their [[Environment (biophysical)|environment]]. These systems are maintained by flows of information, [[energy flow (ecology)|energy]], and matter. [[Nediljko Budisa|Budisa]], Kubyshkin and Schmidt defined [[cellular life]] as an organizational unit resting on four pillars/cornerstones: (i) [[Energy#Biology|energy]], (ii) [[metabolism]], (iii) [[information]] and (iv) [[body plan|form]]. This system is able to regulate and control metabolism and energy supply and contains at least one subsystem that functions as an information carrier ([[nucleic acid sequence|genetic information]]). [[Cell (biology)|Cells]] as self-sustaining units are parts of different [[population]]s that are involved in the unidirectional and irreversible open-ended process known as [[evolution]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Budisa |first1=Nediljko |last2=Kubyshkin |first2=Vladimir |last3=Schmidt |first3=Markus |title=Xenobiology: A Journey towards Parallel Life Forms |journal=ChemBioChem |date=22 April 2020|volume=21 |issue=16 |pages=2228–2231 |doi=10.1002/cbic.202000141 |pmid=32323410 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

⚫
Some scientists have proposed in the last few decades that a general [[living systems]] theory is required to explain the nature of life.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Clealand |first1=Carol E. |last2=Chyba |first2=Christopher F. |chapter=Does 'Life' Have a Definition? |editor-last1=Woodruff |editor-first1=T. Sullivan |editor-last2=Baross|editor-first2=John |title=Planets and Life: The Emerging Science of Astrobiology |publisher=Cambridge University Press |date=8 October 2007 |quote=In the absence of such a theory, we are in a position analogous to that of a 16th-century investigator trying to define 'water' in the absence of molecular theory. [...] Without access to living things having a different historical origin, it is difficult and perhaps ultimately impossible to formulate an adequately general theory of the nature of living systems}}</ref> Such a general theory would arise out of the [[ecology|ecological]] and [[Biology|biological sciences]] and attempt to map general principles for how all living systems work. Instead of examining phenomena by attempting to break things down into components, a general living systems theory explores phenomena in terms of dynamic patterns of the relationships of organisms with their environment.<ref>{{cite web |title=Patterns, Flows, and Interrelationship |url=http://www.mollyyoungbrown.com/systems_article.htm |access-date=27 June 2009 |first=Molly Young |last=Brown |date=2002 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090108122526/http://www.mollyyoungbrown.com/systems_article.htm |archive-date=8 January 2009}}</ref>

=== Gaia hypothesis ===

{{main|Gaia hypothesis}}

The idea that Earth is alive is found in philosophy and religion, but the first scientific discussion of it was by the Scottish geologist [[James Hutton]]. In 1785, he stated that Earth was a superorganism and that its proper study should be [[physiology]].<ref name="Lovelock-1979">{{cite book |title=Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth |date=1979 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-286030-9 |author-link=James Lovelock |first1=James |last1=Lovelock |url=https://archive.org/details/gaianewlookatlif00love_0 }}</ref>{{Rp|10}} The Gaia hypothesis, proposed in the 1960s by [[James Lovelock]], suggests that life on Earth functions as a single organism that defines and maintains [[Natural environment|environmental]] conditions necessary for its survival.<ref name="Lovelock1965">{{Cite journal |last1=Lovelock |first1=J.E. |author1-link=James Lovelock |date=1965 |title=A physical basis for life detection experiments |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=207 |issue=7 |pages=568–570 |doi=10.1038/207568a0 |pmid=5883628 |bibcode=1965Natur.207..568L|s2cid=33821197 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first1=James |last1=Lovelock |author-link=James Lovelock |title=Geophysiology |website=Papers by James Lovelock |url=http://www.jameslovelock.org/page4.html#GEO |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070506073502/http://www.jameslovelock.org/page4.html#GEO |archive-date=6 May 2007 |access-date=1 October 2009 }}</ref>

=== Self-maintainable information ===

[[File:A lather-like hierarchy of lifeness..png|thumb|upright=2|According to the theory of self-maintainable information, entities can be ranked by how alive they are, gaining the ability to evolve and maintaining distinctness.]]

All living entities possess [[genetic information]] that maintains itself by processess called cis-actions.<ref name="Piast-2019" /> [[Cis-action]] is any action that has an impact on the initiator, and in chemical systems is known as the [[autocatalytic set]]. In living systems, all the cis-actions have generally a positive influence on the system as those with negative impact are eliminated by [[natural selection]]. Genetic information acts as an initiator, and it can maintain itself via a series of cis-actions like self-repair or self-production (the production of parts of the body to be distinguished from self-reproduction, which is a duplication of the entire entity). Various cis-actions give the entity additional traits to be considered alive. Self-maintainable information is a basic requirement - a level zero for gaining lifeness and it can be obtained by any cis-action like self-repair (like a gene coding a protein that fixes alteration to a nucleic acid caused by [[Ultraviolet|UV]] radiation). Subsequently, if the entity is able to perform error-prone self-reproduction it gains the trait of [[evolution]] and belongs to a continuum of self-maintainable [[information]] - it becomes part of the living world in meaning of [[phenomenon]] but not yet a living [[individual]]. For this upgrade, the entity has to process the trait of distinctness, understood as an ability to define itself as a separate entity with its own fate. There are two possible ways of reaching distinctness: 1) maintaining an [[Open system (systems theory)|open-system]] (a [[Cell (biology)|cell]]) or/and 2) maintaining a transmission process (for obligatory [[Parasitism|parasites]]). Fulfiling any of these cis-actions raises the entity to a level of living individual - a distinct element of the self-maintainable information's continuum. The final level regards the state of the entity as [[Death|dead]] or alive and requires the trait of functionality.<ref name="Piast-2019" /> This approach provides a ladder-like [[hierarchy]] of entities depending on their ability to maintain themselves, their evolvability, and their distinctness. It distinguishes between life as a phenomenon, a living individual, and an alive individual.<ref name="Piast-2019" />

=== Nonfractionability ===

[[Robert Rosen (theoretical biologist)|Robert Rosen]] devoted a large part of his career, from 1958<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1007/bf02478302 |title=A relational theory of biological systems |year=1958 |last=Rosen |first=Robert |journal=The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics |volume=20 |issue=3 |pages=245–260 }}</ref> onwards, to developing a comprehensive theory of life as a self-organizing complex system, "closed to efficient causation". He defined a system component as "a unit of organization; a part with a function, i.e., a definite relation between part and whole." He identified the "nonfractionability of components in an organism" as the fundamental difference between living systems and "biological machines." He summarised his views in his book ''Life Itself''.<ref>{{cite book |title=Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life |first=Rosen |last=Robert |author-link=Robert Rosen (theoretical biologist) |date=1991 |isbn=978-0-231-07565-7 |publisher=Columbia University Press |place=New York}}</ref><!-- [[James Grier Miller]] proposed a similar view in his book ''Living Systems''.<ref>{{cite book |isbn=978-0070420151 |title=Living Systems |last=Miller |first=James Grier |author-link=James Grier Miller |year=1978 |publisher=McGraw-Hill |place=New York |pages= }}</ref>-->

=== Property of ecosystems ===

A systems view of life treats environmental [[flux]]es and biological fluxes together as a "reciprocity of influence,"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.calresco.org/fiscus/esl.htm |title=The Ecosystemic Life Hypothesis |last=Fiscus |first=Daniel A. |date=April 2002 |publisher=Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090806015449/http://www.calresco.org/fiscus/esl.htm|archive-date=6 August 2009|url-status=dead |access-date=28 August 2009}}</ref> and a reciprocal relation with environment is arguably as important for understanding life as it is for understanding ecosystems. As [[Harold J. Morowitz]] (1992) explains it, life is a property of an [[ecosystem|ecological system]] rather than a single organism or species.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Morowitz |first1=Harold J. |date=1992 |title=Beginnings of cellular life: metabolism recapitulates biogenesis |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-05483-5 |url={{GBurl|id=CmQDSHN_UrIC}} }}</ref> He argues that an ecosystemic definition of life is preferable to a strictly [[biochemical]] or physical one. [[Robert Ulanowicz]] (2009) highlights mutualism as the key to understand the systemic, order-generating behaviour of life and ecosystems.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Robert W. |last1=Ulanowicz |first2=Robert E. |last2=Ulanowicz |title=A third window: natural life beyond Newton and Darwin |publisher=Templeton Foundation Press |date=2009 |isbn=978-1-59947-154-9 |url={{GBurl|id=gAQKAQAAMAAJ}} }}</ref>

=== Complex systems biology ===

{{main|Complex systems biology}}

Complex systems biology is a field of science that studies the emergence of complexity in functional organisms from the viewpoint of [[dynamic systems]] theory.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Baianu |first1=I.C. |date=2006 |title=Robert Rosen's Work and Complex Systems Biology |journal=Axiomathes |volume=16 |issue=1–2 |pages=25–34 |doi=10.1007/s10516-005-4204-z|s2cid=4673166 }}</ref> The latter is also often called [[systems biology]] and aims to understand the most fundamental aspects of life. A closely related approach, relational biology, is concerned mainly with understanding life processes in terms of the most important relations, and categories of such relations among the essential functional components of organisms; for multicellular organisms, this has been defined as "categorical biology", or a model representation of organisms as a [[category theory]] of biological relations, as well as an [[algebraic topology]] of the [[functional organisation]] of living organisms in terms of their dynamic, complex [[Biological network|networks]] of metabolic, genetic, and [[epigenetic]] processes and [[signalling pathway]]s.<ref>* {{cite journal |last1=Rosen |first1=R. |date=1958a |title=A Relational Theory of Biological Systems |journal=Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics |volume=20 |issue=3 |pages=245–260 |doi=10.1007/bf02478302}}</ref><ref>* {{cite journal |last1=Rosen |first1=R. |date=1958b |title=The Representation of Biological Systems from the Standpoint of the Theory of Categories |journal=Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics |volume=20 |issue=4 |pages=317–341 |doi=10.1007/bf02477890}}</ref> Related approaches focus on the interdependence of constraints, where constraints can be either molecular, such as enzymes, or macroscopic, such as the geometry of a bone or of the vascular system.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Montévil |first1=Maël |last2=Mossio |first2=Matteo |date=7 May 2015 |title=Biological organisation as closure of constraints |url=https://www.academia.edu/11705712 |journal=Journal of Theoretical Biology |volume=372 |pages=179–191 |doi=10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.02.029 |pmid=25752259 |bibcode=2015JThBi.372..179M |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171117143806/http://www.academia.edu/11705712/Biological_organisation_as_closure_of_constraints |archive-date=17 November 2017 |citeseerx=10.1.1.701.3373 |s2cid=4654439 }}</ref>

=== Darwinian dynamic ===

{{main|Evolutionary dynamics}}

It has also been argued that the evolution of order in living systems and certain physical systems obeys a common fundamental principle termed the Darwinian dynamic.<ref name="Harris Bernstein, Henry C. Byerly, Frederick A. Hopf, Richard A. Michod and G. Krishna Vemulapalli 185">{{cite journal |title=The Darwinian Dynamic |volume=58 |issue=2 |author1=Harris Bernstein |author2=Henry C. Byerly |author3=Frederick A. Hopf |author4=Richard A. Michod |author5=G. Krishna Vemulapalli |date=June 1983 |journal=The Quarterly Review of Biology |jstor=2828805 |doi=10.1086/413216 |page=185|s2cid=83956410 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=Darwinian Dynamics: Evolutionary Transitions in Fitness and Individuality |last=Michod |first=Richard E. |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-691-05011-9 |location=Princeton }}</ref> This was formulated by first considering how macroscopic order is generated in a simple non-biological system far from thermodynamic equilibrium, and then extending consideration to short, replicating [[RNA]] molecules. The underlying order-generating process was concluded to be basically similar for both types of systems.<ref name="Harris Bernstein, Henry C. Byerly, Frederick A. Hopf, Richard A. Michod and G. Krishna Vemulapalli 185"/>

=== Operator theory ===

Another systemic definition called the operator theory proposes that life is a general term for the presence of the typical closures found in organisms; the typical closures are a membrane and an autocatalytic set in the cell<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Pursuit of Complexity: The Utility of Biodiversity from an Evolutionary Perspective |last=Jagers |first=Gerard |publisher=KNNV Publishing |year=2012 |isbn=978-90-5011-443-1|pages=27–29, 87–88, 94–96}}</ref> and that an organism is any system with an organisation that complies with an operator type that is at least as complex as the cell.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1007/s10699-010-9177-8| title= Towards a Hierarchical Definition of Life, the Organism, and Death| year= 2010 |last1=Jagers Op Akkerhuis| first1= Gerard A. J. M. |journal=Foundations of Science| volume= 15| issue= 3 | pages=245–262| s2cid=195282529}}
</ref><ref>{{cite journal | doi=10.1007/s10699-010-9209-4 | title=Explaining the Origin of Life is not Enough for a Definition of Life | year=2011 | last1=Jagers Op Akkerhuis | first1=Gerard | journal=Foundations of Science | volume=16 | issue=4 | pages=327–329 | s2cid=195284978 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | doi=10.1080/073911012010525006 | title= The Role of Logic and Insight in the Search for a Definition of Life| year=2012 | last1=Jagers Op Akkerhuis| first1=Gerard A. J. M. | journal=Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics | volume=29 | issue=4 | pages= 619–620 | pmid= 22208258| s2cid=35426048 | url=https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/441202| access-date= 16 April 2021 | archive-date=16 April 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210416121541/https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/441202| url-status= live| doi-access= free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=Integral Biomathics |last=Jagers |first=Gerald |publisher=Springer |year=2012 |isbn=978-3-642-28110-5|editor-last=Ehresmann|editor-first=Andree C. |chapter=Contributions of the Operator Hierarchy to the Field of Biologically Driven Mathematics and Computation |editor-last2=Simeonov|editor-first2=Plamen L.|editor-last3=Smith|editor-first3=Leslie S. }}</ref> Life can also be modelled as a network of inferior [[negative feedback]]s of regulatory mechanisms subordinated to a superior [[positive feedback]] formed by the potential of expansion and reproduction.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Korzeniewski |first1=Bernard |title=Cybernetic formulation of the definition of life |journal=Journal of Theoretical Biology |date=7 April 2001 |volume=209 |issue=3 |pages=275–286 |pmid=11312589 |doi=10.1006/jtbi.2001.2262|bibcode=2001JThBi.209..275K }}</ref>

⚫
== See also ==


⚫
==See also==
* {{annotated link|Artificial life}}
* {{annotated link|Artificial life}}
* {{annotated link|Autonomous Agency Theory}}
* {{annotated link|Autonomous Agency Theory}}
Line 72: Line 94:


== References ==
== References ==
{{Reflist|2}}


{{reflist|30em}}
⚫
==Further reading==

⚫
== Further reading ==

* [[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Kenneth D. Bailey]], (1994). ''Sociology and the new systems theory: Toward a theoretical synthesis''. Albany, NY: [[SUNY Press]].
* [[Kenneth D. Bailey (sociologist)|Kenneth D. Bailey]], (1994). ''Sociology and the new systems theory: Toward a theoretical synthesis''. Albany, NY: [[SUNY Press]].
* Kenneth D. Bailey (2006). Living systems theory and social entropy theory. ''Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 22'', 291–300.
* Kenneth D. Bailey (2006). Living systems theory and social entropy theory. ''Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 22'', 291–300.
Line 83: Line 107:
* James R. Simms (1999). ''Principles of Quantitative Living Systems Science''. Dordrecht: [[Kluwer Academic]]. {{ISBN|0-306-45979-5}}
* James R. Simms (1999). ''Principles of Quantitative Living Systems Science''. Dordrecht: [[Kluwer Academic]]. {{ISBN|0-306-45979-5}}


==External links==
== External links ==

*[http://projects.isss.org/doku.php?id=living_systems_theory The Living Systems Theory Of James Grier Miller]
* [http://projects.isss.org/doku.php?id=living_systems_theory The Living Systems Theory Of James Grier Miller]
* [http://www.panarchy.org/miller/livingsystems.html James Grier Miller, Living Systems] The Basic Concepts (1978)
* [http://www.panarchy.org/miller/livingsystems.html James Grier Miller, Living Systems] The Basic Concepts (1978)


Revision as of 06:30, 20 September 2023

Living systems are open self-organizing life forms that interact with their environment. These systems are maintained by flows of information, energy and matter. Multiple theories of living systems have been proposed. Such theories attempt to map general principles for how all living systems work.

Miller

James Grier Miller's 1978 living systems theory is a general theory about the existence of all living systems, their structure, interaction, behavior and development, intended to formalize the concept of life. According to Miller's original conception as spelled out in his magnum opus Living Systems, a "living system" must contain each of twenty "critical subsystems", which are defined by their functions and visible in numerous systems, from simple cells to organisms, countries, and societies. In Living Systems Miller provides a detailed look at a number of systems in order of increasing size, and identifies his subsystems in each. Miller considers living systems as a subset of all systems. Below the level of living systems, he defines space and time, matter and energy, information and entropy, levels of organization, and physical and conceptual factors, and above living systems ecological, planetary and solar systems, galaxies, etc.[1]

Living systems according to Parent (1996) are by definition "open self-organizing systems that have the special characteristics of life and interact with their environment. This takes place by means of information and material-energy exchanges. Living systems can be as simple as a single cell or as complex as a supranational organization such as the European Union. Regardless of their complexity, they each depend upon the same essential twenty subsystems (or processes) in order to survive and to continue the propagation of their species or types beyond a single generation".[2]

Miller's central thesis is that the systems in existence at all eight levels are open systems composed of twenty critical subsystems that process inputs, throughputs, and outputs of various forms of matter–energy and information. Two of these subsystems—reproducer and boundary—process both matter–energy and information. Eight of them process only matter–energy. The other ten process information only.

All nature is a continuum. The endless complexity of life is organized into patterns which repeat themselves—theme and variations—at each level of system. These similarities and differences are proper concerns for science. From the ceaseless streaming of protoplasm to the many-vectored activities of supranational systems, there are continuous flows through living systems as they maintain their highly organized steady states.[3]

Seppänen (1998) says that Miller applied general systems theory on a broad scale to describe all aspects of living systems.[4]

Miller's theory posits that the mutual interrelationship of the components of a system extends across the hierarchical levels. Examples: Cells and organs of a living system thrive on the food the organism obtains from its suprasystem; the member countries of a supranational system reap the benefits accrued from the communal activities to which each one contributes. Miller says that his eclectic theory "ties together past discoveries from many disciplines and provides an outline into which new findings can be fitted".[5]

A supranational system, in Miller's view, "is composed of two or more societies, some or all of whose processes are under the control of a decider that is superordinate to their highest echelons".[6] However, he contends that no supranational system with all its twenty subsystems under control of its decider exists today. The absence of a supranational decider precludes the existence of a concrete supranational system. Miller says that studying a supranational system is problematical because its subsystems

...tend to consist of few components besides the decoder. These systems do little matter-energy processing. The power of component societies [nations] today is almost always greater than the power of supranational deciders. Traditionally, theory at this level has been based upon intuition and study of history rather than data collection. Some quantitative research is now being done, and construction of global-system models and simulations is currently burgeoning.[7]

Bailey states that Miller's theory covers:[8]

  • The specification of the twenty critical subsystems in any living system.
  • The specification of the eight hierarchical levels of living systems.
  • The emphasis on cross-level analysis and the production of numerous cross-level hypotheses.
  • Cross-subsystem research (e.g., formulation and testing of hypotheses in two or more subsystems at a time).
  • Cross-level, cross-subsystem research.

Bailey says that Miller's living systems theory, perhaps in his view the "most integrative" social systems theory, has made many more contributions that may be easily overlooked, such as: providing a detailed analysis of types of systems; making a distinction between concrete and abstracted systems; discussion of physical space and time; placing emphasis on information processing; providing an analysis of entropy; recognition of totipotential systems, and party potential systems; providing an innovative approach to the structure–process issue; and introducing the concept of joint subsystem—a subsystem that belongs to two systems simultaneously; of dispersal—lateral, outward, upward, and downward; of inclusion—inclusion of something from the environment that is not part of the system; of artifact—an animal-made or human-made inclusion; of adjustment process, which combats stress in a system; and of critical subsystems, which carry out processes that all living systems need to survive.[9]

LST's analysis of the twenty interacting subsystems, Bailey adds, clearly distinguishing between matter–energy-processing and information-processing, as well as LST's analysis of the eight interrelated system levels, enables us to understand how social systems are linked to biological systems. LST also analyzes the irregularities or "organizational pathologies" of systems functioning (e.g., system stress and strain, feedback irregularities, information–input overload). It explicates the role of entropy in social research while it equates negentropy with information and order. It emphasizes both structure and process, as well as their interrelations.[10]

Living systems theories

Main article: Living systems
Definition of cellular life according to Budisa, Kubyshkin and Schmidt

Living systems are open self-organizing living things that interact with their environment. These systems are maintained by flows of information, energy, and matter. Budisa, Kubyshkin and Schmidt defined cellular life as an organizational unit resting on four pillars/cornerstones: (i) energy, (ii) metabolism, (iii) information and (iv) form. This system is able to regulate and control metabolism and energy supply and contains at least one subsystem that functions as an information carrier (genetic information). Cells as self-sustaining units are parts of different populations that are involved in the unidirectional and irreversible open-ended process known as evolution.[11]

Some scientists have proposed in the last few decades that a general living systems theory is required to explain the nature of life.[12] Such a general theory would arise out of the ecological and biological sciences and attempt to map general principles for how all living systems work. Instead of examining phenomena by attempting to break things down into components, a general living systems theory explores phenomena in terms of dynamic patterns of the relationships of organisms with their environment.[13]

Gaia hypothesis

Main article: Gaia hypothesis

The idea that Earth is alive is found in philosophy and religion, but the first scientific discussion of it was by the Scottish geologist James Hutton. In 1785, he stated that Earth was a superorganism and that its proper study should be physiology.[14]: 10  The Gaia hypothesis, proposed in the 1960s by James Lovelock, suggests that life on Earth functions as a single organism that defines and maintains environmental conditions necessary for its survival.[15][16]

Self-maintainable information

According to the theory of self-maintainable information, entities can be ranked by how alive they are, gaining the ability to evolve and maintaining distinctness.

All living entities possess genetic information that maintains itself by processess called cis-actions.[17] Cis-action is any action that has an impact on the initiator, and in chemical systems is known as the autocatalytic set. In living systems, all the cis-actions have generally a positive influence on the system as those with negative impact are eliminated by natural selection. Genetic information acts as an initiator, and it can maintain itself via a series of cis-actions like self-repair or self-production (the production of parts of the body to be distinguished from self-reproduction, which is a duplication of the entire entity). Various cis-actions give the entity additional traits to be considered alive. Self-maintainable information is a basic requirement - a level zero for gaining lifeness and it can be obtained by any cis-action like self-repair (like a gene coding a protein that fixes alteration to a nucleic acid caused by UV radiation). Subsequently, if the entity is able to perform error-prone self-reproduction it gains the trait of evolution and belongs to a continuum of self-maintainable information - it becomes part of the living world in meaning of phenomenon but not yet a living individual. For this upgrade, the entity has to process the trait of distinctness, understood as an ability to define itself as a separate entity with its own fate. There are two possible ways of reaching distinctness: 1) maintaining an open-system (a cell) or/and 2) maintaining a transmission process (for obligatory parasites). Fulfiling any of these cis-actions raises the entity to a level of living individual - a distinct element of the self-maintainable information's continuum. The final level regards the state of the entity as dead or alive and requires the trait of functionality.[17] This approach provides a ladder-like hierarchy of entities depending on their ability to maintain themselves, their evolvability, and their distinctness. It distinguishes between life as a phenomenon, a living individual, and an alive individual.[17]

Nonfractionability

Robert Rosen devoted a large part of his career, from 1958[18] onwards, to developing a comprehensive theory of life as a self-organizing complex system, "closed to efficient causation". He defined a system component as "a unit of organization; a part with a function, i.e., a definite relation between part and whole." He identified the "nonfractionability of components in an organism" as the fundamental difference between living systems and "biological machines." He summarised his views in his book Life Itself.[19]

Property of ecosystems

A systems view of life treats environmental fluxes and biological fluxes together as a "reciprocity of influence,"[20] and a reciprocal relation with environment is arguably as important for understanding life as it is for understanding ecosystems. As Harold J. Morowitz (1992) explains it, life is a property of an ecological system rather than a single organism or species.[21] He argues that an ecosystemic definition of life is preferable to a strictly biochemical or physical one. Robert Ulanowicz (2009) highlights mutualism as the key to understand the systemic, order-generating behaviour of life and ecosystems.[22]

Complex systems biology

Main article: Complex systems biology

Complex systems biology is a field of science that studies the emergence of complexity in functional organisms from the viewpoint of dynamic systems theory.[23] The latter is also often called systems biology and aims to understand the most fundamental aspects of life. A closely related approach, relational biology, is concerned mainly with understanding life processes in terms of the most important relations, and categories of such relations among the essential functional components of organisms; for multicellular organisms, this has been defined as "categorical biology", or a model representation of organisms as a category theory of biological relations, as well as an algebraic topology of the functional organisation of living organisms in terms of their dynamic, complex networks of metabolic, genetic, and epigenetic processes and signalling pathways.[24][25] Related approaches focus on the interdependence of constraints, where constraints can be either molecular, such as enzymes, or macroscopic, such as the geometry of a bone or of the vascular system.[26]

Darwinian dynamic

Main article: Evolutionary dynamics

It has also been argued that the evolution of order in living systems and certain physical systems obeys a common fundamental principle termed the Darwinian dynamic.[27][28] This was formulated by first considering how macroscopic order is generated in a simple non-biological system far from thermodynamic equilibrium, and then extending consideration to short, replicating RNA molecules. The underlying order-generating process was concluded to be basically similar for both types of systems.[27]

Operator theory

Another systemic definition called the operator theory proposes that life is a general term for the presence of the typical closures found in organisms; the typical closures are a membrane and an autocatalytic set in the cell[29] and that an organism is any system with an organisation that complies with an operator type that is at least as complex as the cell.[30][31][32][33] Life can also be modelled as a network of inferior negative feedbacks of regulatory mechanisms subordinated to a superior positive feedback formed by the potential of expansion and reproduction.[34]

See also

  • Artificial life – Field of study
  • Autonomous Agency Theory – viable system theory
  • Biological organization – Hierarchy of complex structures and systems within biological sciences
  • Biological systems – Complex network which connects several biologically relevant entities
  • Complex systems – System composed of many interacting components
  • Earth system science – Scientific study of the Earth's spheres and their natural integrated systems
  • Extraterrestrial life – Life not on earth
  • Information metabolism – Psychological theory of interaction between biological organisms and their environment
  • Spome – Hypothetical matter-closed, energy-open life support system
  • Systems biology – Computational and mathematical modeling of complex biological systems
  • Systems theory – Interdisciplinary study of systems
  • Viable System Theory – concerns cybernetic processes in relation to the development/evolution of dynamical systems

References

  1. ^ Seppänen, 1998, p. 198
  2. ^ Elaine Parent, The Living Systems Theory of James Grier Miller, Primer project ISSS, 1996.
  3. ^ (Miller, 1978, p. 1025)
  4. ^ Seppänen 1998, pp. 197–198.
  5. ^ (Miller, 1978, p. 1025)
  6. ^ Miller 1978, p. 903
  7. ^ Miller, 1978, p. 1043.
  8. ^ Kenneth D. Bailey, (2006)
  9. ^ Kenneth D. Bailey 2006, pp.292–296.
  10. ^ Kenneth D. bailey, 1994, pp. 209–210.
  11. ^ Budisa, Nediljko; Kubyshkin, Vladimir; Schmidt, Markus (22 April 2020). "Xenobiology: A Journey towards Parallel Life Forms". ChemBioChem. 21 (16): 2228–2231. doi:10.1002/cbic.202000141. PMID 32323410.
  12. ^ Clealand, Carol E.; Chyba, Christopher F. (8 October 2007). "Does 'Life' Have a Definition?". In Woodruff, T. Sullivan; Baross, John (eds.). Planets and Life: The Emerging Science of Astrobiology. Cambridge University Press. In the absence of such a theory, we are in a position analogous to that of a 16th-century investigator trying to define 'water' in the absence of molecular theory. [...] Without access to living things having a different historical origin, it is difficult and perhaps ultimately impossible to formulate an adequately general theory of the nature of living systems
  13. ^ Brown, Molly Young (2002). "Patterns, Flows, and Interrelationship". Archived from the original on 8 January 2009. Retrieved 27 June 2009.
  14. ^ Lovelock, James (1979). Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-286030-9.
  15. ^ Lovelock, J.E. (1965). "A physical basis for life detection experiments". Nature. 207 (7): 568–570. Bibcode:1965Natur.207..568L. doi:10.1038/207568a0. PMID 5883628. S2CID 33821197.
  16. ^ Lovelock, James. "Geophysiology". Papers by James Lovelock. Archived from the original on 6 May 2007. Retrieved 1 October 2009.
  17. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference Piast-2019 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  18. ^ Rosen, Robert (1958). "A relational theory of biological systems". The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics. 20 (3): 245–260. doi:10.1007/bf02478302.
  19. ^ Robert, Rosen (1991). Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-07565-7.
  20. ^ Fiscus, Daniel A. (April 2002). "The Ecosystemic Life Hypothesis". Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America. Archived from the original on 6 August 2009. Retrieved 28 August 2009.
  21. ^ Morowitz, Harold J. (1992). Beginnings of cellular life: metabolism recapitulates biogenesis. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-05483-5.
  22. ^ Ulanowicz, Robert W.; Ulanowicz, Robert E. (2009). A third window: natural life beyond Newton and Darwin. Templeton Foundation Press. ISBN 978-1-59947-154-9.
  23. ^ Baianu, I.C. (2006). "Robert Rosen's Work and Complex Systems Biology". Axiomathes. 16 (1–2): 25–34. doi:10.1007/s10516-005-4204-z. S2CID 4673166.
  24. ^ * Rosen, R. (1958a). "A Relational Theory of Biological Systems". Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics. 20 (3): 245–260. doi:10.1007/bf02478302.
  25. ^ * Rosen, R. (1958b). "The Representation of Biological Systems from the Standpoint of the Theory of Categories". Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics. 20 (4): 317–341. doi:10.1007/bf02477890.
  26. ^ Montévil, Maël; Mossio, Matteo (7 May 2015). "Biological organisation as closure of constraints". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 372: 179–191. Bibcode:2015JThBi.372..179M. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.701.3373. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.02.029. PMID 25752259. S2CID 4654439. Archived from the original on 17 November 2017.
  27. ^ a b Harris Bernstein; Henry C. Byerly; Frederick A. Hopf; Richard A. Michod; G. Krishna Vemulapalli (June 1983). "The Darwinian Dynamic". The Quarterly Review of Biology. 58 (2): 185. doi:10.1086/413216. JSTOR 2828805. S2CID 83956410.
  28. ^ Michod, Richard E. (2000). Darwinian Dynamics: Evolutionary Transitions in Fitness and Individuality. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-05011-9.
  29. ^ Jagers, Gerard (2012). The Pursuit of Complexity: The Utility of Biodiversity from an Evolutionary Perspective. KNNV Publishing. pp. 27–29, 87–88, 94–96. ISBN 978-90-5011-443-1.
  30. ^ Jagers Op Akkerhuis, Gerard A. J. M. (2010). "Towards a Hierarchical Definition of Life, the Organism, and Death". Foundations of Science. 15 (3): 245–262. doi:10.1007/s10699-010-9177-8. S2CID 195282529.
  31. ^ Jagers Op Akkerhuis, Gerard (2011). "Explaining the Origin of Life is not Enough for a Definition of Life". Foundations of Science. 16 (4): 327–329. doi:10.1007/s10699-010-9209-4. S2CID 195284978.
  32. ^ Jagers Op Akkerhuis, Gerard A. J. M. (2012). "The Role of Logic and Insight in the Search for a Definition of Life". Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics. 29 (4): 619–620. doi:10.1080/073911012010525006. PMID 22208258. S2CID 35426048. Archived from the original on 16 April 2021. Retrieved 16 April 2021.
  33. ^ Jagers, Gerald (2012). "Contributions of the Operator Hierarchy to the Field of Biologically Driven Mathematics and Computation". In Ehresmann, Andree C.; Simeonov, Plamen L.; Smith, Leslie S. (eds.). Integral Biomathics. Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-28110-5.
  34. ^ Korzeniewski, Bernard (7 April 2001). "Cybernetic formulation of the definition of life". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 209 (3): 275–286. Bibcode:2001JThBi.209..275K. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2001.2262. PMID 11312589.

Further reading

  • Kenneth D. Bailey, (1994). Sociology and the new systems theory: Toward a theoretical synthesis. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
  • Kenneth D. Bailey (2006). Living systems theory and social entropy theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 22, 291–300.
  • James Grier Miller, (1978). Living systems. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-87081-363-3
  • Miller, J.L., & Miller, J.G. (1992). Greater than the sum of its parts: Subsystems which process both matter-energy and information. Behavioral Science, 37, 1–38.
  • Humberto Maturana (1978), "Biology of language: The epistemology of reality," in Miller, George A., and Elizabeth Lenneberg (eds.), Psychology and Biology of Language and Thought: Essays in Honor of Eric Lenneberg. Academic Press: 27-63.
  • Jouko Seppänen, (1998). Systems ideology in human and social sciences. In G. Altmann & W.A. Koch (Eds.), Systems: New paradigms for the human sciences (pp. 180–302). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  • James R. Simms (1999). Principles of Quantitative Living Systems Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. ISBN 0-306-45979-5

External links


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Living_systems&oldid=1176208190"