02/22/25

Looking at Alexei Sharov and Morten Tonnessen’s Book (2021) “Semiotic Agency” (Part 24 of 24) 

0264 What do I conclude?

By the time that the authors finish Parts II and IV of Semiotic Agency, the range of applications expands into Parts I-IV of Pathways to the Origin and Evolution of Meanings of the Universe.

0265 Is such an expansion warranted?

From my examination of Parts I and III of Semiotic Agency, I may say, “Yes.  Biosemiotics entails a re-articulation of biology and the social sciences.  Biosemiotics also reveals the nature of phenomenology, cybernetics and the psychometric sciences.”

0266 The re-articulation of biology and the social sciences in the light of biosemiotics is just beginning.  In looking at Part I and III of Semiotic Agency, I could sense the breadth of the project.

0267 The problem concerns the status of the noumenon.

Natural scientists never worry about the noumenon, because the noumenon should be obvious. Indeed, triumphalist scientists want to paper over each natural noumenon with a successful model.  Social scientists observe and measure social phenomena then pull the associated noumena from holes in the ground.  Phenomenologists promote intuitive methods for guessing what a noumenon must be.  Sharov and Tonnessen re-format the triadic specifying sign-relationinto a dyadic structure amenable to empirio-schematic inquiry.  I call their discovery, “the Sharov and Tonnessen noumenal overlay”.

0268 The authors call it “semiotic agency”.

0269 Semiotic agency, depicted as a dyad (agency) within a dyad (semiotic agency), forces scientists to re-examine all that has gone before.

And, that is quite an accomplishment.

0270 The task before me remains.  A sea of biosemiosis lies before me.  The question is how to traverse the waters. How to set sail?

In order to examine Parts II and IV of Semiotic Agency (2021) and Parts I, II, III and IV of Pathways (2024) I plan to take certain steps, listed in the following script.

This script allows me to examine here and there, like a bumbling bee in a spring field, not certain about a proper path, and inadvertently pollinating along the way.

I begin by looking at the chapters on the origins of life.

02/21/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 1 of 8)

0271 What does biosemiotics have to say about abiogenesis, the origin of life from non-living matter?

0272 Two texts are before me.

0273 Semiotic Agency: Science Beyond Mechanism is written by biosemioticians Alexei Sharov and Morten Tonnessen.  Semiotic Agency is published in 2021 by Springer and logs in at volume 25 of Springer’s Series in Biosemiotics.  Series editors have Razie Mah’s permission for use of the following disquisition, with attribution of said blogger.

The text is open to chapter five, titled, “Origins of Life”, and is found on pages 123-149.  This chapter closes Part II of Semiotic Agency.  The title of Part II is “Agency in Organisms and Beyond.”

0274 Pathways to the Origin and Evolution of Meaning in the Universe is edited by Alexei Sharov and George Mikhailovsky (2024, Scrivener Press, Beverly MA).

The text is open to chapter nine, titled “Chemical Origins of Life, Agency and Meaning” (pages 189-210).  This chapter opens Part II, titled “Meanings in the Evolution of Life”.  The chapter’s author is Alexei Sharov.

0275 First and foremost, chemistry-based scenarios for the origins of life have proven futile.  Why?  For one, it is difficult to imagine a chemical system constituting a semiotic agent.  Sure, a biological agent can be reduced to a chemical soup, but a chemical soup cannot unreduced to a biological being.

Is this the reason why proposals of life emerging from a primordial soup consistently fail?

0276 The key word in the above paragraph is “emerging”.

0277 So why not turn to Mariusz Tabaczek, who writes two books, titled Emergence (2019) and Divine Action and Emergence (2021) that are reviewed in Razie Mah’s blog for April and May, 2024?  These and other examinations go into Razie Mah’s two-part e-book, Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek’s Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024), available at smashwords and other e-book venues.

0278 Tabaczek criticizes Terrence Deacon, even as he translates Deacon’s conceptual apparatus into a classical Aristotelian framework.  Why?  If Deacon borrows ideas from Aristotle and re-tools them for his own approach to emergent systems, then why not articulate Deacon’s approach using Aristotle’s terms?

0279 The answer turns out to be more than academic.

Recall the Positivist’s judgment for the natural sciences?

The noumenon (the thing itself) and the model (what ought to be for the empirio-schematic judgment) are two contending sources of illumination.  Deacon stands with the model, then uses modified versions of Aristotle’s vocabulary in order to project his model onto the noumenon.  In contrast, Tabaczek stands with the noumenon, where Aristotle’s terminology is at home.  He sees Deacon’s projection from the model back onto the noumenon and does not think too highly of the imposition.

02/20/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 2 of 8)

0280 Tabaczek’s re-allocates Deacon’s treatment of emergence, without the benefit of Peirce’s category-based nested form.  Razie Mah examines Tabaczek’s re-allocation using two works, A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Formand A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction.

The result in the Deacon-Tabaczek interscope for emergence.

0281 What can I say?

Obviously, a three-level interscope is a nested form composed of nested forms.

In this interscope, Deacon’s terminology is used.

To begin, consider Deacon’s labels for the three levels.

0282 On the content-level, a thermodynamic process that tends towards equilibrium (in a spontaneous sort of way)3abrings the actuality of a contained circulation of ingredients2a, where reagents are separated so that some of the free-energy of their reaction can be captured, into relation with (a situationally induced) displacement from equilibrium1a.

For example, if a dam extracts the gravitational potential and kinetic energy released in a river flowing downstream, then the content-level is the adjusted spontaneous process of water flowing downstream.

0283 On the situation-level, a homeodynamic process capable of extracting the captured energy3b brings the actuality of the embodiment of the captured energy2b into relation with the potential of the various constraints and biases imposed on the content-level nested form1b.

For the example of the hydroelectric dam3b, water is channeled in such a fashion as to drive a turbine1b that produces alternate (and sometimes, direct) voltage in a wire cable2b.  The emergent being is electrical “current”2b.

0284 On the perspective-level, a morphodynamic process3c, capable of utilizing the energy captured by the emergent being1c, generates a persisting form2c.  The persistent form is like an end point of the emergence2c, because it2c not only dissipates the potential1c of the emergent being2b but it2c “forms” something2c in the process3c.  Here, Deacon’s terminology sounds oblique and, perhaps, misleading.  The dissipative power2c persists as a form2c, yet “dynamic form” labels the normal context3c.  Also, the potential of the emergent being1c is a “simplification”, of sorts.  But, is “simplification1c” a satisfying term?

For example, a morphodynamic process3c takes the potential of the alternative electric voltage… or is it current?… in a wire connected (however distantly) to the aforementioned turbine1c and performs some sort of work, such as heating my morning toast2b.

0285 Yes, the example sounds lame.  But, with butter and apricot jam, the emergence is really quite satisfying.

02/19/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 3 of 8)

0286 An example that is closer to Tabaczek’s argument sounds much less lame.

Mitochondria produce ATP from sugar and oxygen.  I breathe in order to supply oxygen to my mitochondria.  I eat toast in order to supply the sugar.

0287 Outside the body, the reaction of sugar with oxygen is called “combustion”2a.

Inside the body, the degradation of sugar into carbon dioxide and water belongs to the Kreb’s cycle1b.  The combination of atomic hydrogen (released by the degradation of sugar) with molecular oxygen is called the mitochondrial electron transport chain1b.  These separated reactions both produce ATP2b, a high-energy molecule that, given enough time, will degrade back to ADP and Pi (inorganic phosphate).

0288 ATP2b is one of the currencies of the cell.  All sorts of biosynthetic routes and transportation mechanisms3c within a eukaryotic cell will take the ATP, which has three covalently bound phosphates, then pop off the last phosphate1b, and use the released energy to do biochemical or kinetic work2c.

0289 Here is a picture of the Deacon-Tabaczek interscope for mitochondria.

0290 On the adjusted thermodynamic or content level, the normal context of orthograde reactions3a brings the actuality of the transfer of electrons from sugar to oxygen2a (yielding water and carbon dioxide)2a into relation with the potential of ‘the chemistry of glucose and oxygen’1a.  

On the homeodynamic level, the normal context of cellular matrix and mitochondria2b bring the actuality of ATP (as an emergent being)2b into relation with the potential of ‘the Kreb’s cycle and the mitochondrial electron-transport chain’1b.

On the morphodynamic level, the normal context of staying alive3c brings the actuality of biosynthesis and cellular transport2c into relation with the potential of ‘utilizing the controlled degradation of ATP in order to do work’1c.

0291 Now, I turn to biosemiotics.

Recall that Sharov and Tonnessen’s noumenal overlay presents the triadic specifying sign-relation (connecting situation and content levels of an interscope)…

…as a dyadic relational structure.

0292 A specifying sign-relation also stands within the interscope for emergence.

The specifying sign-relation stands out when ATP2b, as an emergent being, associates to the specifying sign-object (SOs).  then, other elements of the interscope for mitochondrial respiration fall into slots in the S&T noumenal overlay.

02/18/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 4 of 8)

0293 As it turns out, the interscope for emergence also contains the exemplar sign-relation.  Well, every three-level interscope contains an exemplar sign-relation.  So maybe, that is no surprise.  The exemplar sign-relation binds the situation and perspective levels.  A situation-level actuality2b (SVe) stands for a perspective-level actuality2c (SOe) in regards to the perspective-level normal context3c operating on a perspective-level potential1c (SIe).

“SV”, “SO” and “SI” label the sign-vehicle, sign-object and sign-interpretant. Subscript “s” denotes the specifying sign-relation.  Subscript “e” denotes the exemplar sign-relation.

0294 When I turn my gaze back to the S&T noumenal overlay, I note the following.

The three-level interscope depicting the production of ATP as an emergent being contains both specifying and exemplar sign relations.

The S&T noumenal overlay directly incorporates the specifying sign-relation.

When the full three-level interscope of emergence associates to the S&T noumenal overlay, the incorporation of the exemplar sign-relation becomes apparent.

0295 So, for emergence, the agency aspect of the S&T noumenal overlay should express the exemplar sign-relation.

Here is a picture.

0296 I recall that the agency aspect for the S&T noumenal overlay has simpler formulations.

Here is one that is worth comparing to the ongoing association.

0297 In mitochondrial respiration as emergence, ATP2b is the actuality2 on the situationb level.  Both actuality2 and situationb associate to Peirce’s category of secondness.  ATP2b is the actuality2 on the levelb associated with actuality.  Consequently, the observation and measurement of ATP2b in biological systems should be of interest for modeling the specifying character of [habit] as well as the exemplar character of [salience].

In this regard, ATP2b associates to information and information displays the way that the emergent being2b serves as both the sign-object of the specifying sign-relation (SOs) and the sign-vehicle of the exemplar sign-relation (SVe).

0298 The production of ATP2b is the specifying sign-object (SOs).

The dissipation of the energy (SOeembodied by ATP2b (SVe) represents a goal.

ATP2b (SVe) stands for the productive dissipation of its energy2c (SOe) in the normal context of dynamic form3coperating on the potential intracellular uses of ATP1c (SIe).

This application of emergence, appearing in Comments on Mariusz Tabaczek’s Arc of Inquiry (2019-2024), offers a promising start to look at Sharov’s carefully formulated model for the origin of life.

02/17/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 5 of 8)

0299 Here is a three-level interscope for emergence, with the specifying and exemplar sign-relations noted.

0300 Emergence enters into S&T’s noumenal overlay.

Here are the results.

0301 When Sharov and Tonnessen confront the origin of life on Earth in chapter five of Semiotic Agency, associations with Mariusz Tabaczek’s formulation of emergence are not apparent.  The focus on inquiry is on chemical self-replication rather than structures that capture thermodynamic energy2a through an emergent2b then dissipate the emergent’s energy2cby building a persistent structure.

The eukaryotic cell’s metabolism of glucose and oxygen works by extracting energy released in the combustion of these reagents.

In combustion, oxygen gas directly takes electrons from glucose, without any homeodynamics.  Covalent bonds are broken.  Covalent bonds form.  Lots of free-energy is released and converted into heat.

In the eukaryotic cell, electrons produced by the oxidation of glucose (at one cellular location) are used to produce an emergent being, such as ATP, before going into the reduction of oxygen (at another cellular location), where more ATP is produced.  ATP2b is the emergent being, whose energy is dissipated on the morphodynamic level.

0302 So, where is a scientist supposed to start, when considering abiogenesis?

Researchers into the origins of life focus on the formation of covalent bonds that constitute polymers.  Polymeric molecules are persistent structures.  But, scientists have not identified an emergent, similar to ATP, whose concentration is low yet constant, because it is produced on the homeodynamic level and used up on the morphodynamic level.  Nor have researchers identified any thermodynamic processes amenable to exploitation by a homeodynamic level.

02/15/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 6 of 8)

0302 In section 5.5 of Semiotic Agency and sections 9.4 and 9.5 of Pathways, Alexei Sharov presents a replicator-niche coupling model.  Several items are required: water, oil, pigments (in oil), light, and two complementary molecules that are separate in water, yet combine to form an active site when they attach to the surface of an oil droplet.

0304 Here is a picture.

0305 Let me start with the oil droplet.

Water tends to drive alkanes out of solution.  That is why alkanes form oil droplets in water.  These droplets are not really stable, because they are not held together because of mutual attraction, but are held in place by the fact that each water molecule networks with other water molecules so well that, if a molecule does not participate in water’s hydrogen-bond networks, it gets driven out of solution. That also applies to the pigment, which is oil-soluble and not water-soluble.

0306 What about the polymers?

Parts of complementary polymers are soluble in water.  Other parts are not as soluble.  So, parts are driven out of water and parts are pulled back into water.  These molecules collect on the surface of the oil droplet, then couple with one another, with the pigment and with an alkane, which is part of the oil droplet.

0307 There are no oxygen molecules in the picture.  Today, the Earth’s atmosphere is around 20% oxygen and 80% nitrogen.  In the early Earth’s atmosphere, reduced carbon compounds make the smaller fraction and nitrogen makes the large fraction.  More or less.  No scientist can go back in time and measure the composition of the atmosphere of the early Earth.

Reduced carbon in the atmosphere goes with the alkanes in the oil.  Much of the light of the early sun is absorbed by the carbon-rich atmosphere, but some makes it down to pigments in the oil droplet.  The pigment and complementary polymers conjoin in two locations in the figure below.

0308 Then, what happens?

The pigment absorbs a photon and becomes an electronically excited pigment.

Then, the energy captured by this pigment initiates a chemical reaction, where the alkane is oxidized to a fatty acid.  Oxidation releases electrons.  One among many possible oxidations is pictured above.  With a little more oomph, that carboxylic acid would pop off as carbon dioxide.  However, this reaction stops as an alkane chain with a carboxylic acid at the terminus.  I call this molecule a “fatty acid”.

In the following figure, the two processes are depicted as two dyads.  Each dyad exhibits the structure of reagents [turn into] products.

0309 Now, theoretically a reduction reaction is close at hand.  If the oil droplet is near a chemical that can accept the electrons, then a coordinated reduction can take place.  For example, the hydrogen ions and the electrons can combine to form 3H2(g).  Or, atmosphere nitrogen (N2) can be reduced to ammonia, 2NH3.

02/14/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 7 of 8)

0310 What happens next?

The fatty acid serves as the emergent being2b, because the carboxylic-acid side tends to favor the water and the alkane side stays in the oil droplet.

0311 In short, fatty acid is the emergent being2b that has the potential of stabilizing oil droplets1c, allowing them to “feed off” or “absorb” oil from less stable oil droplets2c.

0312 Does Sharov’s scenario, as far as it goes, fit the Deacon-Tabaczek interscope?

Indeed, it does.

0313 Does this interscope associate to the S&T noumenal overlay?

Yes, it does.

0314 Well, so far so good.

Nevertheless, there is a long way to go to get to a prokaryotic cell (as noted in sections 5.8-5.10 of Semiotic Agency and 9.6-9.8 of Pathways).

For example, prokaryotic cells replicate themselves through cell division.  But, the replication is nothing like this oil droplet example.  That is because DNA plays a role in prokaryotic cell division.  Biologist call this type of replication, “template based”.

Also, there is the issue of the cell membrane.  The cell membrane is a lipid bilayer, consisting of phosphorylated fatty acids.  In other words, fatty acids may stabilize an oil droplet.  Once those fatty acids have a phosphate attached to them, then their phosphates love water so much that the alkane-portion of the molecule is excluded from the water so strongly that a bilayer is stable.

0315 Also, there is the formalization of pigments that capture sunlight in order to produce energy-rich sugar molecules.  Today, photosynthesis absorbs carbon dioxide (gas) and releases oxygen (gas).  In the early Earth, photosynthesis does the same.

Here is the balanced chemical reaction.

02/13/25

Biosemiotics and the Origins of Life on Earth (Part 8 of 8)

0316 Oxygen gas is a byproduct of photosynthesis.  Over billions of years, the continual release of oxygen transforms the atmosphere of the Earth.

The ubiquity of oxygen gas in today’s atmosphere makes experimental research into the chemistry of the early Earthdifficult.  Today, the reaction that Sharov suggests, the oxidation of an alkane to a fatty acid, would require elaborate precautions.  Why?  Even a trace amount of oxygen would directly react with the light-absorbing pigment.

0317  So, what am I saying?

Well, research is difficult.

0318 Also, as soon as one gets to the earliest forms of life on Earth, such as photosynthetic prokaryotes, the “genomic complexity” (nominally, the length of DNA that belongs to only functional genes) is already high.  If one plots the genomic complexity of (1) prokaryotes, such as bacteria, (2) single-celled eukaryotes, such as amoebas, (3) multicellular water animals, such as fish (4) invertebrate land animals, such as worms, and (5) vertebrate land animals, such as mammals, versus time for first fossil evidence, one gets the following graph.

 0319 On one hand, Sharov concludes that the genomic complexity doubles every 340 million years since the start of the Earth.

On the other hand, Sharov points out that, if one projects the line down to zero genomic complexity, the intersection occurs a little over 9 billion years ago.  But, the Earth is only 4.5Byr.

Fortunately, the universe is around 15 billion years old.

0320 If the early Earth is seeded, then biologists already have a label, “panspermia”.

All other planets and moons in the solar system should be similarly seeded.

So, future space exploration may provide an answer.

If it turns out that the early Earth is seeded through panspermia, then research into the origins of life (in general) becomes even more difficult.

0321 Now, I conclude.

Sharov and Tonnessen’s noumenal overlay characterizes biosemiotics.

The Deacon-Tabaczek interscope characterizes emergence.

Both relational structures apply to inquiry into the origin of life on Earth.

This examination demonstrates how the two relational structures relate to one another and constitute complementary approaches for further inquiries into the origins of life.

0322 But, what I have learned concerns more than the topic of the origin of life.

This is significant.

Sharov and Tonnessen’s noumenal overlay may “expand” to include the entire D-T interscope, which includes both the specifying and the exemplar sign-relations.

0322 By extension, the S&T noumenal overlay associates to any three-level interscope, containing two sign-relations,according to the comparison in the following figure.

0323 The topic of the origin of life on Earth turns into a valuable insight into biosemiotics, emergence, and two sign-relations.

02/12/25

Looking at Gustavo Caetano-Anolles’ Chapter (2024) “Evolution of Biomolecular Communication” (Part 1 of 10)

0324 The text before me is chapter ten in Pathways to the Origin and Evolution of Meanings in the Universe (2024, edited by Alexei Sharov and George E. Mikhailovsky, pages 217-243).  The author hails from the Evolutionary Bioinformatics Laboratory at the Department of Crop Sciences and Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, at the University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, USA.  The author and editors have permission to use and reprint this commentary.

From prior examinations, I propose that Alexei Sharov’s and Morten Tonnessen’s 2021 book, Semiotic Agency, formulates a noumenal overlay for the diverse field of biosemiotics.  All manifestations of semiotic agency are unique.  Each is a subject of inquiry on its own.  Yet, they have one relational structure in common.  Here is a picture of that dyadic actuality.

0325 Biosemiotics is not divorced from science.  Scientists observe and measure phenomena, then build models based on those observations and measurements.  The real elements in the above figure support phenomena.  The contiguities (in brackets) call for models.

0326 So, what about communication mediated by biomolecules?

0327 In the introduction (section 10.1), the author reminds the reader of two premodern views of biological behaviorsand how they change over time.  One is the force of life (in French, le pouvoir de vie), which tends to increase complexity.  The other is the influence of circumstances (in French, l’influence des circonstances), which tends to select for… um… survivors.

These premodern views fit nicely into the contiguities in the above relational structure.  Each dyad can be compared to Aristotle’s hylomorphe of matter [substance] form, allowing the following comparison.

0328 The force of life tends towards the many.

The influence of circumstances tends toward the few.. or rather… one goal.

Surely, my assignments are confusing, because the force of life is singular and circumstances tend to vary.  Also, real initiating events can vary.  But, goals tend to rule out alternatives.

0329 The author then draws upon a recently translated papyrus scroll, attributed to Empedocles.  Empedocles speaks of two opposing forces, one capable of growing things together from the many and one capable of growing things apart.  The former is labeled, “love”, the latter, “strife”.

0330 I wonder, “How does this ancient distinction fit into the schema pictured above?”

Here is my suggestion.

I have a 50:50 chance of being correct.

0331 Strife goes with the force of life, tending towards the many.  Love goes with the influence of circumstances and tends towards a singular goal.

Both are substances and reflect (however distantly) Aristotle’s exemplar: matter [substance] form.

In the above figure, the real initiating event is like an form that conjures matter (information). At the same time, that matter (information) substantiates another form (goal).  This conjured matter (information [love]goal) encompasses the presence that accounts for semiotic agency as a thing.  

0332 What does that imply?

As [strife] acquires information, [love] moves closer to its goal.