Introduction
Having framed the organism as a system-of-theory in Post 7, we can now step back and consider the broader conceptual implications. A readiness-based ontology transforms not only how we interpret embryogenesis, differentiation, and morphogenesis, but also how we think about biology itself.
This post explores three central implications: for developmental biology, for evolutionary theory, and for our conceptualisation of life.
1. Development as Negotiation, Not Execution
Traditional biology often frames development as the execution of genetic programs. This representational view assumes:
-
Genes are instructions that dictate outcomes.
-
Development is linear and predetermined.
-
Cellular and tissue behaviours are subordinate to a blueprint.
The readiness framework overturns these assumptions:
-
Ability defines horizons, not instructions.
-
Inclination biases, but does not force, trajectories.
-
Individuation provides the perspectival locus, allowing distributed coherence.
Development is therefore a dynamic negotiation of potential, with actualisations emerging from relational interplay, not deterministic scripts. This perspective better accounts for robustness, plasticity, and adaptability observed across species.
2. Evolution as Recutting of Potential
A system-of-theory perspective also reframes evolutionary thinking:
-
Genetic variation can be seen as altering the distributed ability horizon rather than encoding fixed outcomes.
-
Epigenetic modifications shift inclinations, biasing which variations are more likely to be expressed.
-
Selection operates not on pre-determined outcomes but on the success of perspectival enactments of readiness in specific ecological contexts.
Thus, evolution can be interpreted as a progressive tuning of the system-of-theory, with species trajectories emerging from distributed, relational, and perspectival dynamics, rather than a series of discrete mutations with fixed effects.
3. Rethinking Life, Individuality, and Agency
Readiness-based ontology reshapes our conceptualisation of life itself:
-
Individuals are not fixed entities but perspectival enactments of a relational system.
-
Agency is distributed: cells, tissues, and organs participate in ongoing negotiation of readiness.
-
Phenotypes are emergent outcomes of dynamic interplay, not predetermined endpoints.
This perspective bridges scales — molecular, cellular, tissue, organismal — and situates development, behaviour, and adaptation within a continuous, relational process.
4. Practical Implications for Biology
Adopting a readiness-based, relational framework could influence research and practice:
-
Developmental biology: experiments can focus on perturbation of readiness fields rather than isolated gene functions.
-
Regenerative medicine: understanding ability and inclination distributions could guide tissue engineering and stem cell therapies.
-
Systems biology: emphasises perspectival, distributed modelling over deterministic circuit diagrams.
The framework encourages biologists to think relationally, dynamically, and perspectivally, aligning conceptual tools with observed biological complexity.
Conclusion
By interpreting developmental potential as structured readiness, and organisms as systems enacting relational theories of their own potential, we gain a coherent, unified framework for understanding biology.
-
Post-embryonic life, differentiation, and morphogenesis are not scripts executed but negotiated recuttings of potential.
-
Evolutionary and ecological dynamics are emergent, distributed, and relational, not linear or pre-determined.
-
Life is a continuous interplay of ability, inclination, and individuation, enacted across multiple scales.
This completes the series. The readiness framework offers a new lens — one that preserves complexity, relationality, and perspectival nuance — for thinking about development, evolution, and the very nature of living systems.
No comments:
Post a Comment