Series Overview
This series extends the reinterpretation of quantum potential — as readiness structured by inclination and ability — into the domain of developmental biology. By reframing embryogenesis in terms of relational readiness rather than mechanism or teleology, we uncover a unified conceptual architecture across epigenetics, cell differentiation, and morphogenesis.
Each post elaborates one layer of the developmental process as a structured field of readiness, shaped by the orthogonal axes of inclination and ability, and articulated through individuation.
Introduction
Developmental biology is saturated with metaphors of information, instruction, programme, and control. These metaphors are convenient, but they distort the structure of the phenomenon. They smuggle in a representational ontology — as though the embryo "contains" a blueprint for itself, waiting to unfold. In the quantum series, we cut directly against this representational mode by reframing potential not as a latent property but as readiness: a structured horizon of possible actualisations. That lens clarified the roles that inclination and ability play in shaping the readiness of a system.
Embryogenesis offers an even richer domain in which to apply this distinction, because development is nothing but the continual re‑cutting of potentials under dynamically shifting constraints. But unlike quantum systems, biological systems introduce an additional dimension: individuation. Cells do not simply "bear" the genome; they individuate it. Each cell enacts a perspectival version of the organism’s generative potential.
From Quantum Potential to Developmental Readiness
In the quantum case, we separated two axes of readiness:
-
Ability: the aperture of possible outcomes — the full space of potential actualisations.
-
Inclination: the skew or bias within that aperture — which actualisations are more readily available.
This distinction dissolved several longstanding confusions: potential is not instruction, not hidden property, not pre‑existing outcome. It is structured readiness, modulated by inclination and bounded by ability.
Embryogenesis invites the same analytic move. Instead of treating development as execution of a programme or emergence from chaos, we treat it as the organism’s progressive actualisation of its structured readiness, reshaped at each moment by the interplay of ability and inclination.
The Biological Twist: Individuation
What biology adds is perspectival partitioning. An embryo is not a homogeneous field of potential; it is a collective whose potential is distributed across locally individuated perspectives. Each cell construes the organism’s developmental theory from its own position within the collective.
Thus, developmental readiness has three orthogonal dimensions:
-
Ability — the organism‑scale horizon of developmental possibility.
-
Inclination — local biases that shape which possibilities are readily actualisable.
-
Individuation — the perspectival articulation of the collective potential into local readiness.
This triadic frame lets us clarify the distinct roles these forces play in embryogenesis.
Why Embryogenesis Needs This Ontology
Mainstream developmental biology uses a patchwork of concepts (gene regulation, epigenetic programmes, morphogen gradients, mechanical constraints), but lacks a unifying ontology for potentiality. Attempts to provide one often fall back on representational tropes — the genome as code, development as execution.
A readiness-based account avoids these traps. It allows us to understand development without positing instructions or goals:
-
No teleology: development is not directed toward a pre‑specified form.
-
No genetic determinism: genes constrain ability, but cannot prescribe actualisation.
-
No naive emergence: form does not arise from nothing; it arises from structured readiness.
Embryogenesis becomes the ongoing negotiation of readiness across a perspectivally distributed system.
What This Series Will Do
Each subsequent post will examine a layer of embryogenesis through the readiness framework:
-
Post 2: Ability — genomic and regulatory architectures as developmental aperture.
-
Post 3: Inclination — epigenetic and local biases.
-
Post 4: Individuation — cells as perspectival instantiations.
-
Post 5: Differentiation — narrowing ability, sharpening inclination.
-
Post 6: Morphogenesis — readiness distributed across tissue.
-
Post 7: System as theory — organism as the ongoing recutting of potential.
-
Post 8: Implications for how we think about development and biology.
This first post opens the conceptual space. The rest of the series develops it, step by step.
No comments:
Post a Comment