We tend to think of agency in terms of choice.
An agent has alternatives. It considers them, selects one, and acts.
This seems so natural that we rarely ask whether choice might be a late development in the history of agency rather than its beginning.
But an organism can distinguish among possibilities without choosing between them.
A bacterium moving toward a nutrient does not deliberate.
A root growing toward water does not compare alternatives.
A withdrawing hand does not need to formulate a decision before it moves.
Yet something is happening that resembles selection.
The organism's organisation makes some possibilities more likely to be pursued than others.
This gives us a useful distinction:
selection does not require choice.
Natural selection itself provides the obvious example. A population changes because some variants leave more descendants than others. Nothing in this process needs to select consciously.
But the same distinction appears within organisms.
A bacterium encounters a gradient and changes its movement.
A plant encounters unequal conditions and changes its growth.
An animal encounters danger and changes its behaviour.
In each case, the system's organisation discriminates among possibilities.
The important thing is not that one possibility is consciously preferred.
It is that different possibilities have different consequences within the organisation of the system.
This takes us back to mattering.
If a possibility matters, the system is not indifferent to its realisation. Its organisation is biased toward some states and away from others.
That bias can be entirely physical or biological.
It can become behavioural.
It does not yet need to become psychological.
This helps us separate three things that are often collapsed into the single word choice.
Selection is differentiation among possible outcomes.
Action is organised activity that contributes to bringing about an outcome.
Choice is a much more elaborate form of selection in which alternatives can themselves become objects of deliberation.
The first may be ancient.
The second is older still.
The third is comparatively recent.
Once we make this distinction, agency no longer appears suddenly with consciousness.
It can be understood as a historical accumulation of capacities.
An organism first becomes organised around maintaining itself.
It then develops ways of altering its circumstances.
Those activities modify its future possibilities.
Eventually, some organisms acquire nervous systems capable of integrating multiple sources of information, retaining traces of previous encounters and modifying behaviour accordingly.
Selection becomes flexible.
Action becomes adaptive.
And eventually, in some organisms, alternatives can become represented as alternatives.
Now something genuinely new appears.
The organism can, in a meaningful sense, choose.
But even here, choice does not escape the older structure.
The person who chooses between two paths is still operating within a field of possibilities shaped by bodily needs, previous experience, surroundings, social relations and anticipated consequences.
Conscious choice is not an escape from biological agency.
It is an elaboration of it.
This also changes how we should think about deliberation.
To deliberate is not simply to possess more possibilities.
It is to transform possibilities into something that can themselves be related to.
The organism can, in effect, pause within the action loop.
Instead of immediately moving from situation to response, it can maintain several possible courses of action and assess their anticipated consequences.
That is a remarkable achievement.
But it remains an achievement within the much older world of mattering and possibility.
Before there were choices, there were organisms for which outcomes mattered.
Before there were organisms that could compare alternatives, there were organisms whose organisation differentiated among possible futures.
Before there was deliberation, there was directed activity.
And before directed activity, there was simply the persistence of organisation under conditions in which some changes supported continuation and others did not.
The history of agency therefore does not begin with the moment when something first said, implicitly or explicitly, I choose this.
It begins much further back.
Perhaps the deepest mistake is to ask:
When did matter acquire the ability to choose?
The better question is:
How did systems become capable of progressively richer ways of selecting and transforming their possible futures?
Choice is one answer to that question.
It is not the first.
No comments:
Post a Comment