Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29966241›Full record

ArticleBiology2018

How Organisms Gained Causal Independence and How It Might Be Quantified.

Keith Douglas Farnsworth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Naturalising Agent Causation.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. The Shared Origins of Embodiment and Development.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Keith Douglas FarnsworthSchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast BT97BL, UK. k.farnsworth@qub.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8025-1114

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two broad features are jointly necessary for autonomous agency: organisational closure and the embodiment of an objective-function providing a ‘goal’: so far only organisms demonstrate both. Organisational closure has been studied (mostly in abstract), especially as cell autopoiesis and the cybernetic principles of autonomy, but the role of an internalised ‘goal’ and how it is instantiated by cell signalling and the functioning of nervous systems has received less attention. Here I add some biological ‘flesh’ to the cybernetic theory and trace the evolutionary development of step-changes in autonomy: (1) homeostasis of organisationally closed systems; (2) perception-action systems; (3) action selection systems; (4) cognitive systems; (5) memory supporting a self-model able to anticipate and evaluate actions and consequences. Each stage is characterised by the number of nested goal-directed control-loops embodied by the organism, summarised as will-nestedness N. Organism tegument, receptor/transducer system, mechanisms of cellular and whole-organism re-programming and organisational integration, all contribute to causal independence.

conclusionorganisms are cybernetic phenomena whose identity is created by the information structure of the highest level of causal closure (maximum N), which has increased through evolution, leading to increased causal independence, which might be quantifiable by ‘Integrated Information Theory’ measures.

Indexed as

action-selectionagencyautonomyautopoiesiscausationcognitionconsciousnessfree willIIT

Identifiers

PMID29966241
PMCPMC6163937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.