In the early 1970s, Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela introduced the concept of autopoiesis. Autopoiesis describes the self-producing and self-maintaining nature of living systems. According to this concept, living organisms are autonomous, operationally closed systems that regenerate and sustain themselves through internal processes. They maintain their boundaries and structures through interactions with their environment, but these interactions do not determine their internal operations. Autopoiesis emphasizes the circular organization of biological systems, where components are produced by the system and, in turn, contribute to its continuous self-production. This idea has significant implications in biology, cognitive science, and systems theory.

Biologically, this can be understood in terms of a cell that maintains itself through continuous production and repair of its components. The cell membrane, which serves as a boundary, is synthesized and maintained by the cell’s own metabolic activities. Inside the cell, various organelles and structures, such as the nucleus, mitochondria, and ribosomes, are produced and maintained through the cell’s machinery.

The cell’s metabolic network is a self-sustaining system. Nutrients and energy are taken from the environment, processed through metabolic pathways, and used to synthesize proteins, nucleic acids, lipids, and carbohydrates. These molecules are essential for the cell’s structure, function, and reproduction. For instance, DNA replication, transcription, and translation processes are carried out by the cell’s enzymes and ribosomes, ensuring the production of proteins necessary for cellular function and structure.

The cell also engages in homeostatic regulation, adjusting its internal environment to maintain stability despite external fluctuations. This includes regulating ion concentrations, pH levels, and the synthesis and degradation of biomolecules.

Beyond biology, the concept of autopoiesis has philosophical implications, offering a critique of traditional ontology.

Ontology, a branch of philosophy, deals with the study of being, existence, and the nature of reality. It explores the fundamental categories and relationships of what exists, aiming to determine the essential properties and structures of entities constituting reality. Although ontology may seem abstract, the term is increasingly used in computer systems and design. Here, ontology refers to a structured framework for organizing information and knowledge within a specific domain. It involves creating a formal representation of entities, concepts, and relationships within a particular area of interest. Thus, ontology in computer systems and design represents a practical application of philosophical principles to create structured, interoperable, and intelligent information systems.

Questions about existence, identity, societal aspects, and the objects around us are fundamental aspects of human curiosity and the quest for understanding. Questions such as “What is the nature of reality?” “What defines our existence?” and “How do we relate to the world around us?” are central to philosophical ontology but also resonate on a personal level.

Modern European thought and culture premise ontology on essentialism. Essentialism holds that entities have a set of essential attributes defining their identity and function. According to this view, objects and beings possess inherent properties determining their nature and behavior, independent of external influences. Essentialism provides a framework for understanding the world in a structured and predictable manner, enabling the classification and study of entities based on their inherent characteristics. This view supports the notion that the essence of things can be discovered through observation and analysis, leading to objective knowledge about the nature of reality.

For example, think about how we classify animals. Essentialism would say that a dog is a dog because it has essential features like barking, having fur, and being loyal. These features define what it means to be a dog, regardless of other factors. This belief helps us understand and organize the world by assuming that things have fixed properties that can be observed and studied to know their true nature.

Essentialism influences how we understand and define personal identity. If we believe that individuals have a set of essential characteristics defining who they are, it shapes our perceptions of self and others. This belief affects how we categorize and interact with people based on perceived inherent traits, such as personality, abilities, and behaviours.

Essentialism puts human rationality at the centre of how we think about the world. By assuming that entities have fixed, essential characteristics, it supports the idea that we can use reason and logic to understand and categorize everything around us. This belief reinforces the notion that, through careful observation and analysis, we can uncover the true nature of things and gain reliable knowledge.

In practical terms, this means that human reasoning is seen as a powerful tool for making sense of the world. For example, scientists use the essentialist approach to classify species, diagnose diseases, or develop new technologies. By focusing on inherent properties and rational analysis, they can make predictions, solve problems, and advance our understanding of the natural and social worlds.

Essentialism was a unique development in European society, providing a solution to the problems posed by the existing hierarchies of church, monarchy, and feudal society. Essentialism offers a systematic and rational approach to understanding the world, independent of traditional hierarchies.

Essentialist ontology is the basis for what is termed the Anthropocene, a proposed geological epoch marking the significant impact of human activity on Earth’s geology and ecosystems. Essentialism underpins capitalism and colonialism, but it also forms the basis on which human rights and a liberal social order have emerged. The belief in fixed, intrinsic properties allowed for the categorization of labour, resources, and products, facilitating the growth of market economies. Essentialist thinking justified colonialism by categorizing and ranking people based on perceived inherent traits, such as race or ethnicity.

On the other hand, essentialism provides a foundation for human rights by asserting that all individuals possess inherent dignity and worth. This idea is central to the notion that every person has fundamental rights that must be recognized and protected. Essentialism supports the development of a liberal social order emphasizing personal liberty, autonomy, and equality before the law.

Yet, essentialism and its consequences for modern society, including notions of liberty, scientific truth, and the foundational aspects of self and identity, are replete with contradictions. Essentialism tends to oversimplify the complexity of identities and experiences by reducing them to fixed categories. This reductionism fails to account for the dynamic and fluid nature of identity, which can change over time and in different contexts. Essentialism’s emphasis on inherent characteristics can reinforce stereotypes and perpetuate social inequalities. In science, advances in genetics and epigenetics show that biological traits are influenced by a complex interplay of genetic and environmental factors. This undermines the essentialist notion of fixed biological essences and supports a more nuanced understanding of living systems.

Quantum mechanics reveals the indeterminate and probabilistic nature of physical reality, challenging the essentialist idea of fixed properties. Gödel’s incompleteness theorems challenge essentialist notions of absolute knowledge and truth, showing that no system can be both complete and consistent. These critiques reveal the limitations of essentialism.

Postmodernist and poststructuralist thinkers argue that reality and identity are constructed through language, culture, and power relations. They emphasize the contingent and situated nature of knowledge and identity, rejecting universal, timeless essences. Instead, identities are performed and negotiated within specific social contexts, highlighting the role of power in shaping our understanding of the world.

Alternative frameworks emphasize relationality and process over fixed essences. For instance, the concept of becoming, as articulated by philosophers like Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, focuses on the continuous process of transformation and the interconnectedness of all entities.

This is where the idea of autopoiesis, as posited by Maturana and Varela, offers a critique of essentialism. German sociologist Niklas Luhmann and British mathematician George Spencer Brown have used autopoiesis to critique essentialism. This counter-essentialism starts from an ontological paradox, where the identity of an entity is a difference or distinction but remains part of its environment.

Thinkers such as Leibniz and Spinoza provide insights into these perspectives. Leibniz’s concept of monads emphasizes that these fundamental units of reality are self-sufficient and self-determining, resonating with the idea of autopoiesis. Similarly, Spinoza’s philosophy presents nature as a single substance with infinite attributes, where everything is interconnected and self-sustaining through the principle of conatus.

In Chinese philosophy, Daoism and Confucianism reflect autopoietic principles. Daoism, particularly as articulated by Laozi in the Dao De Jing, emphasizes the self-organizing and self-sustaining nature of the Dao, which underlies and animates all things. Zhuangzi illustrates the fluid and interconnected nature of reality, where distinctions between self and other are seen as relative and interdependent. In Confucianism, the concept of self-cultivation and the interconnectedness of individuals within the social and cosmic order also reflect autopoietic principles.

Embracing a non-essentialist autopoietic ontology can lead to a more dynamic, inclusive, and sustainable approach to understanding and interacting with the world. Recognizing identity as fluid and context-dependent can foster a more inclusive understanding of personal and social identities, challenging rigid categories and stereotypes. In science, a non-essentialist view supports the idea that knowledge is provisional and context-dependent, encouraging interdisciplinary research and a more holistic understanding of complex phenomena.

Adopting a relational and process-oriented view can lead to more adaptable and responsive social and political systems. Understanding ecosystems and environmental systems as autopoietic entities highlights the importance of maintaining their self-sustaining processes, leading to more sustainable practices. In technology, a non-essentialist ontology supports the development of adaptive, intelligent systems that can evolve and respond to changing environments.

Overall, embracing a non-essentialist autopoietic ontology can lead to a more nuanced and interconnected view of reality, challenging traditional notions of fixed identities and deterministic knowledge.