I Act Therefore I Live? Autopoiesis, Sensorimotor Autonomy, and Extended Agency

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY
Diametros Pub Date : 2024-05-11 DOI:10.33392/diam.1847
Barbara Tomczyk
{"title":"I Act Therefore I Live? Autopoiesis, Sensorimotor Autonomy, and Extended Agency","authors":"Barbara Tomczyk","doi":"10.33392/diam.1847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to determine whether extended human-machine cognitive systems and group systems can be regarded as autonomous agents. For this purpose, I compare two notions of agency: one developed within analytical philosophy of action and based on the concept of intention, and the other introduced by enactivists via the concepts of autopoiesis and sensorimotor autonomy. I argue that only the latter approach can be used to demonstrate autonomous agency in respect of systems that are not humans as such, though they contain humans as their elements. After introducing Maturana and Varela’s conception of minimal autonomy as a kind of generalization of autopoiesis, I present the three conditions of agency put forward by Barandiaran, Di Paolo and Rohde, noting that they do not invoke the property of being alive as necessary in that respect. I argue that both extended and group systems can satisfy these conditions of agency, even though they are not alive as such. The fulfillment of these conditions, however, is ensured by the autopoietic nature of the living components of these systems. That being said, an autonomous system itself does not need to be alive in the biological sense. Sensorimotor, adaptive agency could emerge out of other processes than those responsible for biological life. The article concludes with a suggestion that this is exactly what will happen if an autonomous system is ever artificially created. It would be functionally indistinguishable from a living organism, though not alive in a biological sense.","PeriodicalId":42290,"journal":{"name":"Diametros","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diametros","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1847","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper aims to determine whether extended human-machine cognitive systems and group systems can be regarded as autonomous agents. For this purpose, I compare two notions of agency: one developed within analytical philosophy of action and based on the concept of intention, and the other introduced by enactivists via the concepts of autopoiesis and sensorimotor autonomy. I argue that only the latter approach can be used to demonstrate autonomous agency in respect of systems that are not humans as such, though they contain humans as their elements. After introducing Maturana and Varela’s conception of minimal autonomy as a kind of generalization of autopoiesis, I present the three conditions of agency put forward by Barandiaran, Di Paolo and Rohde, noting that they do not invoke the property of being alive as necessary in that respect. I argue that both extended and group systems can satisfy these conditions of agency, even though they are not alive as such. The fulfillment of these conditions, however, is ensured by the autopoietic nature of the living components of these systems. That being said, an autonomous system itself does not need to be alive in the biological sense. Sensorimotor, adaptive agency could emerge out of other processes than those responsible for biological life. The article concludes with a suggestion that this is exactly what will happen if an autonomous system is ever artificially created. It would be functionally indistinguishable from a living organism, though not alive in a biological sense.
我行故我在?自生、感官运动自主和延伸代理
本文旨在确定扩展的人机认知系统和群体系统是否可被视为自主代理。为此,我比较了两种代理概念:一种是在分析行动哲学中发展起来的、以意图概念为基础的代理概念,另一种是由制定论者通过自生和感觉运动自主概念引入的代理概念。我认为,只有后一种方法可以用来证明非人类系统的自主能动性,尽管这些系统包含人类这个要素。在介绍了马图拉纳和瓦雷拉的最低限度自主性概念作为自组织的一种概括之后,我介绍了巴兰迪亚兰、迪保罗和罗德提出的三个代理条件,并指出他们在这方面并没有援引 "活着 "这一属性作为必要条件。我认为,扩展系统和群体系统都可以满足这些代理条件,即使它们本身并不是有生命的。然而,这些条件的满足是由这些系统的生命组成部分的自生性质所保证的。尽管如此,自主系统本身并不需要具有生物学意义上的生命。感知运动和自适应机构可以从其他过程中产生,而不是从那些负责生物生命的过程中产生。文章最后提出,如果人工制造出自主系统,就会出现这种情况。它将在功能上与生物有机体无异,尽管不是生物意义上的生命。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diametros
Diametros PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信