Machines all the way up and cognition all the way down: Updating the machine metaphor in biology

IF 6.7 2区 生物学 Q1 CELL BIOLOGY
Michael Levin , Richard Watson
{"title":"Machines all the way up and cognition all the way down: Updating the machine metaphor in biology","authors":"Michael Levin ,&nbsp;Richard Watson","doi":"10.1016/j.semcdb.2026.103668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cell and developmental biology (CDB) offer numerous remarkable examples of collective adaptive plasticity, as cells coordinate to implement large-scale form and function. Despite the gaps in understanding, it is often assumed that the machine metaphor (dominating molecular and cell biology) will explain all of the adaptive complexity involved, from molecules up. In the case of goal-driven intentional agents, however, living tissues have cognitive properties that seem different from machines. So what is the relationship between cognition and CDB, and can the machine metaphor accommodate it? The relationship between ‘ordinary’ machine-like matter and minded agents is often treated naively, as if: a) a complexity threshold exists above which memory, learning, problem solving and intelligence are possible, but below which there is no such thing, b) this putative threshold lies far outside the remit of day-to-day CDB, and c) the identification of mechanisms (e.g. cell signalling, morphogens and pathways) confirms the absence of cognition, as if mechanism and ‘real cognition’ were mutually exclusive. In this paper, we argue that, in fact, CDB is the only discipline that can possibly naturalise the cognition of biological matter avoiding such exceptionalist and dualist positions, and that doing so requires a multiscale approach that also offers interdisciplinary insight in the other direction. Specifically, characterizing a continuum of cognitive competencies (without a naïve threshold) and identifying its mechanisms (without explaining it away) illuminates the gaps in our understanding of CDB’s extraordinary collective adaptive plasticity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21735,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in cell & developmental biology","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 103668"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in cell & developmental biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084952126000029","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cell and developmental biology (CDB) offer numerous remarkable examples of collective adaptive plasticity, as cells coordinate to implement large-scale form and function. Despite the gaps in understanding, it is often assumed that the machine metaphor (dominating molecular and cell biology) will explain all of the adaptive complexity involved, from molecules up. In the case of goal-driven intentional agents, however, living tissues have cognitive properties that seem different from machines. So what is the relationship between cognition and CDB, and can the machine metaphor accommodate it? The relationship between ‘ordinary’ machine-like matter and minded agents is often treated naively, as if: a) a complexity threshold exists above which memory, learning, problem solving and intelligence are possible, but below which there is no such thing, b) this putative threshold lies far outside the remit of day-to-day CDB, and c) the identification of mechanisms (e.g. cell signalling, morphogens and pathways) confirms the absence of cognition, as if mechanism and ‘real cognition’ were mutually exclusive. In this paper, we argue that, in fact, CDB is the only discipline that can possibly naturalise the cognition of biological matter avoiding such exceptionalist and dualist positions, and that doing so requires a multiscale approach that also offers interdisciplinary insight in the other direction. Specifically, characterizing a continuum of cognitive competencies (without a naïve threshold) and identifying its mechanisms (without explaining it away) illuminates the gaps in our understanding of CDB’s extraordinary collective adaptive plasticity.
机器一路向上,认知一路向下:更新生物学中的机器隐喻。
细胞和发育生物学(CDB)提供了许多集体适应可塑性的显著例子,因为细胞协调实现大规模的形式和功能。尽管在理解上存在差距,但人们通常认为机器隐喻(主导分子和细胞生物学)将解释所有涉及的适应性复杂性,从分子开始。然而,在目标驱动的有意代理的情况下,活体组织具有与机器不同的认知特性。那么认知和CDB之间的关系是什么,机器隐喻能适应这种关系吗?“普通的”类似机器的物质和有意识的代理人之间的关系常常被天真地对待,好像:a)存在一个复杂性阈值,超过这个阈值,记忆、学习、解决问题和智力就有可能存在,但低于这个阈值,就没有这样的东西了;b)这个假定的阈值远远超出了日常CDB的范围;c)对机制(例如细胞信号传导、形态因子和途径)的识别证实了认知的缺失,就好像机制和“真正的认知”是相互排斥的。在本文中,我们认为,事实上,CDB是唯一可能将生物物质的认知自然化的学科,避免了这种例外论和二元论的立场,这样做需要一种多尺度的方法,也提供了另一个方向的跨学科洞察力。具体来说,描述认知能力的连续体(没有naïve阈值)和确定其机制(没有解释它)阐明了我们对CDB非凡的集体适应可塑性的理解中的差距。
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
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
1.40%
发文量
310
审稿时长
9.1 weeks
期刊介绍: Seminars in Cell and Developmental Biology is a review journal dedicated to keeping scientists informed of developments in the field of molecular cell and developmental biology, on a topic by topic basis. Each issue is thematic in approach, devoted to an important topic of interest to cell and developmental biologists, focusing on the latest advances and their specific implications. The aim of each issue is to provide a coordinated, readable, and lively review of a selected area, published rapidly to ensure currency.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书