Organic Codes: A Unifying Concept to Life?

Although increasing knowledge about biological systems has advanced exponentially in recent decades, it is surprising to realize that the very definition of Life keeps presenting theoretical challenges. Even if several lines of reasoning seek to identify the essence of life phenomenon, most of these thoughts contain fundamental problem in their basic conceptual structure. Most concepts fail to identify necessary and sufficient features to define life. Here, we analyzed the main conceptual framework regarding theoretical aspects supporting life concepts, such as (i) the physical, (ii) the cellular and (iii) the molecular approaches. Based on ontological analysis, we propose that Life should not be positioned under the ontological category of Matter. Yet, life should be better understood under the top-level ontology of “Process”. Exercising an epistemological approach, we propose that the essential characteristic pervading each and every living being is the presence of organic codes. Therefore, we explore theories in biosemiotics in order to propose a clear concept of life as a macrocode composed by multiple inter-related coding layers. Therefore, we suggest a clear distinction between the concept of life and living beings, a distinction that is not evident in theoretical terms. From the proposed concept, we suggest that the evolutionary process is a fundamental characteristic for life’s maintenance but not to its definition. The current proposition opens a fertile field of debate in astrobiology, biosemiotics and robotics.

Semiosis and Emergence

Among the different orientations in biosemiotics, those moved by Peircean ideas tend to agree that the organization of non-living parts into organisms cannot be made intelligible without supplementing the traditional resources of the physical sciences with novel kinds of causation. This is particularly true with regard toConsideration of special forms of causation and explanation is important for assessing the place of biosemiotics within biology. In my view the promise of biosemiotics far exceeds its role as a biological sub-discipline governing the semiotic aspects of living processes (cellular signaling, organic codes, etc.). Beyond this, biosemiotic research should include two other important endeavors: first, if semiosis is essential to the constitution of the objects of biological science, biosemiotic ideas must have foundational and integrative roles comparable to those of evolutionary conceptions; and second, these roles should promote a wholesale redefinition of the place of biology within the sciences.This examination seeks to clarify the relations between semiosis and ordinary physical causation. It also proposes a new perspective on the evolutionary nature of emergence by taking into account the increasing importance of evolutionary explanations in some branches of contemporary physics.

A new theory of development: the generation of complexity in ontogenesis

Today there is a very wide consensus on the idea that embryonic development is the result of a genetic programme and of epigenetic processes. Many models have been proposed in this theoretical framework to account for the various aspects of development, and virtually all of them have one thing in common: they do not acknowledge the presence of organic codes (codes between organic molecules) in ontogenesis. Here it is argued instead that embryonic development is a convergent increase in complexity that necessarily requires organic codes and organic memories, and a few examples of such codes are described. This is the code theory of development , a theory that was originally inspired by an algorithm that is capable of reconstructing structures from incomplete information , an algorithm that here is briefly summarized because it makes it intuitively appealing how a convergent increase in complexity can be achieved. The main thesis of the new theory is that the presence of organic codes in ontogenesis is not only a theoretical necessity but, first and foremost, an idea that can be tested and that has already been found to be in agreement with the evidence.