From Autocatalysis to Market Relations: A Systems Approach to the Material Flows Needed by Living Systems

Abstract

The paper analyses how the control of material flows needed by living systems determines evolutionary patterns. A simplification of Miller's living systems theory, distinguishing only three functional units, (i) production systems, (ii) storage, and (iii) controller structures, is used to investigate the importance of these units on various evolutionary stages. In the internal evolution of biological systems, storage is crucial to control the availability of intermediate products of autocatalytic cycles. This is the base for continuous production and maintenance of controller structures (brains). In the external, technical evolution storage enables building external production systems and controller structures (like computers). In the dyadic coevolution of living systems, control of material flows and/or storage enable power positions in interaction patterns ranging from competition for scarce resources, via market relations, to egalitarian cooperation. Such power positions open access to different markets and exclusive evolutionary options. Economic theory widely ignores that. Figure 2 The exemplary autocatalytic cycle of Figure 1b. shown as the 'real' process in time Figure 1 Exemplary illustrations of (a) a catalytic reaction cycle (left), and (b) an autocatalytic reaction cycle (right) Syst. ResSo we can illustrate in an unequivocal system approach the decisive steps of the evolution of RESEARCH PAPER Syst. Res

Forms of Cooperation

“…Here, ‘power’ is used to diminish the options of weaker parties, particularly by control of access to needed resources (Nechansky, ). And the continuous availability and application of differences in ‘power’ is the prerequisite for maintaining these unequal forms of cooperation.…”

“…having physical strength, controlling resources like money, owning a company, having a political, or military status function). The power position allows A either alone or with the support of third parties to enforce certain behavior of others (Nechansky, ).…”

From Complexity Reduction to Moral Character: A Deweyian Reading of Luhmann's Social Systems Theory

“…As John Maurice Clark argued in the seminal (Clark, ) article on the economic responsibility, the progress of science dramatically increases the social and economic interdependence that fails to be reflected in the moral justifications of laissez‐faire and consequently calls for the exercise of social responsibility directed at value devolution rather than value capture (cf. Agafonow, ; Nechansky, ). As a result, the economic and social types of responsibility turn out to be complementary (cf.…”