The Epistemology of Biomimetics: The Role of Models and of Morphogenetic Principles

Abstract

Form follows function, but it does not follow from function. Form is not derivable from the latter. To realize a desired technical function, a form must first be found that is able to realize it at all. Secondly, the question arises as to whether an envisaged form realizes the function in an appropriate way. Functions are multiply realizable—various different forms can bear the very same function. One needs to find a form of a technical artifact that realizes an envisaged function sufficiently efficient, robust, or whatever criteria might be imposed. This paper scrutinizes biomimetics as one way to find a good solution to the realization problem. Drawing on an approach from the philosophy of simulations, it reconstructs the biomimetic relation as being mediated by a theoretical model. It is shown that the robustness of the functioning system is usually reached in different ways in biological and in technological systems, which explains differences in morphogenetic mechanisms or principles found in these fields. This reconstruction helps to understand problems with robustness in synthetic biology that occur when technical design principles are implemented in a biological system. The mimetic relation between the biological and the technical realm is found to be asymmetric.

Biomimetic Epistemology

“…Thus far, the epistemological issues raised by biomimetics and related approaches have received relatively little attention (Drack and Jansen 2022). Imitating or drawing inspiration from nature has been much discussed, including in the philosophical literature (e.g., Bensaude-Vincent 2011;Blok and Gremmen 2016;Gerola et al 2023;Mathews 2011;Tamborini 2023), but the specifically epistemological issue of learning from nature, that is, in some sense acquiring knowledge from nature, has received only occasional philosophical attention (e.g., Krohs 2021;Dicks 2023). As for scientific publications, this epistemological dimension is often present in the titles of articlesfor example, "Biomimetics: Lessons from Nature-an Overview" (Bhushan 2009), "Chemists and the School of Nature" (Bensaude- Vincent et al 2002), "Learning from Nature-Biomimicry Innovation to Support Infrastructure Sustainability and Resilience" (Hayes et al 2020)-but without being explicitly analyzed in the articles themselves.…”

“…The reason this distinction is relevant in that it brings our attention to a possible distinction between epistemology of biomimetics (a field) and biomimetic epistemology (an approach). The work of Krohs (2021) is an example of the former. It takes a specific domain of research-biomimetics-and then seeks to analyze some of its epistemological aspects.…”