Skip to main content

Introduction: Metaphysical and Postmetaphysical Relationships of Humans with Nature and Life

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biocommunication and Natural Genome Editing

Abstract

First, I offer a short overview on the classical occidental philosophy as propounded by the ancient Greeks and the natural philosophies of the last 2000 years until the dawn of the empiricist logic of science in the twentieth century, which wanted to delimitate classical metaphysics from empirical sciences. In contrast to metaphysical concepts which didn’t reflect on the language with which they tried to explain the whole realm of entities empiricist logic of science initiated the end of metaphysical theories by reflecting on the preconditions for foundation and justification of sentences about objects of investigation, i.e. a coherent definition of language in general, which was not the aim of classical metaphysics. Unexpectedly empiricist logic of science in the linguistic turn failed in the physical and mathematical reductionism of language and its use in communication, as will be discussed below in further detail. Nevertheless, such reflection on language and communication also introduced this vocabulary into biology. Manfred Eigen and bioinformatics, later on biolinguistics, used ‘language’ applied linguistic turn thinking to biology coherent to the logic of science and its formalisable aims. This changed significantly with the birth of biosemiotics and biohermeneutics. At the end of this introduction it will be outlined why and how all these approaches reproduced the deficiencies of the logic of science and why the biocommunicative approach avoids their abstractive fallacies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The outline of the three metaphysical world views follows Zeno Bucher (1982). Natur, Materie Kosmos. Eos, St. Ottilien.

  2. 2.

    ‘Speech, communication, reading and comprehension on this level mean binding (=recognising) the complementary molecular building blocks (=language symbols) and linking them into a macromolecular ribbon (=text)’ (307).

  3. 3.

    ‘Each language primarily reflects the characteristic features of the respective, underlying communication machinery’ (313).

  4. 4.

    ‘The relative arrangement of the individual genes, the gene map, as well as the syntax and semantics of this molecular language are (…) largely known today’ (207).

  5. 5.

    ‘Although the active center – the actual three-dimensional word correlate of the protein language – comprises no more characters than the number of verbs in spoken language, the protein molecule must unite a total of between one to five hundred chain elements within itself in order to form such an active center, each one of these molecules represents a particular task and one could describe the enzymes as the ,verbs’ of the molecular language’.(305) ‘(…) All the words of the molecular language are combined to a meaningful text, which can be broken down into sentences’ (305).

  6. 6.

    ‘…sentence structures, if we disregard the specific peculiarities of the individual languages, exhibit parallels that indicate a universal regularity evidently originating in the organization of the human brain’ (301).

  7. 7.

    ‘Nature, through the development of receptors that register environmental signals and through the development of nervous systems that can process and store such signals, has found a more economic way’ (225).

  8. 8.

    ‘A specific operational task of the von Neumann automaton is self-reproduction. The first model from the year 1950 was entirely realistic in its conception: the machine runs back and forth in a huge spare-parts warehouse and compiles the components necessary for its own replication. Most importantly, it also reproduces its own construction plan or blueprint. Its progeny should, after all, also be equipped with the self-reproduction capability. Herein lies the possibility to perfect the von Neumann automaton, an idea that has long been taken up by theoreticists: selective alteration of the program enables continuous improvement and an expanded range of application in the sense of Darwinian evolution’ (216).

  9. 9.

    ‘In principle, the automaton is capable of carrying out any desired calculation’ (217).

  10. 10.

    ‘At any rate one can say that the prerequisite for both great evolutionary processes of nature – the origin of all forms of life and the evolution of the kind – was the existence of a language’ (314).

  11. 11.

    ‘Is what we call ‘obeying a rule’ something that it would be possible for only one man to do, and to do only once in his life? (…) It is not possible that there should have been only one occasion on which someone obeyed a rule. It is not possible that there should have been only one occasion on which a report was made, an order given or understood, and so on – To obey a rule, to make a report, to give an order, to play a game of chess, are customs (uses, institutions). To understand a sentence means to understand a language. To understand a language means to be master of a technique’ (Wittgenstein 1975: 80e).

References

  • Apel KO (1975) Der Denkweg von Charles Sanders Peirce. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Apel KO (1976) Sprachpragmatik und Philosophie. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin JL (1962) Zur Theorie der Sprechakte. Reclam, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri M (2001) The Organic Codes. The Birth of Semantic Biology. PeQuod, Ancona

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri M (ed) (2007) Introduction to Biosemiotics. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucher Z (1982) Natur, Materie, Kosmos. Eos, St. Ottilien

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhler D, Nordenstam T, Skirbeckk G (1986) Die pragmatische Wende. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1931a) Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache. Erkenntnis 2:219–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1931b) Die physikalische Sprache als Universalsprache der Wissenschaft. Erkenntnis 2:432–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1934) Logische Syntax der Sprache. Wien. Schriften zur wissenschaftlichen Weltauffassung

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1939) Foundations of Logic and Mathematics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1956) The methodological character of theoretical concepts. In: Feigl H, Scriven M (eds) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol 1, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 74–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap R (1966) Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Meiner, Hambur

    Google Scholar 

  • Chebanov S (1994) Man as participant to natural creation. Enlogue and ideas of hermeneutics in biology. Rivista di Biologia 87:39–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N (1964) Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. The Hague, Mouton, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N (2004) Biolinguistics and the Human Capacity. Delivered at MTA, Budapest, May 17, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich W (1978) Theorien der Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Eigen M, Winkler R (1975) Das Spiel. Naturgesetze steuern den Zufall. Pieper, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein A, Infeld L (1950) Die Evolution der Physik. Zsolnay, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Florkin M (1974) Concepts of molecular biosemiotics and of molecular evolution. In: Florkin M, Stotz EH (eds) Comparative Biochemistry. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Gödel K (1931) Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38:173–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1987) The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Beacon Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1994) Actions, speech acts, linguistically mediated interactions and the lifeworld. Philosophical Problems Today 1:45–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisenberg W (1973) Physik und Philosophie. Ullstein, Frankfurt, Berlin/Wien

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmeyer J (1996) Signs of Meaning in the Universe. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ji S (1997) Isomorphism between cell and human languages: molecular biological, bioinformatic and linguistic implications. Biosystems 44:17–39

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ji S (1999) The linguistics of DNA: words, sentences, grammar, phonetics and semantics. Ann NY Acad Sci 870:411–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T (1967) Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos I, Musgrave A (1974) (eds) Kritik und Erkenntnisfortschritt.Vieweg, Braunschweig

    Google Scholar 

  • Markos A (2002) Readers of the Book of Life. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris C (1946) Signs, Language, and Behavior. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Neurath O (1932) Protokollsätze. Erkenntnis 3:204–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peukert H (1978) Wissenschaftstheorie, Handlungstheorie, Fundamentale Theologie. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Popov O, Degal DM, Trifonov EN (1996) Linguistic complexity of protein sequences as compared to texts of human languages. Biosystems 38:65–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Russel B (1940) An inquiry into Meaning and Truth. Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle JR (1977) Sprechakte. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Searls DB (2002) The language of genes. Nature 420:211–217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok T (1968) Animal Communication. Indiany University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok T, Umiker-Sebeok J (1992) Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web 1991. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon CE, Weaver W (1949) The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller W (1975) Hauptströmungen der Gegenwartsphilosophie. Bd 2. Alfred Kröner Verlag, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarski A (1966) Einführung in die mathematische Logik, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Tembrock G (1975) Biokommunikation. Vieweg, Braunschweig

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing A (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59:433–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uexküll T (1980) Jakob von Uexküll. Kompositionslehre der Natur. Ullstein, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (1975) Philosophische Untersuchungen. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Witzany G (1993) Natur der Sprache – Sprache der Natur. Sprachpragmatische Philosophie der Biologie. Königshausen und Neumann, Würzburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Witzany G (2000) Life: The Communicative Structure. Libri Books on Demand, Norderstedt

    Google Scholar 

  • Witzany G (2007) The Logos of the Bios 2. Bio-Communication. Umweb, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang HY (2006) The Evolution of genomes and language. EMBO Rep 7:748–749

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Capelle W (1968) Die Vorsokratiker. Kröner, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Krings H (1982) Kann man die Natur verstehen? In: Kuhlmann W, Böhler D (eds) Kommunikation und Reflexion. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (1959) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuchterl K (1977) Methoden der Gegenwartsphilosophe. Paul Haupt Verlag, Bern/Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Witzany, G. (2010). Introduction: Metaphysical and Postmetaphysical Relationships of Humans with Nature and Life. In: Biocommunication and Natural Genome Editing. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3319-2_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics