I agree with Villalobos and Razeto-Barry’s main argument that living beings are autopoietic bodies. I suggest, however, that if we apply this definition of life to a consideration of living beings as dissipative systems, we find opportunities for further refinement. I propose that living bodies are autopoietic bodies that maintain themselves by using their boundaries to control their constituent processes of dissipative adaptation.

Key words: dissipative systems, autopoiesis, living bodies.

The aim of this paper is to characterize a type of causality relevant to study the closure of complex systems that we call formal causation. By this term we understand the existence of a new (not materially inherent) causal relation among constituents, generated through an autonomous process of closure. Once a certain level of organization is reached, material systems can generate internal constraints that, through recursive processes, construct their own identity. We study two different forms of closure: closure in dissipative systems and closure in template self-replication. Finally, these two forms merge and bring forth a new one: informational closure, We show how complex forms of organization are based on informational closure, which is an explicit, recorded type of formal causation allowing a functional articulation between individual organizations and larger, collective and historical (meta)organizations.

This paper argues that biological organisation can be legitimately conceived of as an intrinsically teleological causal regime. The core of the argument consists in establishing a connection between organisation and teleology through the concept of self-determination: biological organisation determines itself in the sense that the effects of its activity contribute to determine its own conditions of existence. We suggest that not any kind of circular regime realises self-determination, which should be specifically understood as self-constraint: in biological systems, in particular, self-constraint takes the form of closure, i.e. a network of mutually dependent constitutive constraints. We then explore the occurrence of intrinsic teleology in the biological domain and beyond. On the one hand, the organisational account might possibly concede that supra-organismal biological systems (as symbioses or ecosystems) could realise closure, and hence be teleological. On the other hand, the realisation of closure beyond the biological realm appears to be highly unlikely. In turn, the occurrence of simpler forms of self-determination remains a controversial issue, in particular with respect to the case of self-organising dissipative systems.

Key words: Teleology, organisation, self-determination, closure, circularity.