Intrinsic intentionality and inherent goal-directedness of eukaryotic cells is defended by Tecumseh Fitch and minimal molecular autonomous agents are characterized in “On emergence, agency, and organization” (by Stuart Kauffman and Philip Clayton).
The “aboutness” and “goal-directedness” of eukaryotic cells and how it relates to nano-intentionality is defined as follows (p14):
The crucial pre-mental properties of a cell are that it can
1) respond to (somewhat) novel circumstances, eventualities for which it is not specifically-prepared by the evolutionary "memory" instantiated in its DNA.
2) discover, through an individual process of trial and error, some "adaptive" (in the physiological sense) response or solution.
3) in various ways incorporate the results of this discovery into its own structure, thus "recording" or "remembering" (in a non-mental sense) this past, individual history.
It is argued that simple single-celled eukaryotes possess nano-intentionality and it is stressed that one of the abilities of a nano-intentional structure is its ability to rearrange its physical structure in response to environmental circumstances. An example of eukaryotic chemotaxis (sensory adaptation) in the amoeba and its ability to react to environmental signals and adapt to them by inducing structural changes was given, e.g. when seeking and ingesting food was given. Chemotaxis involves structural changes in response to environmental circumstances and it is not limited to eukaryotes as bacterial cells are also capable of chemotaxis. In this respect, bacterial cells would qualify since no other reason was provided for not including bacterial cells.
Kauffman and Clayton argue that the simple example of a bacteria that is able to swim up a glucose gradient is an example of an organism acting on its own behalf and they call such a system a “molecular autonomous agent”. They continue to provide a tentative five part definition of a minimal molecular autonomous agent (p505):
Such a system should be able to
1) Reproduce with heritable variation.
2) Perform at least one work cycle.
3) Have boundaries such that it can be individuated naturally.
4) Engage in self-propagating work and constraint construction.
5) Be able to choose between at least two alternatives.
The earliest life forms emerged about 3000-3400 million years ago (ref) and were likely bacteria.
Many natural sciences aim to detect the actions and intentions of agents. A few of these include forensic science, archeology and SETI.
If it is accepted that bacteria qualify as nano-intentional molecular autonomous agents then it would seem evolutionary and molecular biology also fall squarely into the category of natural sciences concerned with detecting the actions and intentions and/or “nano-intentions” of agents over time, be it mental or pre-mental. Also, if the outcome of a choice of an agent is then viewed as artificial selection, it certainly implies that artificial selection played a big role in the evolution of life.
Ay-ay-ay Mechhie, that opening post of yours is one huge semantic trick from start to end - and not a very good one either. Plus it’s got a giant leap of faith at the end. Topic-wise it belongs in Science and Technology and substance-wise in the Fun section. That’s because there’s no Farce section.
“Nano-intentionality”? Give clear objective criteria that distinguish this novel verbal invention from “reactiveness”. From there you can explain how it suddenly becomes “artificial selection” before explaining to us how this proves your god.
Oh lord! Now you’re peddling Tecumseh’s speculative twaddle over on this forum!
As you yourself have defined ( elsewhere ) intentionality is a property of mind, and these little cells of yours don’t have minds, unless, as said to you before, they are hiding them up their arses. Nano-intentionality is bull.
The crucial pre-mental properties of a cell are that it can
1) respond to (somewhat) novel circumstances, eventualities for which it is not specifically-prepared by the evolutionary "memory" instantiated in its DNA.
2) discover, through an individual process of trial and error, some "adaptive" (in the physiological sense) response or solution.
3) in various ways incorporate the results of this discovery into its own structure, thus "recording" or "remembering" (in a non-mental sense) this past, individual history.
"Pre-mental" would thus in a nutshell imply "respond", "discover by trial and error" and "incorporate results of discovery".
A microorganism has to adapt to changing environmental conditions in order to survive. Cells could follow one of two basic strategies to address such environmental fluctuations. On the one hand, cells could anticipate a fluctuating environment by spontaneously generating a phenotypically diverse population of cells, with each subpopulation exhibiting different capacities to flourish in the different conditions. Alternatively, cells could sense changes in the surrounding conditions - such as temperature, nutritional availability or the presence of other individuals - and modify their behavior to provide an appropriate response to that information. As we describe, examples of both strategies abound among different microorganisms. Moreover, successful application of either strategy requires a level of memory and information processing that has not been normally associated with single cells, suggesting that such organisms do in fact have the capacity to 'think'.
From the article:
Finally, our computational and experimental analyses of pheromone and osmolarity response highlight the importance of confronting cells simultaneously with multiple stimuli as a means of revealing dualistic behavior. [b]Thus, further experiments using multivariate stimuli may well reveal additional cases of cells having deep thoughts.[/b]
Any "deep thoughts" from the other conglomerate of cellular debris here :D?