- Home
- Materials
- Methodological Foundations of the Series
- Introduction to the Series
- Living Systems
- Structural Dynamics of the Evolution
- Animal Magnetism
- Territories and Landscapes
- Cultural Systems
- Shamanic Practices of North America
- Religious Systems
- SSIFS: Hybrid Information-Field Systems
- Digital Environments
- Economic Systems
- Spatiotemporal Logic of Structural Systems
- Conclusion of the Article Series
- Learning
- Blog
- About us
- Contacts
- English
6. Structural Dynamics of the Evolution of Living Systems as the Dynamics of the “Imprint–Subject” Linkage
6.1. Abstract
This section proposes a structural interpretation of biological evolution within the framework of An Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints. Evolution is interpreted not as a linear accumulation of traits or the autonomous development of organisms, but as a long-term dynamic of the formation, activation, and archiving of “structural imprint–subject” linkages within a changing system.
It is shown that the structural imprint is formed prior to the emergence of the subject and is not a product of its activity; inheritance is described as the reproduction of conditions enabling the activation of similar imprints rather than their transmission. Natural selection is interpreted as the retention of stable linkages consistent with the current dynamics of the environment, while extinction is understood as the transition of imprints into an archived state following the loss of activation conditions.
The proposed framework does not replace biological theories of evolution and does not describe specific mechanisms of mutation, inheritance, or adaptation. Its task is to fix a structural level of analysis that ensures conceptual consistency across biological, territorial, cultural, and digital systems examined in this series.
This section is not a biological theory and does not substitute natural-scientific descriptions of evolutionary mechanisms. Its purpose is to define a structural analytical level compatible with the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints.
6.2. Evolution as the Dynamics of the “Imprint–Subject” Linkage within the System
Within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints, biological evolution is considered as a long-term dynamic of the formation, activation, and loss of stability of “structural imprint–subject” linkages in a changing system.
In this context, evolution is not reduced to the accumulation of traits or adaptations but is described as a process of coordinating structural configurations with the current and historical conditions of the environment. The structural imprint is formed prior to the emergence of the subject, provided that the system’s dynamics allow for the corresponding configuration. It arises as a result of stable environmental changes and internal system constraints and is not a consequence of the activity of a particular organism. The emergence of the subject represents the activation of an already formed imprint, after which mutual influence among subject, imprint, and environment unfolds during the period of the linkage’s existence.
6.3. The Subject as Carrier and Actualizer of the Structural Imprint
Within this approach, a living organism is described as a physical carrier within which a previously formed structural imprint may transition from an inactive to an active state. Physiological, behavioral, and functional characteristics of the organism function not as sources of the imprint but as modes of its actualization under specific conditions.
During the active period, the imprint and the subject form a coupled configuration in which changes in one component inevitably affect the other. Thus, the subject does not create the structural imprint but realizes and maintains it in material form, while remaining dependent on environmental and systemic constraints.
6.4. Inheritance as the Reproduction of Conditions for Imprint Activation
In structural analysis, inheritance is not considered as the transfer of an imprint from one subject to another. A structural imprint does not migrate and is not directly transmitted between organisms. Inheritance represents the reproduction of conditions under which the activation of a similar structural imprint—previously formed by the system—becomes possible in a new physical carrier.
Genetic, epigenetic, and environmental mechanisms ensure the repeatability of activation conditions; however, each “imprint–subject” linkage is formed anew and is not a continuation of the previous one. This removes the notion of linear structural transmission and replaces it with the concept of repeated activation within similar configurations.
6.5. Selection as the Retention of Stable Linkages
Within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints, natural selection is interpreted as the retention of stable “imprint–subject” linkages consistent with the current dynamics of the environment. If an activated linkage is capable of maintaining structural stability and reproducing the conditions of its activation, it is retained within the system.
When a structural imprint becomes misaligned with changing environmental conditions, the linkage loses stability and disintegrates regardless of the physical persistence of the subject. Selection thus acts not on individual elements, but on the integrity of the linkage as the minimal stable configuration.
6.6. Species as a Reproducible Configuration of Activatable Imprints
A biological species may be described as a stable configuration of structural imprints that are formed by the system and regularly activated across multiple physical carriers under similar environmental conditions. Species stability is determined not by the preservation of specific forms or the continuity of imprints, but by the stability of the system’s dynamics that allow for their repeated activation.
Changes in conditions lead either to the transformation of the configuration of activatable imprints or to the loss of the possibility of their activation in the previous form.
6.7. Extinction as the Transition of Imprints into an Archived State
From the perspective of structural dynamics, extinction signifies the loss of the possibility to activate a structural imprint on physical carriers within a given system configuration. After the disappearance of subjects, the imprint is not destroyed but transitions into an archived state.
In archived mode, it does not participate in the system’s current calibration but is preserved as an element of the environment’s structural memory and, under certain conditions, may exert indirect influence on subsequent configurations. Extinction thus represents a change in the mode of the imprint’s existence rather than its disappearance.
6.8. Complexity as Increased Configuration of the Linkage
Evolutionary complexity in this approach manifests as an increased complexity of the “imprint–subject” linkage configuration rather than as an accumulation of forms or the autonomous development of structural imprints. As complexity increases, so does the number of conditions, coordination contours, and internal constraints required for the activation and maintenance of the linkage. This increases stability in a stable environment while simultaneously reducing the range of permissible changes and increasing sensitivity to misalignments.
6.9. Universality of Imprint–Subject Dynamics
Considering biological evolution as the dynamic of imprint formation, activation, and archiving allows biological systems to be linked with other types of systems analyzed in this series: territorial, cultural, economic, and digital subjectless information-field systems within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints.
In all cases, the system forms imprints in advance, activates them through subjects or carriers, and archives them upon the loss of activation conditions, without recourse to centralized management or subject-based control.
6.10. Methodological Limitations
This section does not replace biological evolutionary theory and does not describe mechanisms of mutation, inheritance, or adaptation in the terms of the natural sciences. Its function is to establish a structural level of description compatible with the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints and used within this series as an analytical framework.
This section proposes a structural interpretation of biological evolution within the framework of An Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints. Evolution is interpreted not as a linear accumulation of traits or the autonomous development of organisms, but as a long-term dynamic of the formation, activation, and archiving of “structural imprint–subject” linkages within a changing system.
It is shown that the structural imprint is formed prior to the emergence of the subject and is not a product of its activity; inheritance is described as the reproduction of conditions enabling the activation of similar imprints rather than their transmission. Natural selection is interpreted as the retention of stable linkages consistent with the current dynamics of the environment, while extinction is understood as the transition of imprints into an archived state following the loss of activation conditions.
The proposed framework does not replace biological theories of evolution and does not describe specific mechanisms of mutation, inheritance, or adaptation. Its task is to fix a structural level of analysis that ensures conceptual consistency across biological, territorial, cultural, and digital systems examined in this series.
This section is not a biological theory and does not substitute natural-scientific descriptions of evolutionary mechanisms. Its purpose is to define a structural analytical level compatible with the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints.
6.2. Evolution as the Dynamics of the “Imprint–Subject” Linkage within the System
Within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints, biological evolution is considered as a long-term dynamic of the formation, activation, and loss of stability of “structural imprint–subject” linkages in a changing system.
In this context, evolution is not reduced to the accumulation of traits or adaptations but is described as a process of coordinating structural configurations with the current and historical conditions of the environment. The structural imprint is formed prior to the emergence of the subject, provided that the system’s dynamics allow for the corresponding configuration. It arises as a result of stable environmental changes and internal system constraints and is not a consequence of the activity of a particular organism. The emergence of the subject represents the activation of an already formed imprint, after which mutual influence among subject, imprint, and environment unfolds during the period of the linkage’s existence.
6.3. The Subject as Carrier and Actualizer of the Structural Imprint
Within this approach, a living organism is described as a physical carrier within which a previously formed structural imprint may transition from an inactive to an active state. Physiological, behavioral, and functional characteristics of the organism function not as sources of the imprint but as modes of its actualization under specific conditions.
During the active period, the imprint and the subject form a coupled configuration in which changes in one component inevitably affect the other. Thus, the subject does not create the structural imprint but realizes and maintains it in material form, while remaining dependent on environmental and systemic constraints.
6.4. Inheritance as the Reproduction of Conditions for Imprint Activation
In structural analysis, inheritance is not considered as the transfer of an imprint from one subject to another. A structural imprint does not migrate and is not directly transmitted between organisms. Inheritance represents the reproduction of conditions under which the activation of a similar structural imprint—previously formed by the system—becomes possible in a new physical carrier.
Genetic, epigenetic, and environmental mechanisms ensure the repeatability of activation conditions; however, each “imprint–subject” linkage is formed anew and is not a continuation of the previous one. This removes the notion of linear structural transmission and replaces it with the concept of repeated activation within similar configurations.
6.5. Selection as the Retention of Stable Linkages
Within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints, natural selection is interpreted as the retention of stable “imprint–subject” linkages consistent with the current dynamics of the environment. If an activated linkage is capable of maintaining structural stability and reproducing the conditions of its activation, it is retained within the system.
When a structural imprint becomes misaligned with changing environmental conditions, the linkage loses stability and disintegrates regardless of the physical persistence of the subject. Selection thus acts not on individual elements, but on the integrity of the linkage as the minimal stable configuration.
6.6. Species as a Reproducible Configuration of Activatable Imprints
A biological species may be described as a stable configuration of structural imprints that are formed by the system and regularly activated across multiple physical carriers under similar environmental conditions. Species stability is determined not by the preservation of specific forms or the continuity of imprints, but by the stability of the system’s dynamics that allow for their repeated activation.
Changes in conditions lead either to the transformation of the configuration of activatable imprints or to the loss of the possibility of their activation in the previous form.
6.7. Extinction as the Transition of Imprints into an Archived State
From the perspective of structural dynamics, extinction signifies the loss of the possibility to activate a structural imprint on physical carriers within a given system configuration. After the disappearance of subjects, the imprint is not destroyed but transitions into an archived state.
In archived mode, it does not participate in the system’s current calibration but is preserved as an element of the environment’s structural memory and, under certain conditions, may exert indirect influence on subsequent configurations. Extinction thus represents a change in the mode of the imprint’s existence rather than its disappearance.
6.8. Complexity as Increased Configuration of the Linkage
Evolutionary complexity in this approach manifests as an increased complexity of the “imprint–subject” linkage configuration rather than as an accumulation of forms or the autonomous development of structural imprints. As complexity increases, so does the number of conditions, coordination contours, and internal constraints required for the activation and maintenance of the linkage. This increases stability in a stable environment while simultaneously reducing the range of permissible changes and increasing sensitivity to misalignments.
6.9. Universality of Imprint–Subject Dynamics
Considering biological evolution as the dynamic of imprint formation, activation, and archiving allows biological systems to be linked with other types of systems analyzed in this series: territorial, cultural, economic, and digital subjectless information-field systems within the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints.
In all cases, the system forms imprints in advance, activates them through subjects or carriers, and archives them upon the loss of activation conditions, without recourse to centralized management or subject-based control.
6.10. Methodological Limitations
This section does not replace biological evolutionary theory and does not describe mechanisms of mutation, inheritance, or adaptation in the terms of the natural sciences. Its function is to establish a structural level of description compatible with the Approach to the Evaluation of Structural Imprints and used within this series as an analytical framework.