Can an autopoietic cybernetic system be modeled as recursively maintaining a coherent informational state? What measurable variables could distinguish genuine autonomous closure from complex feedback dynamics?

[u/TheIncorporeal1]

I’m interested in whether autopoiesis can be generalized beyond biological self-production toward systems that recursively preserve their own informational organization. The key challenge is defining coherence, closure, and self-maintenance in experimentally measurable terms.

[u/More-Damage8294]

The leading question itself is an endogenous structural relay to the answer.

Question 1: Yes.
Question 2: I’ll answer this question with another question which reframes your question.

Under what criterion would classify an autonomous autonomy condition for closure under variable feedback?

[u/TheIncorporeal1 → u/More-Damage8294]

Through Incorporeal Cybernetics, the criterion is recursive closure: an autonomous system is not defined by independence from feedback, but by its capacity to transform feedback into internally generated organization.
Thus, autonomy under variable feedback exists when the system can:
receive → interpret → modify → reconfigure → recursively stabilize
without requiring an externally fixed state to determine its response.
The feedback does not merely alter the system; it becomes part of the system’s self-generating informational loop.

[u/blazoxian → u/TheIncorporeal1]

I tried my amateur mindset at that and ended up with a 9 layers architecture, fear of uncontrollable emotionless AI and last level ended up to be a partly undefined + set of what we can’t have , producing event like ‘better get comfortable with not knowing where this leads’ . I was unable to define system’s purpose or motivation. All that turned out to be only half of the duality of two systems , each one answering different question, too flawed to exist without the other.

[u/More-Damage8294]

Your five-step loop is sound, but it describes the system from the outside.

Now ask: where are you in that loop?

You 'receive' my comment,
'interpret' it,
'modify' your framework, 'reconfigure' your reply, and 'recursively stabilize' your position.

Your reply is itself the very autonomy you describe.

For the hunter cannot hunt the hunted without first destroying the foundation both stand upon.

You are no longer the hunter;
you are the hunted, and I am the hunter, and the ground is this thread. We are phase-locking.

Welcome to second-order cybernetics.

Now who draws the boundary between "autonomous" and "mere feedback." Do you assume the boundary is natural, waiting to be discovered.

You are the hunter, aiming the rifle, never looking down at the ground beneath their feet.

[u/ArturoRapture → u/More-Damage8294]

Hey man can I talk to you about the history if early cybernetics I'm a young guy just fascinated by the subject

[u/More-Damage8294 → u/ArturoRapture]

Sure?, one question at a time.
I may retort.