Home > Positioning > Persons > Lyon

Pamela Lyon

Lyon reframed the study of cognition by inverting its starting point. The standard route — she named it the anthropogenic approach — begins from human cognition and works downward, asking of each simpler creature how much of our kind of thinking it approximates. Her biogenic approach (2006) runs the other way: begin from the biological facts of what living systems demonstrably do — sense, evaluate, adjust, persist — and work upward, asking psychological questions as if they were biological questions. The inversion turned out to be generative: it made bacteria, plants and cell collectives legitimate subjects of cognitive science rather than metaphors at its edge, and it gave the research programme that studies them its name — basal cognition, her coinage — and its agenda, which she has done more than anyone to convene.

Life

Australian, and an unusual route in: a career as an investigative and science journalist first, with the academic work coming later — the biogenic approach was developed as a mature-age doctoral project at the Australian National University. She has since been affiliated with the University of Adelaide as an adjunct and visiting research fellow. The unhurried path shows in the work’s character: wide synthesis across microbiology, philosophy of mind and evolutionary theory, aimed at reframing a field’s assumptions rather than producing results within them. Her standing interest is the co-evolution of cognition and the physiological stress response, from prokaryotes to humans.

The biogenic approach

The inversion. “The biogenic approach to cognition” (2006) diagnosed cognitive science’s inherited habit — taking human cognition as the paradigm and grading everything else against it — and proposed the alternative: start from life. Every organism that persists does so by becoming familiar with its environment, valuing what it encounters, exploiting what helps and avoiding what harms. Those capacities, not human report, are where the study of cognition should begin.

The cognitive cell. “The cognitive cell: bacterial behavior reconsidered” (2015) made the case concrete: bacterial signal transduction — the machinery by which a cell senses gradients, weighs signals, retains a molecular record of the recent past, and adjusts its behaviour — read as a genuine cognitive repertoire in miniature, with the vocabulary earned capacity by capacity rather than borrowed wholesale.

Framing the field. The double Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B theme issue of 2021 — basal cognition’s convening document — had Lyon as lead guest editor (with Fred Keijzer, Detlev Arendt and Michael Levin) and her agenda paper, “Reframing cognition: getting down to biological basics,” at its head, including the field’s working toolkit: sensing, memory, valence, learning, anticipation, decision-making, communication. Her “Valuing what happens” (2021) develops the valence strand — how organisms register good-for-me and bad-for-me — as the toolkit’s most basic entry. The field’s later literature traces its lineage through her papers; her public profile is modest beside Levin’s, but the conceptual architecture is hers. Her intellectual ancestry runs in part through Maturana and the autopoiesis tradition — the earlier widest statement of life and cognition as one process.

Where Lyon stops

The biogenic approach is a methodological stance, and Lyon keeps it one. It tells the study of cognition where to begin — with what life does — and supplies an operational toolkit for asking the questions; it does not by itself settle what cognition is, and she does not claim it does. The demarcation dispute — whether the toolkit’s capacities in a bacterium amount to cognition or to chemistry described in borrowed words — is answered on her programme by accumulation rather than definition: extend the toolkit, case by case, and let the usefulness of the framing carry the argument. Whether usefulness can settle a definitional question, or only defer it, is where her critics take their stand — and the question is pressed on the field she framed more than on any claim of her own.

Key works

See also: Levin · Maturana · Varela · Basal cognition