Evolutio Unfolding Theory and “Platonic Space”: On Conceptual Priority and Lineage
1. Introduction: the problem of conceptual priority and lineage
In contemporary theoretical biology, it is increasingly common for concepts to reappear under new names, reframed within different rhetorical or institutional contexts. Such reappearances are often described as cases of convergent theorizing or independent rediscovery. While genuine convergence certainly exists in science, it is not synonymous with conceptual amnesia. The distinction between convergence and lineage is not merely historical; it is epistemic and ethical.
Clarifying conceptual lineage is therefore not an act of accusation, but an ethical responsibility. It allows ideas to be situated within their developmental trajectories, makes visible the conditions of their emergence, and preserves the integrity of scientific discourse. This short essay is intended as a public act of epistemic self-location: a clarification of conceptual priority and structural continuity between two theoretical frameworks that address the same underlying biological problem.
2. The Evolutio Unfolding Theory (2020): a brief statement
In 2020, I published A Theory of Evolution as a Process of Unfolding (Cosmos and History), proposing an alternative to both Darwinism and Intelligent Design. The core elements of this framework can be summarized as follows:
- Evolution is understood as a process of unfolding, not as the accumulation of random variations filtered by external selection.
- Biological forms exist as latent formal potentials prior to their empirical realization.
- Formal causes play a constitutive role in development and evolution, irreducible to efficient causation.
- Morphogenetic fields act as organizing domains that constrain and guide form actualization.
- Evolutionary and developmental processes are mediated by teleological–purposeful formal agents, operating within these fields.
- Novelty arises through the actualization of pre-existing but non-manifest form space (ideological matrix), rather than through blind stochastic search.
This framework was later extended and empirically connected to developmental and evolutionary biology in subsequent publications.
3. A later framework: “Platonic Space” (2025)
In 2025, a framework referred to as Platonic Space was introduced in a preprint and related publications by Michael Levin and collaborators. This framework is presented as an independent theoretical contribution aimed at explaining biological form, regeneration, and goal-directed behavior.
According to these texts, biological systems are described as exploring or inhabiting a structured space of possible forms, where developmental trajectories are guided by attractors, constraints, and non-local organizational principles. The proposal is framed as a novel conceptual advance within contemporary biology.
4. Comparative clarification of conceptual structure
The table below presents a concise comparison between the Evolutio Unfolding Theory (2020) and the Platonic Space framework (2025). Only structurally non-trivial and conceptually central overlaps are included.
Table 1. Comparative conceptual functions of two evolutionary frameworks
Sources: Ostachuk (2020); Levin (2025).
| Conceptual function | Evolutio Unfolding Theory (2020) | Platonic Space framework (2025) | Notes on priority / equivalence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ontological status of form | Forms exist as latent potentials prior to material realization | Forms pre-exist as points or regions in Platonic Space | Structural equivalence; latent form precedes instantiation |
| Source of biological order | Formal causes operating within morphogenetic fields | Non-local organizational constraints shaping trajectories | Same causal level beyond efficient causation |
| Nature of novelty | Actualization of pre-existing formal possibilities | Movement to new regions of form space | Novelty without random generation |
| Role of teleology | Teleological–purposeful formal agents guide development | Goal-directed behavior via attractors in form space | Goal-directed structure described using attractor-based language |
| Developmental guidance | Morphogenetic fields constrain and orient morphogenesis | Platonic Space constrains developmental trajectories | Field/space equivalence |
| Evolutionary dynamics | Evolution as unfolding of form space (ideological matrix) | Evolution as exploration of Platonic Space | Same process articulated within a renamed ontological framework |
5. On awareness, overlap, and attribution
Given the documented structural overlap, along with prior professional contact and direct awareness of my work by the later authors, the question at stake is no longer one of independent theoretical development, but of attribution, conceptual lineage, and ethical responsibility within contemporary biology.
When a framework reproduces the same explanatory architecture—formal causes, latent form, teleological guidance, and non-local organization—while presenting itself as conceptually unprecedented, the issue is no longer mere convergence. It becomes necessary to examine how ideas travel, how they are renamed, and how priority is acknowledged or obscured within scientific discourse.
6. Closing: lineage as scientific integrity
Clarifying lineage is not about ownership of ideas as private property. It is about maintaining the integrity, accountability, and historical continuity of scientific thought. When concepts are detached from their origin and reintroduced as novel through renaming alone, science loses not only memory, but responsibility.
This clarification is offered from the standpoint of EVOLUTIO’s core commitments: ethical integrity in scholarship, proper acknowledgment of conceptual sources, and the preservation of clear lineages of thought. EVOLUTIO was founded precisely to make such lineages visible and traceable. Through initiatives such as Evolutio Concepts, the emerging Evolutio Semantic Web, we document the origin, development, and transformation of concepts within our knowledge ecosystem.
In this context, clarification is not denunciation, but responsibility: a necessary practice for maintaining coherence, accountability, and continuity in contemporary biological thought.
Subscribe to “The Unfolding”: