Parinamavada

In the explanatory path of objectivity-in-parenthesis, the observer system explicitly accepts: a) that he or she is, as a human being, a living system; b) that his or her cognitive abilities as an observer are biological phenomena because they are altered when his or her biology is altered; and c) that if he or she wants to explain his or her cognitive abilities as an observer, he or she must do so showing how they arise as biological phenomena in his or her realisation as a living system. Moreover, by adopting this explanatory path, the observer has to accept as his or her constitutive features all constitutive features of living systems, particularly their inability to distinguish in experience what we distinguish in daily life as perception and illusion."(Maturana, 1988a, p. 29)

The single most detailed discussion of these constructs is to be found in Maturana (1988a), in which he provides (p. 32) one of his rare illustrations (termed the ontological diagram) laying out the relationships between these two modes of explanation. The ontological diagram is illustrated below.

Ontological Diagram (Maturana, 1988a, p. 32)

		The path on the left side of the ontological diagram represents objectivity-without-parenthesis. This path acknowledges only a single objective 'universum', and explanations generated within this path are directed toward that single object of reference. Because this path invokes a foundation which transcends the observer's / explainer's own biology and cognition, it generates a domain of 'transcendental ontologies'.The path on the right side represents objectivity-in-parenthesis. As a secondary or corollary commitment in this path, the observer must accept any and all constitutive features of living systems -- most particularly their imputed inability to distinguish (within the scope of their experience) between perception (i.e., apprehension of something objectively existent) and illusion (a misapprehension of something objectively existent). This has the effect of opening the doors for multiple -- even infinite -- viable or valid explanations, as well as an equivalent diversity of explanatory domains. As such, this explanatory path allows for a multiversum instead of a unary universum. Explanations generated within this path are qualified with regard to the biology and cognition of the observer(s) involved. Because this path must pay attention to the constitutive features of living systems, it generates a domain of 'constitutive ontologies'. In Summary: The biology of cognition / autopoietic theory is an explanatory framework generated along the explanatory path of objectivity-in-parenthesis. In terms of fundamental orientation to 'reality', the biology of cognition / autopoietic theory is presented within the domain of constitutive ontologies.