Review | From extended phenotype to extended affordance: distributed language at the intersection of Gibson and Dawkins

Introduction

Dennis P. Waters is an insightful transdisciplinary thinker whose scholarly pursuits encompass ecological psychology, linguistics, and biosemiotics. His recent book, Behavior and Culture in One Dimension, explores how one-dimensional sequences such as DNA, language, and computational code organize complex, three-dimensional behaviors across various scales. Waters completed his Ph.D. at SUNY Binghamton under the mentorship of Howard Pattee, a distinguished figure in biosemiotics and theoretical biology. Waters’ approach is deeply influenced by Pattee’s notion of “symbol-matter complementarity,” aiming to integrate symbolic systems with their material substrates.

I first met Waters at the eighth Northeast Regional Conference on Complex Systems (NERCCS 2025) earlier this year. During our discussions, we explored semiotics, linguistics, and relational biology, finding common ground in our respective efforts to synthesize underappreciated intellectual traditions. Our dialogue emphasized the intricate interactions between symbols and their physical implementations, highlighting the rich intellectual history and current relevance of integrating these disciplinary perspectives.

In particular, I found Waters’ paper From extended phenotype to extended affordance: distributed language at the intersection of Gibson and Dawkins compelling, because it offers a robust synthesis of two pivotal ecological concepts: Dawkins’ extended phenotype and Gibson’s affordance theory. Given my own scholarly ambition to unify relational biology, physical biosemiotics, and ecological psychology—disciplines deeply rooted in the Northeastern US yet overlooked by mainstream computational narratives—I resonated strongly with the integrative vision presented by Waters. His work underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in addressing complex ecological and evolutionary phenomena. Thus, today I will be reviewing his paper.

Extended Phenotype

Richard Dawkins first introduced the concept of the extended phenotype in his seminal work The Extended Phenotype, a sequel to The Selfish Gene proposing a gene-centric view of evolution that transcends the boundaries of individual organisms. Dawkins argues that phenotypic expressions include all effects that a gene exerts on its environment, regardless of whether these effects occur inside or outside the organism. This reframes evolutionary processes as interactions between genes and their ecological contexts, broadening traditional perspectives, such as those proposed by Dan Dennett.

Dawkins’ extended phenotype concept invites us to reconsider the boundaries of biological agency, moving beyond organisms to the effects their genetic information has on their environment. These effects can include structures like beaver dams, spider webs, or even complex social behaviors. Dawkins emphasizes the significance of viewing evolutionary adaptations as dynamic interactions between genes and environments rather than merely intrinsic organismal traits. This is coherent with Pattee’s symbol-matter complementarity.

In his article, Waters skillfully contextualizes Dawkins’ concept within linguistics. Waters views language itself as an extended phenotype, suggesting that linguistic structures, much like physical structures or behavioral patterns created by animals, constitute external manifestations of underlying cognitive or genetic processes. Thus, language, extending beyond an individual’s physical boundaries, acts as an evolved artifact that significantly shapes social and ecological interactions, serving as both a medium and a constraint in the evolutionary landscape.

Affordances

James J. Gibson’s affordance theory, articulated in his influential The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, emphasizes direct perception and engagement with the environment without the mediation of cognitive representations. Gibson introduced affordances as action opportunities inherently present in an environment, recognized directly by organisms through perceptual systems. This ecological psychological perspective strongly critiques cognitive internalism (including biosemiotics), advocating for a direct interaction model between organisms and their surroundings.

Gibson posits that perception is fundamentally about detecting affordances—what the environment offers for functional action. These affordances are relational, contingent on both environmental features and the perceptual and motor capabilities of the organism. Gibson’s theory thereby situates perception as inherently meaningful, deeply embedded in ecological contexts rather than confined within cognitive or mental representations. Despite in principle not being compatible with biosemiotics, both approaches embrace a mutualism between organism and environment. In particular, recent work by Kauffman and Roli could serve as a bridge between these two non-computationalist approaches.

Waters integrates Gibson’s affordance theory into linguistics, highlighting how language structures perceptual interactions within environments. He suggests linguistic affordances allow agents to perceive and respond effectively to complex social and ecological conditions. Language, in Waters’ view, does not merely describe the world; it actively shapes perceptions and guides interactions, structuring the landscape of affordances available to organisms. By linking affordances to linguistic structures, Waters enriches our understanding of communication as ecologically grounded, directly influencing perceptual and behavioral processes.

Synthesis: Extended Affordances

Waters’ synthesis of Dawkins’ extended phenotype and Gibson’s affordance theory culminates in his innovative notion of extended affordances. Waters first clarifies this concept by examining the role that artifacts—tangible creations resulting from organismal activity—play as extensions of an organism’s phenotype. Artifacts like beaver dams, spider webs, or termite mounds do not merely reflect an organism’s abilities but actively shape ecological niches, influencing available resources and interactions within ecosystems. Such structures transcend simple physical utility by embodying genetic and behavioral information, extending the functional influence of an organism’s genotype into the external environment.

Moreover, Waters argues that these externalized artifacts reshape the affordances available within ecosystems. They alter the environment’s action possibilities, enhancing or limiting the actions available to other organisms. For instance, a beaver dam creates new ecological niches by altering water flow and landscape structure, thereby providing additional affordances such as habitats for various aquatic organisms. This transformative aspect of artifacts highlights their role not only as static physical structures but also as dynamic elements that continuously reshape ecological relationships and evolutionary potentials.

Through these insights, Waters expands the classical concept of affordances by incorporating elements derived from the extended phenotype framework. His synthesis reveals how ecological interactions are deeply embedded within structures and artifacts that organisms produce. These extended affordances thus bridge genetic, behavioral, and ecological dimensions, providing a more comprehensive understanding of how organisms interact with and shape their environments.

Waters’ discussion of vervet monkey alarm calls vividly illustrates his synthesis. These monkeys produce distinct vocalizations to signal different predators, effectively creating linguistic affordances that structure the perceptual world of their conspecifics. These alarm calls are exemplary extended phenotypes that do more than convey information—they shape how other monkeys perceive and respond to their surroundings, enabling adaptive behaviors and influencing survival outcomes. Through this example, Waters compellingly demonstrates how extended phenotypes and affordances intricately interweave, giving rise to his concept of extended affordances.

Conclusion

Waters’ paper illuminates the deep interconnections between evolutionary biology and ecological psychology through the innovative concept of extended affordances. His synthesis demonstrates how language and other extended phenotypes profoundly shape ecological interactions, highlighting their distributed nature across space, time, and organisms. Waters’ insights underscore the necessity of adopting an ecological perspective on language, emphasizing its role in structuring perceptual and behavioral possibilities within ecosystems.

Future explorations building upon Waters’ framework could significantly benefit from integrating perspectives from physical biosemiotics and relational biology, disciplines closely aligned with his ecological approach when introducing organism-environment reciprocity. Such integration would allow deeper examination of symbolic processes in biological and linguistic contexts, potentially clarifying the mechanisms through which symbolic and ecological domains interact. Addressing this gap would reinforce the foundational ideas proposed by Waters, advancing a holistic understanding of language evolution and ecological cognition.