Thank you so much for responding. I will relay your answers to our community via other sources as well. It will take me longer to respond, as I need to study your work more.

This view also is the baseline for any of my attempts to reformulate economy which I also understand as an exchange system between sensing beings. This is what economy generally misses. I therefore cannot really see what here is „reverse social darwinism“ (and most mainstream biologists also could not, for that matter). My view of biology is explicitly transgressing the objectivst, natural-law-bound approach. (See e.g. Weber & Varela 2002: Life after Kant. Natural purposes and the autopoietic foundations of biological individuality. Phen. Cogn. Sci. 1:97-125.

Also I do not think nature to be „cooperative“. In some aspects it is, in others it is competitive, in others it is blank chance. Nature is not simply cooperative, but semiotic and teleological, meaning that we have nested meshworks of selves, which in turn are in some strange way also selfless. Nature (and reality, for that matter), is relative, always performing relations and thereby it is self-expressive: in a creative manner, meaning is brought forth via existential relations binding-unbindung individuals into wholes.

And these wholes, to add a further point, are not feeding back in a top down hierarchical manner onto lower levels (as you seem to suggest in your layer model of plant nature, animal nature, culture). There is a common aspect of meaningful relativity which is working across all these levels. We must not forget that it is not true that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. In many respect it is less, and in other respects it is different.

The basic point, therefore, is that we just can not approach reality on a natural-law base. The laws of relationships between living agents are constantly brought forth by them and are constantly shifting. However, we can study nature – that which is relation – to understand fruitful relating. But it won’t be possible without body (so economy is NOT only about human cultural decisions). As it won’t be possibly only with body.

This is why I propose the terms of „empirical subjectivity“ and „poetic objectivity“ to describe a picture of reality from the viewpoint of existential relatedness. Commoning, to put it short, is embodied productive coping with relatedness.