A Biosemiotic and Active-Inference Model of Suffering, Semiosis, and Niche Construction

The Active Semiotic-Suffering Framework (ASSF) proposes a biophilosophical synthesis linking the Free Energy Principle and active inference, interoceptive predictive processing, biosemiotics, Umwelt theory, and niche construction. The framework does not identify subjective suffering with variational free energy. Instead, it advances the hypothesis that persistent, precision-weighted prediction errors that resist regulatory resolution can constitute one computational condition associated with experienced suffering. ASSF further proposes that biological agents respond to unresolved uncertainty not only by internal regulation and action, but also by semiotic reconfiguration: the transformation of biologically salient discrepancies into increasingly structured signs that can reorganize behavior, social coordination, and external niches. The paper introduces the Erom Insula hypothesis, defined not as a novel anatomical region but as a theoretical neurophenomenological state in which salient interoceptive prediction errors are insufficiently attenuated or contextualized by higher-order priors. The anterior insula is treated as candidate hub within a broader interoceptive-salience network rather than as a solitary causal locus. The framework distinguishes two potential trajectories of active semiosis: pathological loop closure, in which uncertainty is reduced through rigid priors and narrowed repertoires, and creative semiotic reconfiguration, in which model revision expands behavioral and symbolic flexibility. ASSF also presents a seven-layer comparative architecture of semiotic agency, ranging from boundary cases in non-cellular replicators to symbolic-narrative human agents. These layers are explicitly heuristic and do not represent a phylogenetic ladder. A conceptual dynamical schema, candidate empirical proxies, and falsifiable predictions are provided to guide future operationalization. The framework is intended as a testable research program rather than an established neurobiological law, and its major claims regarding genetic diversity, semiotic adaptation, and the Erom state are presented as hypotheses requiring empirical validation.