Di Paolo on Bare Autopoesis

Like much of the work on autopoeisis, I find Di Paolo's exposition a bit difficult to follow.  I just don't have the sense of the problematic here.  But, here's my take on the upshot of section 4.1.

Nothing can be a cognitive system simply in virtue of being an autopoeitic system.  Why?  Cognitive systems operate according to potential future states, but an autopoeitic system does not necessarily operate this way.

Now, one might expect the solution to this problem would be to say that a cognitive system is an autopoeitic system that operates according to potential future states.  But things do not appear to be that simple...