Using the Logic of the Life to Reduce the Complexity of Life (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Journal of General Systems, vol. 44, n°5, pp. 523-571, 2015
Bertalanffy's so-called "general system theory" (GST) and cybernetics were and are often confused: this calls for clarification. In this article, Bertalanffy's conceptions and ideas are compared with those developed in cybernetics in order to investigate the differences and convergences. Bertalanffy was concerned with first order cybernetics. Nonetheless, his perspectivist epistemology is also relevant with regard to developments in second order cybernetics, and the latter is therefore also considered to some extent. W. Ross Ashby's important role as mediator between GST and cybernetics is analysed. The respective basic epistemological approaches, scientific approaches and inherent world views are discussed. We underline the complementarity of cybernetic and "organismic" trends in systems research within the unitary hermeneutical framework of "general systemology".
International Journal of General Systems, 2007
Ludwig von Bertalanffy was one of the first masterminds and advocates of a "general system theory". Trained in philosophy and in history of arts, he also concerned himself with biology. His early works in those fields, most of the time unknown to the non-German speaking audience, are essential in order to understand the genesis and the meanings of his "general system theory", which we prefer to describe as a "general systemology". We here examine them and provide a comprehensive insight into the diverse roots of the concepts that led Bertalanffy to his later achievements. This paper is thereby devoted to the scientific, philosophical and ideological sources of his "theory", as well as to the motivations and logic which governed its genesis. Our study concentrates particularly on the following points: the context of "general crisis" in which he developed his intellectual schemes; his "perspectivist" philosophy of knowledge; his elaboration of an "organismic" theoretical biology; his non-reductionist approach to the problem of mathematization of biology and his theory of organic growth; and his sketch of a general theory of "open systems" as nucleus and way of legitimising a "general systemology".
The ‘Cybernetic Cut’: Progressing from Description to Prescription in Systems Theory
Howard Pattee championed the term “epistemic cut” to describe the symbol-matter, subject-object, genotypephenotype distinction. But the precise point of contact between logical deductive formalisms and physicality still needs elucidation. Can information be physical? How does nonphysical mind arise from physicality to then establish formal control over that physicality (e.g., engineering feats, computer science)? How did inanimate nature give rise to an algorithmically organized, semiotic and cybernetic life? Both the practice of physics and life itself require traversing not only an epistemic cut, but a Cybernetic Cut. A fundamental dichotomy of reality is delineated. The dynamics of physicality (“chance and necessity”) lie on one side. On the other side lies the ability to choose with intent what aspects of ontological being will be preferred, pursued, selected, rearranged, integrated, organized, preserved, and used (cybernetic formalism).
On the Framing of Systems and Cybernetic Models
Philosophy Kitchen, 2023
Most writing on systems and cybernetics is within the scientific frame of modelling in terms of objects characterised by attributes. There are two clear exceptions, Stafford Beer in the construction of the Viable System Model, and Peter Checkland in the construction of Soft Systems methodology. These two authors frame their approach in a transformation process, the purpose of which lies in the eye of the beholder/observer defining the process, and characterised by its relationship to its context. I start from the Heraclitian notion that in the world in which we find ourselves all is flux and change. Using the frame developed by Beer and Checkland, I propose that this process view is fundamentalto developing models and understanding the stability we find in phenomena in our world. I explore the necessary structures to achieve coherence and stability and show that the learning process is essential. I designate this approach 'systemic process thinking', and show that it can be considered a distinct paradigm which fits the Heraclitian view of a dynamic world. It is necessarily constructivist, improves on Whitehead's Process Philosophy, and has considerable modelling power. I also show how the Western WEIRD approach has been derived from this.
International Journal of General Systems, vol. 43, n°2, pp. 172-245, 2014
The history of "general system theory" is investigated in order to clarify its meanings, vocations, foundations and achievements. It is characterized as the project of a science of the systemic interpretation of the "real", renamed here "general systemology". The contexts and modes of its elaboration, publication and implementation are discussed. The paper mostly focuses on the works of its instigator: Ludwig von Bertalanffy. However, general systemology was a collective project: the main contributions of other "systemologists", from the 1950s until the 1970s, are hence also considered. Its solidarity with the history of the Society for General Systems Research is notably discussed. A reconstruction of the systemological hermeneutics is undertaken on this basis. It finds out the potential systematic unity underlying the diversity of the contributions to this both scientific and philosophical project. Light is thus shed on the actual scope of von Bertalanffy's works.
The scientific and philosophical scope of artificial life
Leonardo, 2002
The new interdisciplinary science of artificial life has had a connection with the arts from its inception. This paper provides an overview of artificial life, reviews its key scientific challenges, and discusses its philosophical implications. It ends with a few words about the implications of artificial life for the arts.
Heinz von Foerster and Niklas Luhmann: The Cybernetics of Social Systems Theory
Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 2011
I offer a broad comparison between classical and neocybernetic epistemology and sketch the redescription of the subject/object relation as the system/environment relation. I situate von Foerster and Luhmann on the latter side of this comparison and suggest that their shared commitments to a constructivist epistemology informed von Foerster’s approval of Luhmann’s reworking of Maturana and Varela’s concept of autopoiesis.
Systems Science, Cybernetics, and Complexity
Handbook of Systems Sciences, 2021
Systems science, cybernetics, and complexity all evolved out of concerns for understanding complex phenomena in science. They also share many of the same theoretical roots, as well as histories which converge across leading figures and places in time. They can be conceived as three realms which shared and competed for prominence. All have influenced and been incorporated into scientific disciplines, though much of the history has been forgotten by current generations.