Heinz von Foerster and Niklas Luhmann: The Cybernetics of Social Systems Theory (original) (raw)
Related papers
Revista Direito GV, 2021
Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998) built one of the most encompassing and abstract sociological theories of the 20th century. Bringing to sociology the radical constructivism developed by transdisciplinary scientists such as the mathematician George Spencer-Brown, the physicist Heinz von Foester, and the biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela, Luhmann renewed the bases of understanding society and its subsystems – including law, science, politics, economy and many others. Two decades after the death of this German sociologist, his views on world society, communication and functional differentiation have given rise to an immense body of literature that focuses on analyzing a variety of questions. But how to deal with the scale and abstraction of this theory and apply it to the understanding of localized legal phenomena, such as crime and punishment, or ethics and courts? In this interview, this discussion was posed to two leading Luhmannian scholars who work specially in the Francophone academy. Álvaro Pires, Distinguished University Professor at the University of Ottawa (Canada), and Lukas Sosoe, Full Professor at the University of Luxembourg, were interviewed in São Paulo, on August 22, 2019. Professors Pires and Sosoe have parallel academic trajectories, having worked together in some projects and symposiums. Professor Pires conducted pioneer works on empirical and criminological research with systemic approaches. Professor Sosoe works with legal theory, ethics, contemporary political philosophy and European studies. He has worked on translations to the French of many books by Niklas Luhmann. In this interview, both scholars explore the limitations and potentials for addressing empirical and historical questions within systems theory and present their views on the epistemological innovations that radical constructivism brings for socio-legal studies.
Can social systems be autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann's social theory
The Sociological Review, 2002
The theory of autopoiesis, that is systems that are self-producing or selfconstructing, was originally developed to explain the particular nature of living as opposed to non-living entities. It was subsequently enlarged to encompass cognition and language leading to what is known as second-order cybernetics. However, as with earlier biological theories, many authors have tried to extend the domain of the theory to encompass social systems, the most notable being Luhmann. The purpose of this article is to consider critically the extent to which the theory of autopoiesis, as originally defined, can be applied to social systems -that is, whether social systems are autopoietic. And, if it cannot, whether some weaker version might be appropriate.
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.
Environment and Planning A, 2003
For more than three decades Niklas Luhmann had explicitly pursued the ambitious project of developing a theory of the social based on systems theory (Luhmann, 1997a, page 11). When he died in 1998 his already published work had exceeded 400 articles and 60 monographs. (1) Although recognised as one of the most innovative social scientists of the 20th century in Germany, and well known in Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, and Italy, Luhmann is not widely read in English and French social science. Moreover, his overall impact upon human geography has in general remained marginal. We regret this and use this opportunity to invite geographers to get critically involved with his theory of social systems.
(Re-) Problematizing the Luhmannian Constructivist Systems Approach: A Bungean Intervention
Current Sociology, 2011
In the field of sociological theory, after the decline of Parsons’ version of structural functionalism, Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory came to be seen as the major representative of systems thinking. While Luhmann’s autopoietic systems ontology is sophisticated and deserves serious consideration, the author argues that the prevailing identification of Luhmann’s constructivist-oriented approach with the systems approach itself is problematic mainly for two reasons. First, as the works of the Argentinian-Canadian systems theorist Mario Bunge demonstrate, the systems approach can be fruitfully based on (some version of) scientific realism. Second, the adherents to Luhmann’s constructivist epistemology in sociology seldom engage in a detailed examination of the various critiques of anti-realism offered by scientific and critical realists. Drawing on the literature on philosophy of science, especially the writings of Bunge and a few leading critical realists, the author suggests that a serious Luhmannian sociologist is obligated to provide more cogent and detailed discussions on philosophy of (social) science before taking an opinionated position on epistemology.
Luhmann and the Constructivist Heritage A Critical Reflection
> Context • Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic social systems is increasingly receiving attention in the scholarly dispute about constructivism. > Problem • The paper explores the transition from Kant’s “transcendental/empirical” to Luhmann’s “system/environment” distinction to provide a deepened understanding of Luhmann’s constructivist approach. > Method • Luhmann’s construction of reality via the system/environment distinction is discussed with respect to preceding concepts provided by philosophical and system/cybernetic scholars such as Kant, Husserl, Piaget, von Glasersfeld, von Foerster, and Maturana & Varela. The innovativeness of Luhmann’s approach is then critically evaluated. > Results • Luhmann’s contribution to constructivism is innovative only in the context of his stringent theory architecture of autopoietic meaning-based systems. > Implications • The text is a contribution to the positioning of this approach as part of the philosophical and systems/cybernetics constructivist heritage. > Key Words • Theory of social systems (TSS), observation, autopoiesis, self-reference & hetero-reference, meaning.
Blindness and Seeing in Systems Epistemology: Alfred Locker’s Trans-Classical Systems Theory
Foundations of Science, 2016
Appreciating the undeniable value of General Systems Theory (GST), Alfred Locker considers the question whether or not GST is able to go beyond a mere scientific point of view. Locker's own systems theoretical approach, Trans-Classical Systems Theory, proposes not only to include usual observations into a systems view, but likewise their theoretical presuppositions. Locker hereby creates two levels of observation; an ortho-and a meta-level, where otherwise incommensurable viewpoints are united into whole. In this way, Locker is able to articulate a holistic systems theory of seeming opposites, like, for example, creation and evolution.
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2011
Varela is well known in the systems sciences for his work on second-order cybernetics, biology of cognition and especially autopoietic theory. His concern during this period was to find an appropriate epistemological foundation for the self-reference inherent in life and mind. In his later years, Varela began to develop the so-called ‘enactive’ approach to cognitive science, which sets itself apart from other sciences by promoting a careful consideration of concrete experiential insights. His final efforts were thus dedicated to finding a pragmatic phenomenological foundation for life and mind. It is argued that Varela’s experiential turn—from epistemology to phenomenology—can be seen as a natural progression that builds on many ideas that were already implicit in second-order cybernetics and biology of cognition. It is also suggested that the rigorous study of conscious experience may enable us to refine our theories and systemic concepts of life, mind and sociality.