Advertisement

Systems practice

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 47–74 | Cite as

Cybernetics and suprahuman autopoietic systems

  • Fenton F. Robb
Papers

Abstract

Several streams of cybernetic thinking lead to the notion that there may exist systems of a higher logical order than that of manmade organisation. Such systems would be autopoietic and, in principle, beyond human control. Man and his institutions would be but components of such systems. The accelerated growth of institutions and the connections between them facilitated by the IT revolution makes the realization of such systems more probable at this time. The implications for systems practice are discussed.

Key words

autopoiesis cybernetics management organization systems practice 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ashby, W. R. (1952).Design for a Brain, Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  2. Baumgartner, T., Burns, T. R., and De Ville, P. (1978). The dialectics of social action and system structuring. In Geyer, R. F., and Van der Zouwen, J. (eds.),Sociocybernetics, Martinus Nijhoff, Lieden, pp. 27–54.Google Scholar
  3. Beer, S. (1975).Platform for Change, John Wiley & Sons, London.Google Scholar
  4. Beer, S. (1979).The Heart of the Enterprise, John Wiley & Sons, London.Google Scholar
  5. Beer, S. (1980). Preface to autopoiesis: The organisation of the living. In Maturana, H. R., and Varela, F. J. (eds.),Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realisation of the Living, D. Reidel, Dortrecht, pp. 63–72.Google Scholar
  6. Beer, S. (1985).Diagnosing the System, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Ben Eli, M. U. (1981). Self-organization, autopoiesis and evolution. In Zeleny, M. (ed.),Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organisation, North-Holland, Oxford and New York, pp. 169–182.Google Scholar
  8. Braten, S. S. (1986). The third position; beyond artificial and autopoietic reduction. In Geyer, F., and Van der Zouwen, J. (eds.),Sociocybernetic Paradoxes, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 193–205.Google Scholar
  9. Checkland, P. (1987). Address to the 31st Annual Meeting of the International Society for General Systems Research, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
  10. Conant, R., and Ashby, W. R. (1970). Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system.Int. J. Syst. Sci. 1(2), 89–97.Google Scholar
  11. Davies, P. (1987).The Cosmic Blueprint, Hienemann, London.Google Scholar
  12. Durkin, J. E. (1980). The structure of autonomy boundarying in living groups. In Banathy, B. H. (ed.),Systems Science and Science, Society for General Systems Research, Louisville, KY, pp. 634–645.Google Scholar
  13. Espejo, R. (1987). Cybernetic method to study organisations. InProceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the International Society for General Systems Research, Budapest, Hungary, Vol. 1, pp. 323–336.Google Scholar
  14. Flood, R. L., and Robinson, S. A. (1989). Analogy and metaphor in systems and sybernetic methodology.Cybernet. Syst. 20(1) (in press).Google Scholar
  15. Francois, C. (1987). Consequences of Godel's theorem for the metasystemic paradigm. In Van Gigch, J. P. (ed.),Decision Making About Decision Making, Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, England, and Cambridge, MA, pp. 67–76.Google Scholar
  16. George, F. H. (1970). Cybernetics and industry. In Rose, J. (ed.),Progress in Cybernetics, Proceedings of the First International Congress of Cybernetics, London, 1969, Gordon and Breach, London, pp. 113–215.Google Scholar
  17. Gorelik, G. (1975). Principal ideas of Bogdanov's tektology. In Rapaport, A. (ed.),General Systems, XX, pp. 3–13.Google Scholar
  18. Hacking, I. (1981). Lakatos's philosophy of science. In Hacking, I. (ed.),Scientific Revolutions, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 128–143.Google Scholar
  19. Hume, D. (1739). Of the skeptical and other systems of philosophy. Treatise of Human Nature, Book I, Part iv, Sect. ii. In Flew, A. (ed.) (1962).David Hume: On Human Nature and Understanding, Collier Macmillan, London, pp. 219–245.Google Scholar
  20. Jackson, M. C. (1987). New directions in management science. In Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.),New Directions in Management Science, Gower, Aldershot, England, pp. 133–164.Google Scholar
  21. Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (1984). Towards a system of system methodologies.J. Operat. Res. Soc. 35, 473–486.Google Scholar
  22. Kauffman, S. A. (1984). Emergent properties in random complex automata.Physica 10D, 145–155.Google Scholar
  23. Kuhn, T. S. (1970).The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, University Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  24. Kuhn, T. S. (1981). A function for thought experiments. In Hacking, I. (ed.),Scientific Revolutions, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 6–27.Google Scholar
  25. Luhman, N. (1986). The autopoiesis of social systems. In Geyer, F., and Van der Zouwen, J. (eds.),Sociocybernetic Paradoxes, Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 172–192.Google Scholar
  26. Maruyama, M. (1963). The second cybernetics: Deviation-amplifying mutual causal processes.Am. Sci. 51, 164–179, 250–256.Google Scholar
  27. Maruyama, M. (1980). Mindscapes and science theories.Curr. Anthropol. 21, 589–599. [Reprinted in Ragade, R. K. (ed.),General Systems, XXVI, pp. 41–60.]Google Scholar
  28. Maruyama, M. (1987). Communication between mindscape types. In Van Gigch, J. P. (ed.),Decision Making About Decision Making, Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, England, and Cambridge, MA, pp. 79–98.Google Scholar
  29. Maturana, H. R. (1981). Autopoiesis. In Zeleny, M. (ed.),Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organisation, North-Holland, New York and Oxford, pp. 21–23.Google Scholar
  30. Maturana, H. R., and Varela, F. J. (1975). Autopoietic systems: A characterisation of the living organisation.Biological Computer Laboratory Report 9.4, University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
  31. Maturana, H. R., and Varela, F. J. (1980).Autopoiesis: The Organisation of the Living, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Boston, and London.Google Scholar
  32. Miller, J. G. (1965). Living systems; Basic concepts.Behav. Sci. 10, 193–237.Google Scholar
  33. Miller, J. G. (1978).Living Systems, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, J. G. (1986). Can systems theory generate testable hypotheses? from Talcott Parsons to living systems theory.Syst. Res. 3(2), 73–84.Google Scholar
  35. Mirham, D., and Mirham, G. A. (1985). The chronology of the etymology of “cybernetics.”Syst. Res. 2(2), 165–167.Google Scholar
  36. Pask, G. (1960).An Approach to Cybernetics, Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
  37. Pask, G. (1970). Cybernetics in the behavioural sciences; The cybernetics of behaviour and cognition, extending the meaning of “goal.” In Rose, J. (ed.),Progress in Cybernetics. Proceedings of the First International Congress of Cybernetics, London, 1969, Gordon and Breach, London, pp. 15–44.Google Scholar
  38. Pask, G. (1978). A conversation theoretic approach to social systems. In Geyer, R. F., and Van der Zouwen, J. (eds.),Sociocybernetics, Martinus Nijhoff, Lieden, Boston, and London, pp. 15–26.Google Scholar
  39. Pask, G. (1980). The limits of togetherness. In Lavington, S. H. (ed.),Information Processing, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 999–1012. (Reprinted in Ragade, R. (ed.),General Systems, XXV, pp. 144–157.)Google Scholar
  40. Pask, G. (1981). Organisational closure of potentially conscious systems. In Zeleny, M. (ed.),Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organisation, North-Holland, Oxford and New York, pp. 265–308.Google Scholar
  41. Pask, G., Scott, B. C. E., and Kalliourdis, D. (1973). A theory of conversations and individuals; exemplified by the learning process on CASTE.Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 5, 443–566.Google Scholar
  42. Perrow, C. (1984).Normal Accidents; Living with High-Risk Technologies, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  43. Popper, K. (1972).Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  44. Prigogine, I. (1980).From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences, Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  45. Robb, F. F. (1985a). Towards a “better” scientific theory of human organisations.J. Operat. Res. Soc. 36(6), 433–466.Google Scholar
  46. Robb, F. F. (1985b). Thought experiments on human activity systems. InProceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Society for General Systems Research, Los Angeles, pp. 914–917.Google Scholar
  47. Robb, F. F. (1987). MIS: A distorting lens? Paper to the 29th Annual Conference of the Operational Research Society, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  48. Robb, F. F., and Brown, T. A. (1987a). The machine intelligence family.Account. Mag. 91(971), 50–52.Google Scholar
  49. Robb, F. F., and Brown, T. A. (1987b). The accountant and the intelligent machine.Account. Mag. 91(972), 38–39.Google Scholar
  50. Rosen, R. (1986).Anticipatory Systems, Pergamon, London.Google Scholar
  51. Russell, B. (1946).A History of Western Philosophy, George Allan and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  52. Simons, G. (1987).Eco-Computer, John Wiley, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
  53. Thom, R. (1975).Structural Stability and Morphogenesis, Benjamin, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  54. Tinker, T. (1986). Metaphor or reification: Are radical humanists really libertarian anarchists?J. Man. Sci. 23(4), 363–383.Google Scholar
  55. Tritton, D. J. (1986). Ordered and chaotic motion of a forced spherical pendulum.Eur. J. Phys. 7, 162.Google Scholar
  56. Troncale, L. (1985). The future of general systems research; Obstacles, potentials and case studies.Syst. Res. 2(1), 43–84.Google Scholar
  57. Van Gigch, J. P. (1987). The metasystem, rationalities and information. In Van Gigch, J. P. (ed.),Decision Making About Decision Making, Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, England, and Cambridge, MA, pp. 227–239.Google Scholar
  58. Varela, F. J. (1981). Describing the logic of the living. In Zeleny, M. (ed.),Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organisation, North-Holland, New York and Oxford, pp. 36–48.Google Scholar
  59. Warfield, J. M. (1982). Organisations and systems learning. In Warfield, J. M. (ed.),General Systems, XXVII, pp. 5–74.Google Scholar
  60. Weick, K. E. (1979).The Social Psychology of Organizing, 2nd ed., Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  61. Wiener, N. (1948).Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and in the Machine, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Wiener, N. (1949).Interpolation, Extrapolation and Smoothing of Stationary Time Series with Engineering Applications, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  63. Wise, J. A., and Debons, A. (1987).Information Systems Failure Analysis, Springer-Verlag, Heidleberg.Google Scholar
  64. Wittgenstein, L. (1945). Philosophical investigations I, 43. In Anscombe, G. E. M., Rhees, R., and von Wright, G. H. (eds.), Anscombe, G. E. M. (trans.),Ludwig Wittgenstein (1967), 3rd ed. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fenton F. Robb
    • 1
  1. 1.The Department of Accounting and Business MethodThe University of EdinburghEdinburghScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations