Luhmann’s Social Theory

  • Michael King
  • Chris Thornhill

Abstract

There is no doubt that Niklas Luhmann’s social theory is complex. Yet this is not complexity for complexity’s sake. It is complex because modern society itself is a mass of complexities, and Luhmann saw the task of a social theorist as observing complexity for what it is and avoiding simplified or reductionist accounts of the social world. He wanted to avoid above all else the idea that one could capture ‘the truth’ or essence of modern society in one theoretical account. No theory, not even closed systems theory or autopoiesis, can have the last word or give an exclusive or true account of what society, in its totality, is and how it operates. One could even suggest that the first principle of Luhmann’s sociology is that the possibility not only of seeing things differently but of society actually being different is always present. He fully realized that one could never completely escape reductionism, since any attempt to address and understand events socially necessarily involves selection, rejection and interpretation. What he did accept as feasible, however, was a theory which embraced the possibility of infinite theories, accounts or interpretations of society or beliefs about society. In this theory none of these theories, accounts or interpretations is or could ever be final or definitive. What he wished to offer, therefore, was a social theory of social theories — a social theory which considered multiple ways of perceiving and understanding society.

Keywords

Modern Society Binary Code Meaningful Communication Autopoietic System Communicative Subsystem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    King and Schütz, ‘The Ambitious Modesty of Niklas Luhmann’ (1994), p. 265.Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    Luhmann, ‘The World Society as a Social System’ (1982), p. 132, emphasis added.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    For example, Mingers, ‘Can Social Systems be Autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann’s Social Theory’ (2002). Cf. Teubner, ‘Economics of Gift — Positivity of Justice: The Mutual Paranoia of Jacques Derrida and Niklas Luhmann’ (2001), p. 40.Google Scholar
  4. 6.
    Luhmann, ‘The Cognitive Program of Constructivism and a Reality that Remains Unknown’ (1990), p. 78.Google Scholar
  5. 9.
    ‘The Individuality of the Individual: Historical Meanings and Contemporary Problems’ (1986), p. 318.Google Scholar
  6. 24.
    Luhmann, ‘The Self-Description of Society: Crisis, Fashion and Sociological Theory’ (1984), p. 64.Google Scholar
  7. 54.
    Parsons, The Structure of Social Action (1937) and Social Systems and the Evolution of Action Theory (1997).Google Scholar
  8. 55.
    Luhmann, ‘Generalized Media and the Problem of Contingency’ (1976).Google Scholar
  9. 56.
    See Wolfe, ‘Sociological Theory in the Absence of People: The Limits of Luhmann’s System’s Theory’ (1992), p. 1730.Google Scholar
  10. 57.
    Luhmann, ‘The Improbability of Communication’ (1981), p. 122.Google Scholar
  11. 81.
    In Baraldi et al., GLU: Glossario dei teemini della teoria dei sistemi di Niklas Luhmann (1990).Google Scholar
  12. 82.
    This is an adaptation of the definition of paradox set out in Baraldi et al., GLU, p. 130.Google Scholar
  13. 111.
    Luhmann, Das Recht der Gesellshaft, p. 190.Google Scholar
  14. 112.
    This is borrowed from King, ‘Future Uncertainty as a Challenge to Law’s Programmes: The Dilemma of Parental Disputes’ (2000). Its specific application to law in this article can be generalized to include all social function systems.Google Scholar
  15. 113.
    Spencer Brown, Laws of Form. Google Scholar
  16. 114.
    A summary of several of the issues in the following account may be found in Luhmann, Social Systems. The references provided, however, present a much fuller discussion.Google Scholar
  17. 115.
    Luhmann, ‘The Future Cannot Begin: Temporal Structures in Modern Society’ (1976), p. 135.Google Scholar
  18. 116.
    Luhrnann, Social Systems, ch. 2, ‘Meaning’, p. 78 (translation modified).Google Scholar
  19. 145.
    Luhmann, ‘The World Society as a Social System’, p. 132, and Political Theory in the Welfare State (1990), ch. 3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Michael King and Chris Thornhill 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael King
    • 1
  • Chris Thornhill
    • 2
  1. 1.Law DepartmentBrunel UniversityUxbridgeUK
  2. 2.German DepartmentKing’s College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations