Social Systems Theory 2012 #2

Takashi Iba

Social Systems Theory#2 Emergence of Communication as an Event

Associate ProfessorFaculty of Policy ManagementKeio University

Niklas Luhmannhttp://www.mt-online.de/start/letzte_meldungen_aus_der_region/4219080_Bielefeld_Universitaet_Bielefeld_erwirbt_Nachlass_von_Luhmann.html

“Thus the theory’s design resembles a labyrinth more than a freeway off into the sunset.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Preface p.lii, l.3

“This theory design pushes the presentation to unusually high levels of abstraction. Our flight must take place above the clouds, and we must reckon with a rather thick cloud cover. We must rely on our instruments.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Preface p.lii, l.3

“Abstraction, however, should not be misunderstood as pure artistry or as a retreat to a "merely analytically" relevant, formal science. ... abstraction is an epistemological necessity.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Preface p.lii, l.3

Studying a sociological theory, Social Systems Theory, proposed by Niklas Luhmann

Understanding what’s happening in the information society

Learning about the media for social change

Social Systems Theory

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

Social Systems Theory (2012 Spring)

Introduction

Emergence of Communication as an Event

Media and Code for Communication

Modern Society

Autopoiesis and Structural Coupling

Voice and Exit for Social Change

Scenario Planning: Learning by Making Stories of Future

Pattern Language, part I: Media for User Participation

Pattern Language, part II: Way of Organizational Change

Creative Collaboration: Value Creation through Communication

Open Collaboration, part I: Collaborative Innovation Networks

Open Collaboration, part II: Open-Source Software Development

Open Collaboration, part III: Wiki and Wikipedia

Exploring Philosophy of Social Change

[Apr 9]

[Apr 16]

[Apr 23]

[May 1]

[May 7]

[May 14]

[May 21]

[May 28]

[Jun 4]

[Jun 11]

[Jun 18]

[Jun 25]

[Jul 2]

[Jul 9]

Mission-Driven Dialogue Book Reading

Social Systems Theory 2012

Understanding What does the concept “communication” mean?

Mission-Driven Dialogue Book Reading

Social Systems Theory 2012

Today’s First Dialogue

What do you thinkwhen reading these books?

Mission-Driven Dialogue Book Reading

Social Systems Theory 2012

“How is social order possible?”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.116, l.22

Communication

Information

Utterance

Understanding

(contingent)(contingent) (contingent)

Communication

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Perception of little movement of others help themto expect the other’ s decision.

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

Double Contingency

Social Systems Theory 2012

Class #2 Keywords

Double Contingency（二重の偶有性）

the nexus of consciousness

Psychic System

the nexus of consciousness

Psychic System

the nexus of consciousness

Psychic System

Each system is operationally closed(Consciousness cannot be imported / exported to another system).

Double Contingency

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Each Actor cannot make decision because it is depend on the alter’ s decision.

? ?? ?

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

Talcott Parsons thought ...

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Shared Norm or Culture helps them to expectthe others decision.

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

Shared Norm / Culture

Niklas Luhmann thought ...

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Perception of little movement of others help themto expect the other’ s decision.

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

Contingency

“the concept of contingency ... This concept results from excluding necessity and impossibility.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.106, l.11

“Something is contingent insofar as it is neither necessary nor impossible; it is just what it is (or was or will be), though it could also be otherwise.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.106, l.13

“It presupposes the world as it is given, yet it does not describe the possible in general, but what is otherwise possible from the viewpoint of reality.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.106, l.19

“At first, alter tentatively determines his behavior in a situation that is still unclear. He begins with a friendly glance, a gesture, a gift and waits to see whether and how ego receives the proposed definition of the situation. In light of this beginning, every subsequent step is an action with a contingency-reducing, determining, effect — be it positive or negative.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.104, l.36

“Highly complex meaning-using systems that are opaque and incalculable to one another are part of the infrastructure presupposed by the theorem of double contingency.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.109, l.18

“They concentrate on what they can observe as input and output in the other as a system in an environment and learn self-referentially in their own observer perspective. They can try to influence what they observe by their own action and can learn further from the feedback.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.110, l.11

“In this way an emergent order can arise that is conditioned by the complexity of the systems that make it possible but that does not depend on this complexity’s being calculated or controlled. We call this emergent order a social system.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.110, l.15

“Nothing forces one to seek the solution for the problem of double contingency exclusively in an already existing consensus, thus in the social dimension. There are functional equivalents for example, those in the temporal dimension.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.104, l.32

“Nothing forces one to seek the solution for the problem of double contingency exclusively in an already existing consensus, thus in the social dimension. There are functional equivalents for example, those in the temporal dimension.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.104, l.32

“How is social order possible?”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.3, p.116, l.22

Today’s Second Dialogue

What is Double Contingency?

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Perception of little movement of others help themto expect the other’ s decision.

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

What is Luhmann’s understanding how to overcome the situation of double contingency?

Communication

“The elementary process constituting the social domain as a special reality is a process of communication.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.138, l.39

Communication-Centered Viewpoint

(Not Human-Centered)

“If one begins with the concept of meaning, it is clear from the start that communication is always a selective occurrence.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.6

“Communication grasps something out of the actual referential horizon that it itself constitutes and leaves other things aside.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.9

“From now on we will treat communication as a three-part unity. We will begin from the fact that three selections must be synthesized in order for communication to appear as an emergent occurrence.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.141, l.38

“If one conceptualizes communication as the synthesis of three selections, as the unity of information, utterance, and understanding, then communication is realized if and to the extent that understanding comes about.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.147, l.19

Communication

Information

Utterance

Understanding

(contingent)(contingent) (contingent)

as the synthesis of three selections: information, utterance, and understanding

Communication

“communication constitutes what it chooses, by virtue of that choice, as a selection, namely, as information.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.15

“the selectivity of the information is itself an aspect of the communication process.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.21

“What is uttered is not only selected, but also already a selection - that is why it is uttered.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.21

“What is decisive is the fact that the third selection can base itself on a distinction, namely, the distinction between information and its utterance.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.140, l.36

“Communication is made possible, so to speak, from behind, contrary to the temporal course of the process.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.143, l.14

“The fact that understanding is an indispensable feature in how communication comes about has far-reaching significance for comprehending communication.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.143, l.20

Sender Receiver

Information

Transferring the Information

Communication

The metaphor of transmission

“The metaphor of transmission is unusable because it implies too much ontology. It suggests that the sender gives up something that the receiver then acquires. This is already incorrect because the sender does not give up anything in the sense of losing it. The entire metaphor of possessing, having, giving, and receiving, the entire “thing metaphoric” is unsuitable for understanding communication..”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.139, l.17

“Thus understanding normally includes more or less extensive misunderstandings.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.141, l.34

“Viewed dynamically, the unity of an individual communication is merely its connectivity.”

N. Luhmann, Social Systems, Stanford University Press, 1996 Chap.4, p.148, l.19

Today’s Third Dialogue

What is Luhmann’s definition of “communication”?

Actor A Actor B

Expectation of the decisionof Actor B

Perception of little movement of others help themto expect the other’ s decision.

Expectation of the decisionof Actor A

What is the advantage for conceptualizing communication as such?