One of the most innovative features of Niklas Luhmann's theory resides in its allegedly circular construction: it starts from the assumption that even a theory of society itself is but a part of the object (society) that it aims to explain. Hence the relevance and crucial position of the issue of self-description. Using observation theory and second-order cybernetics, the paper briefly examines the epistemological presuppositions that are the basis for this position. It then turns to one of the aspects of the theory that reveals most clearly the consequences of this circular approach: the study of communication as applied to the system of science.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baraldi, C. , Corsi, G. and Esposito, E. (1995) Glossario della teoria dei sistemi sociali di Niklas Luhmann. Milano: Angeli.
2.
Esposito, E. (1991) “Die Paradoxien als Unterscheidungen von Unterscheidungen”, in H.U. Gumbrecht and K.L. Pfeiffer (eds) Paradoxien, Dissonanzen, Zusammenbrüche, pp. 35-37. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
3.
Esposito, E. (1992) L'operazione di osservazione. Costruttivismo e teoria dei sistemi sociali. Milano: Angeli.
4.
Glanville, R. (1981) “The Same is Different”, in M. Zeleny (ed.) Autopoiesis: A theory of the living organization, pp. 252-262. New York/Oxford:Elsevier North-Holland.
5.
Günther, G. (1979) Beiträge zur Grundlegung einer operationsfähigen Dialektik, Vol. 2. Hamburg: Meiner.
6.
Hughes, P. and Brecht, G. (1975) Vicious Circles and Infinity. New York: Doubleday.
7.
Luhmann, N. (1984) Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
8.
Luhmann, N. (1985) “Die Autopoiesis des Bewußtseins”, Soziale Welt36: 402-446.
9.
Luhmann, N. (1986) “The Autopoiesis of Social Systems”, in F. Geyer and J. van der Zouwen (eds) Sociocybernetic Paradoxes: Observation, Control and Evolution of Self-Steering Systems, pp. 172-192. London/Beverly Hills: Sage.
10.
Luhmann, N. (1988) Erkenntnis als Konstruktion. Bern: Benteli.
11.
Luhmann, N. (1990a) Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
12.
Luhmann, N. (1990b) “Sthenographie”, in N. Luhmann et al., Beobachter - Konvergenz der Erkenntnistheorien?, pp. 119-137. München: Fink.
13.
Luhmann, N. (1992) Beobachtungen der Moderne. Opladen: Westdeutscher.
14.
Luhmann, N. and De Giorgi, R. (1992) Teoria della società. Milano: Angeli.
15.
Maturana, H. and Varela, F. (1980) Autopoiesis and Cognition. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Reidel.
16.
Spencer Brown, G. (1969) Laws of Form. London: Allen & Unwin.
17.
Varela, F. (1979) Principles of Biological Autonomy. New York/Oxford: Elsevier North Holland.
18.
Von Foerster, H. (1972) “Notes on an Epistemology for Living Things”, BCL Report No. 9.3, Biological Computer Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana. Also in Observing Systems, pp. 258-271. Seaside, CA: Intersystems Publications, 1984.
19.
Wormell, C.P. (1958) “On the Paradoxes of Self-Reference”, Mind67: 267-271.
