Internal
Links

Top
 Review Notes:  Systems Theory
External
Links
  Syllabus
Link
  Resources
Link
 
Outline on   Systems Theory
  
Link
 Systems Theory  
Link
 Luhman's General System Theory  
Link
 Autopoietic Systems  
Link
 Society & Psychic Systems  
Link
 Double Contingency  
Link
 Evolution of Social Systems  
Link
 Differentiation w/in Systems  
Link
 Codes  
Link
 Luhmann's Sociology of Knowledge  
Link
 A Critique of Systems Theory  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Systems Theory
External
Links
 
 See Also:  The Schools of Thought of the Social Sciences  
 
 Scrivener asks, why do we need Cybernetics and Systems Theory now? 
 
 
 We need Systems Theory because, "When we try to pick up anything by itself we find it is attached to everything in the universe."  -- John Muir, ecologist  
  Systems Theory   
 
 - is applicable to all behavioral & social sciences 
 
  - provides a common vocabulary to unify the behavioral & social sciences & the physical sciences  
  - examines the many aspects in the social & behavioral sciences  
 
 - is a multi-level system
 
  - can be applied to the largest & the smallest scale social phenomenon  
 
 - examines the many varied relationships
 
  - focuses on relationships & processes at various levels w/in the social system  
  - views social life as relationships among relationships  
  - sees all aspects of socio-cultural systems in process terms, i.e. as networks of information & communications  
  - is inherently integrative  
  - operates against a piece meal analyses of the social world  
 
 - holds that components & complexes of elements are directly or indirectly related in a causal network such that each component is related to some others in a more or less stable way w/in any particular period of time
 
 
 - holds that because of the intricacy of social systems, an analysis of the parts cannot be treated out of the context of the whole
 
 
 - holds that society, social structures, texts, etc. cannot be treated as unified social facts
 
  The example of gravity shows that gravity, as reified into a thing, is actually only a relationship of attraction btwn objects w/ mass, demonstrating that in the social sciences we must not fall into reification of, for example, social structures, which are not things, but relationships  
     See Also:  Reification  
 
 Information is "a difference that makes a difference," to use Gregory Bateson's definition
 
  Information is a measure of the reduction of uncertainty (entropy) that results from receiving a message  
  System is a word that we use to describe any "experience-cluster" that we can map as a set of interacting elements over time  
  A System is mapped by identifying the pathways of information flow -- as well as possibly the flow of energy, matter and other variables  
 
 In a System, the "flow" of information is special, because only information can go from A to B while also staying at A  
 
 Buckley saw Systems Theory as operating on the levels of large-scale objective structures, symbol systems, action  & interaction, consciousness, & self-awareness
 
 
 The individual & society are viewed as equal & as connected through mutually constitutive fields, related through feedback processes
 
 
 Systems Theory focuses on processes in seeing the social world in dynamic terms where socio-cultural reality continually emerges
 
 
 Systems Theory sees relationships among mechanical systems, organic systems, & socio-cultural systems, running in a continuum from least to most complex, & as exhibiting sub-systems that exist in a continuum from least to most stable
 
 
 In mechanical systems, interrelationships are based on transfers of energy
 
 
 In organic & socio-cultural systems, interrelationships are based on transfers of information
 
 
 Mechanical systems, organic systems, & socio-cultural systems may be differentiated by their degree of openness or closedness which describes their degree of interchange w/ the environment
 
 
 In general, mechanical systems are the most closed, organic systems are intermediate, & socio-cultural systems are the most open  
 
 The degree of openness is related to entropy, the tendency of a system to run down, or negentropy, the tendency of a system to elaborate systems  
  Closed systems tend to be entropic & open systems tend to be negentropic  
  Socio-cultural systems are generally open & tend to have more tension built into them  
  Socio-cultural systems can be purposive & goal-seeking & they receive high levels of feedback from the environment, which allows them to move toward their goals  
  Feedback is an essential process in Systems Theory  
  In contrast to Functionalism w/ its focus on equilibrium, feedback enables Systems Theorist to deal w/ friction, growth, evolution, & change  
  See Also:  Functionalism  
  One quality of system openness is the amount of feedback a systems receives  
  Morphostasis includes those processes that help a system maintain itself, which are similar to Functionalism's Maintenance, a.k.a. Latency Function  
  Morphogenesis includes those processes that help a system change itself, & grow more elaborate  
      See Also:  Archer & Agency-Structure Integration  
  Social systems develop increasingly complex mediating systems which are systems which intervene btwn external forces & the action of the system  
  Some mediating systems maintain the system & some cause change  
  Mediating systems may grow more independent, autonomous, and determinative of the system, allowing the system to become less dependent on the environment  
  Mediating systems allow the system to adjust, they allow the system to enter new environments, they reorganize parts of the system to more efficiently deal w/ the environment  
  Buckley built on Mead's work where consciousness & action are interrelated  
     See Also:  Mead  
  Action begins w/ a signal from the environment, which is transmitted to the actor, complicated by noise, providing the actor w/ info, upon which the actor selects a response via the mediating process of self-consciousness  
  In Systems Theory, self-consciousness is a mechanism of internal feedback of the system's own states which may be mapped or compared w/ other info from the situation, form memory, permitting selection from a repertoire of actions in a goal-directed manner  
  For Mead & Systems Theory, consciousness is integral part of both action & interaction  
  Buckley goes on to saw the interpersonal realm as part of the personality system & as mutually determinative  
  Buckley did not move beyond the individual /consciousness, personal & interpersonal levels, to the interactional domain of patterns of interaction such as imitation & response  
  Buckley did examine the macro-level, especially roles & institutions  
  Buckley formulated General Principles of Systems Theory  
  a.  Systems Theory accepts the ideas that tension is norm, ever-present, & necessary for system operation  
  b.  Systems Theory focuses on the nature & sources of varieties of social systems  
  The focus on tension & variety makes Systems Theory dynamic  
  c.  Dynamism is enhanced in the understanding that the selection process at various levels, i.e. individual & interpersonal, has alternatives that may be sorted & sifted  
  d.  The interpersonal level is the basis of the larger structures  
  e.  Besides the dynamic processes of tension, variation of systems, & choice, the processes of perpetuation & transmission operated to bring stability & change  
  Ball notes the similarity btwn Systems Theory & dialectics in their focus on relations, process, creativity, & tension  
     See Also:  The Dialectic   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Luhmann's General Systems Theory  1927 - 1998
External
Links
  See Also:  Systems Theory  
Link
 -  Biography & Major Works  
  German social thinker, Niklas Luhmann, is considered to be the Father & major figure in Systems Theory
 
  Luhmann combined Systems Theory w/ Parsons' structural-functionalism, cognitive biology, & cybernetics
 
  See Also:  Parsons  
  Luhmann's Systems Theory & his concept of society are analytical tools that allow sociology to obtain a fresh perspective on current social problems  
  Systems Theory makes a distinction btwn systems & their environments, opening up a kind of interdisciplinary research based on the assumption that complexity is the overarching problem in connecting the apparently separated realms of the natural & the human sciences  
  a.  Luhmann believes Parsons has no place for self-reference
 
  For Luhmann, society's ability to refer to itself is central to understanding society as a system
 
  b.  Luhmann believes Parsons does not recognize contingency & thus cannot adequately analyze society because there is no analysis of alternative ways of being
 
  For Luhmann, Parsons' AGIL scheme should be seen as a model of possibilities, not as a social fact
 
  Luhmann's analysis of AGIL shows that adaptive & goal attainment functions can be related in various ways & the goal of Systems Theory is to decide why a particular relationship exists at a given time
 
  Luhmann examines the choice of relationships in a self-referential context w/ a dynamic environment
 
  Systems & environments differ in complexity
 
  A system is always less complex that its environment
 
  Example of auto plant as less complex than its environment  
  Example of the Borges story of the king & the cartographer  
  Systems must reduce complexity, or they are useless  
  Systems select from & simplify the environment & thus ignore many aspects of the environment, until they demand attention
 
  Because systems cannot deal w/ all of the complexity of the environment, systems are forced to select
 
  The forced selection of components or relationships from the environment creates contingency, since other components or relationships could be chosen
 
  Contingency means risk, since a systems may select the right or wrong components or relationship from the environment
 
  Despite being less complex than the environment, systems develop subsystems in order to deal effectively w/ the environment
 
  Subsystems make a system more complex
 
  Paradoxically, only complexity can reduce complexity
 

 
Top
  

Niklas Luhmann
1927  -  1998

Top
  
Major Works
 


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Autopoietic Systems
External
Links
  -  Project:  Auotpoietic Systems & Social Structure 
Link
  Autopoietic systems have the qualities that they
1.  - produce the basic elements of a system, i.e. the system produces itself
2.  - are self organizing
3.  - produce & organize their own boundaries, distinguishing btwn what is in the system & what is in the environment
4.  - are determined by the self organization of the system, & not as functionalism would hold, by the functional necessities of the system
5.  - produce & organize their own internal structures
6.  - produce their own structures
7.  - are self referential
8.  - are a closed systems w/ no direct connection btwn itself & the environment, instead dealing w/ representations of the environment
 
  1.  Autopoietic systems produce the basic elements of a system, i.e. the system produces itself
 
  Example:  the economic system produces money, & the meaning / value of money is produced / maintained by the system
 
  Both money & the economic system emerged together
 
  2.  Autopoietic systems are self organizing
 
  3.  Autopoietic systems produce & organize their own boundaries, distinguishing btwn what is in the system & what is in the environment
 
  Example:  customers are sometimes seen as being part of an business, & sometimes not  
  4.  Autopoietic systems are determined by the self organization of the system, & not as functionalism would hold, by the functional necessities of the system  
     See Also:  Functionalism  
 
 5.  Autopoietic systems produce & organize their own internal structures
 
  Traditional European philosophy has favored theories in which causality is the dominant explanatory principle: things happen because someone, or by extension something, makes them happen  
  Causality has rarely provided adequate accounts of most systems because they consist of many interacting parts   
  The behavior of the system as a whole, and often of the individual parts, is an complex aggregation of the interactions of all the parts  
  In most systems, no part controls the whole, or can even control another part outside the influence of the rest of the system  
  Systems are said to be 'self organizing' and the behavior of aggregates of components is said to be 'emergent'  
  Systems may be living organisms, ecosystems, and social or ecosocial systems, all which have no isolated controlling agencies  
  There are no control hierarchies among components: no generals, captains, and soldiers  
  Self organizing systems are inherently democratic, and Eurocultural philosophies basically are not  
 
 The environment & other systems may try to limit the scope of autopoietic systems
 
  An example of the limiting of autopoietic systems can be seen in the situation that sex & drugs are part of all market systems, but political systems try to exclude them
 
  6.  Autopoietic systems produce their own structures
 
  An example of autopoietic systems producing their own structures is economic systems producing markets, banks, exchanges, etc.
 
  7.  Autopoietic systems are self referential
 
  An example of the self referential quality of autopoietic systems is that economic systems use prices to refer to itself; the legal system has laws about laws; the educational system assesses & educates itself
 
  8.  Autopoietic systems are a closed systems w/ no direct connection btwn itself & the environment, instead dealing w/ representations of the environment
 
  An example of the closed quality of autopoietic systems is that economic system responds to the needs of the people through the demand they have as represented by the money they are willing to offer
 
  An example of the closed quality of autopoietic systems is that the IRS deals w/ tax forms, not people
 
  Autopoietic systems develop subsystems to indirectly link it to its environment & thus an autopoietic system is affected by its environment
 
  An example of the linking quality of autopoietic systems is that  Stock Market value may be out of sync or in sync w/ various environmental qualities such as the value of assets, resale price, revenue value, etc. 
 
  A closed system is distinct from the individual components that appear to be part of it; i.e. a bank is more than its money, more than its customers  
  An example of the distinction quality of autopoietic systems is that a bureaucracy is made up of people & deals w/ people in the environment & thus must bring people from the environment into the system as workers, as clients, & so on, differentiating them as workers, mgrs., major clients, etc.   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Society & Psychic Systems
External
Links
  See Also:  Systems Theory  
  Society & Psychic Systems are autopoietic systems because they fulfill the four characteristics in that they produces their own basic elements, they establish their own boundaries & structures; they are self-referential; & they are closed
 
  The basic element of society is communication produced by society
 
  Participants in society refer to society through communication
 
  An individual is relevant in society only to the extent that they communicate
 
  Whatever is not communication is part of the environment including biological & psychic systems, thus, for Luhmann, the individual is not part of society
 
  For Luhmann, there are no true individuals in that we are all created by society & continually immersed in it; to use the terms of the ethnomethodologists, behavior is over-determined
 
     See Also:  Ethnomethodology  
  A Psychic System is the consciousness of the individual
 
  The Psychic System & Society are systems consisting entirely of communication, which both rely on meaning, which affects the choices of the system
 
  The meaning of an action or object is the difference from other actions or objects
 
  Meaning appears against a backdrop of contingency
 
  If there is no possibility of being different, then there is no difference in meaning
 
  Action has meaning only when a selection is made from a range of possible actions
 
  All systems which rely on meaning, such as the Social & Psychic Systems, are closed because
 
    a.  meaning always refers to other meanings
 
    b.  only meaning can change meaning
 
    c.  meaning usually produces more meaning
 
  Meaning forms the boundary to each social or psychic system
 
  For example, for the Psychic System, what is not meaningful is seen as outside the system as a cause of action; and what is seen as inside the system is seen as a motivation  
  Events enter the psychic system only as meaning  
  Even our bodies are seen only as a disturbance to the psychic system as the body enters our consciousness by becoming meaningful as an emotion, a feeling, a sensation  
  The social system differentiates meaning btwn a communication w/in the system, meaningful communications from the environment, or noise from inside or outside  
  Psychic & Social Systems evolved together because each is the necessary environment for the other  
  The elements of the psychic meaning system are conceptual representations  
  The elements of the social meaning system are communications  
  The  meaning in the psychic system does not have any priority over meaning in the social system because both systems are autopoietic & thus produce their own meanings & processes  
  In the psychic system, meaning is bound to consciousness, while in the social system, it is bound to communication  
  Consciousness is internal communication  
  Meaning in the social system cannot be attributed to an individual, an individual's intentions, nor to a social system because it is a selection from among the elements of each of these systems & thus meaning is contingent, the selection which is negotiated by members of the systems  
Link
 Example of various meanings of a greeting  

 
Top
  
Example of the various meanings of a greeting

A friendly hello
A person who wants something
A brush off
A romantic proposition


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Double Contingency
External
Links
 Link
 -  Project:  Double Contingencies 
Link
  Double contingency is the fact that every communication takes into consideration the meaning that is received as well as the meaning that is sent
 
  Communication takes into consideration the meaning that is received which depends on the receiver's estimation of the communicator
 
  The meaning of a communication being dependent on the sender & receiver's estimation of each other creates the double contingency
 
 Link
 Example of double contingencies
 
  The less we know about each other, the greater the chance of the problem of double contingency
 
  Actors take into account personal attributes, norms, roles, expectations & judge these correctly or incorrectly
 
  Society can never do w/o these expectations because actors must make them to understand a communication
 
  Because we may each have different attributes, norms, expectations in sending or receiving a communication, we develop social norms & expectations which are based in the social structures in which we continually find ourselves
 
  The social system, which is based on communication, creates social structures to solve the problem of double contingency
 
  Society & the social structures that make up society are all autopoietic systems in that the norms, expectations, meanings, etc. create the elements (communications) of society & those elements create the structure, so that the system constitutes its own elements
 
  In any system, because of double contingency, any communication is improbable
 
  Double contingency in systems holds that it is improbable that we have something we want to communicate to another
 
  Double contingency in systems holds that it  is improbable that we will choose a particular method to communicate
 
  Double contingency in systems holds that it  is improbable that the receiver will understand us correctly
 
  Social structures evolved to make communications more probable
 
  While communications seem to be a collection of independent interactions which last only as long as we are present, from the point of view of society, interactions are episodes in ongoing social processes
 
  We as individuals realize that we are one of many millions of people using the phone, saying hello, etc., & thus we are aware of our social context
 
  To avoid a breakdown, structures are developed to permit earlier communications to connect w/ later communications so that we greet family members one way which continues our familial relationship w/ them and we greet fellow workers in another way which continues our workplace relationship w/ them
 
  The selection of communications in one social structure is restricted by previously chosen communications  
  The need to overcome the double contingency by making improbable communications more probable regulates the evolution of social systems  
Top
  
Examples of Double Contingencies

In this example, the double contingency succeeds for one pair of people, but fails for another.
[ Three people riding in a car  Driver, Passenger 1 & Passenger 2 ]
Passenger 1:  Look, there is an old wind mill. 
Passenger 2:  Yes, that is a nice one!
Driver:  Where?  I don't see it? 
Passenger 1:  Ha ha!  I mean it is in the travel book we are looking at.

Failed Double Contingency:
1st person:    "How's it going?"
2nd person:  "What do you mean by that?!"


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Evolution of Social Systems
External
Links
  See Also:  Systems Theory  
  System Theory's general theory of evolution & differentiation, as well as Luhmann's thinking on specific systems such as science & the economy, open up new avenues of theory & research  
  The need to overcome the double contingency by making improbable communications more probable regulates the evolution of social systems
 
  Luhmann's sociology assumed that human societies are both 'evolutionary' and 'contingent', that is, they are historical structures that could have been different from what they are  
  Evolution is a process of trial-and-error & is not technological & its outcomes are not governed by a predefined goal
 
  Because of his view of evolution, for Luhmann & Systems Theory, the idea of progress makes no sense
 
  Because at some level, the idea of progress does make sense to many people, Systems Theory is weak in this respect
 
  Parsons developed the idea of evolutionary universals in modern societies
 
    See Also:  Parsons' Structural Functionalism
 
  For Luhmann, to assume a necessary path of societal development is teleological & ignores the variety of ways to deal w/ a given situation
 
  Generally, evolution, as embodied in the principles of natural selection & the inheritance of stable characteristics, makes improbability more probable in that once a particular path or species exists, it makes it more probable that another, similar type will evolve
 
  Evolution is a set of THREE processes of variation, selection, & stabilization
 
  a.  Variation is a process of trial-and-error that occurs when a system faces a unique situation, a variety of solutions may develop to deal w/ it
 
  b.  Selection is a process of choosing what appears to be the best solution given the double contingent meaning of the situation; however, this is not to say that the best solution is chosen
 
  The selection of one alternative does not always mean that the other alternatives have disappeared  
  c.  Stabilization occurs when a new differentiation requires the adjustment of all parts of the system to a new selection, temporarily ending the evolutionary process
 
Link
 Example of exchanges btwn economic systems
 
Top
  
Example of exchanges btwn economic systems

When one econ system buys more products from another system, they have a trade deficit, as we do w/ oil. 
The nations that is doing the selling builds up a surplus of currency, i.e. the dollar.
A surplus of anything drives down the value of that thing & thus the value of the dollar falls.
The nation holding the dollar does not want to see the loss of their value of dollars so they invest it in the host nation.
They buy property, products or services from the nation w/ the trade deficit.


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Differentiation w/in Systems
External
Links
  See Also:  
 
 -  Systems Theory  
  -  Social Differentiation  
 
 Differentiation in Systems is similar to, but not the same as Social Differentiation along the lines of Race, Gender, Class, etc.  
  Differentiation is the replication w/in a system of the difference btwn a system & its environment
 
  Differentiation is the separating / differentiating of a component of a system into a fully separate subsystem  
  Differentiation is the process that creates a subsystem  
  For Luhmann, the principal feature of modern society is the increased process of system differentiation as a way of dealing w/ the complexity in the environment
 
  In a differentiated system there are TWO kinds of environments:  one which is common to all subsystems & a different internal environment for each subsystems
 
 Link
 Example of Differentiation of Ford
 
  A differentiated subsystem (all subsystems are differentiated) views itself as separate from its environment, separate & part of a system, & separate & part of other subsystems w/in the system
 
  Each subsystem has a different view of the internal environment of the system
 
  Differentiated subsystems create a highly complex & dynamic internal environment
 
  Differentiation is a primary way of dealing w/ changes in the environment
 
  Each system maintains boundaries w/ the environment otherwise the system would be overwhelmed by the complexity of the environment, break down, & cease to exist
 
  But each system must deal w/ the environment
 
  It is understood that large-scale orgs adjust slowly to changes in the environment such as demands by the public, political changes, technological changes, etc. 
 
  Even though orgs may seem to adapt slowly, they do evolve & one of the ways they evolve is by differentiation w/in the system
 
  Thus, environmental change is "translated" into the structure of the org
 
  An example of an env change being translated in the structure of the org is seen when an org creates an IT Dept. to deal w/ computers & technology
 
  Differentiation increases the complexity of a system by adding a subsystem & by connecting the subsystem to the system, to other subsystems, & to the environment
 
  Differentiation, i.e. the creation of a subsystem, allows for more variation w/in the system to respond o variation in the environment
 
  Differentiation also allows for faster evolution since evolution is the process of selection from various alternatives, differentiation creates more alternatives to choose from
 
 
 In systems, the more variation that is available, the better the selection
 
 
 Luhmann argues that FOUR forms of internal differentiation have developed, which he calls  
Link
    a.  segmentation differentiation  
Link
    b  stratification differentiation  
Link
    c.  center-periphery differentiation  
Link
    d.  functional differentiation  
 
 Each type of differentiation increases the complexity of the system through the repetition of the differentiation btwn system & its environment w/in the system  
  Each type of differentiation has a different evolutionary potential because each type of differentiation has a different ability to produce variability & therefore provide for more selectivity for evolutionary processes  
The more complex forms of differentiation have more potential to accelerate the evolution of the system   
  a.  Segmentary Differentiation  
  Segmentary Differentiation divides parts of the system on the basis of the need to fulfill identical functions over & over  
  Example:  Autos:  similar types of plants in one manufacturer, i.e. Ford has several engine plants  
  Each Segment   
     - is nearly the same  
     - has nearly the same structure  
     - fulfills the same function  
     - fulfills functions over & over  
  In Segmentary Differentiation inequality results from accidental variations in environments, or in slight differentiation in the Segments themselves  
  In Segmentary Differentiation, if a segment fails to fulfill its function, it does not threaten the system  
  In Segmentary Differentiation, the relations that any two subsystems are not structurally different  
 
 In business management, this type of organization is call a Functional Organization; i.e. the org is structured according to function  
    See Also:  Org Structure Types  
  b.  Stratification Differentiation  
  Stratification Differentiation is vertical differentiation by rank or status, in a hierarchical system   
 
 Each level in stratified differentiation is distinguished by its rank in the hierarchy
 
  Each rank in the hierarchy in stratified differentiation fulfills a particular & distinct function in the system  
  An example of stratification differentiation is seen when in corporations mgt. differentiates into top mgt., middle mgt., supervisors, team leaders, etc.  
  In stratification differentiation, inequality results from the structure of the system itself; i.e. inequality is designed into the system  
  There is an interplay, some would say a functionality, of equality & inequality  
  Those of the same rank are essentially equal  
  The higher the ranks have more access to resources & influential communications  
  Stratified systems usually have a greater concern for those at the top of the hierarchy  
  Stratified systems are usually w/ lower-level members only if they threaten the higher ranks  
  Both higher & lower ranks depend on each other & can survive only if all ranks realize their operation  
  The importance of the lower ranks, & their difficulty in becoming the subject of influential communications create structural problems that limit the complexity of the system  
  When the upper levels become too removed from the lower levels, the system may collapse because the lower operations may cease to function w/o or w/ improper direction  
  In Stratified Differentiation, the relations that any two subsystems are basically different from those within the ranking system  
  In business management, this type of organization is call a Vertical Organization; i.e. the org is structured in a hierarchy  
In order to have a communication or access to resources, the lower-levels must resort to conflict   
  c.  Center-Periphery Differentiation  
  Center-Periphery Differentiation links Segmentary & Stratified Differentiation  
  Example:  Autos:  Headquarters is "in the center" & continues to manage plants in other areas  
  The Center has a differentiated function of management / administration as compared to the Periphery which operates to actually carry out the directions of the Center  
  The Center has authority / control over the Periphery & thus is in a Stratified relationship, giving it more access to resources & influential communications  
In business management, this type of organization is call a Geographic Organization; i.e. the org is structured geographically by location   
 
 d.  Functional Differentiation
 
 
 Functional Differentiation occurs when every function or operation w/in a system occurs in a separate unit
 
 
 Functional Differentiation rarely occurs in a pure form in social systems; never-the-less social systems can be highly differentiated based on function
 
 
 Functional Differentiation is the most complex form of differentiation & is the form that dominates modern society
 
 
 Weber holds that rationalization & bureaucratization dominates modern society  
 
 Ritzer holds that hyperrationalization & McDonaldization dominates modern society  
 
 Functional Differentiation is the most flexible of the types of systems differentiation which is to say that functions may be accomplished, in the same system, in many different ways, through many different subsystems
 
 
 If one subsystem fails to fulfill its operation, the whole system will have trouble surviving
 
 
 As long as each subsystem fulfills its operation, the different units can attain a high degree of independence
 
 
 Functional Differentiation is the most complex form of differentiation, & complexity allows more flexibility & efficiency, but a failure in a complex system is more likely to be catastrophic
 
 
 Increased vulnerability is the weakness that is inherent when a system develops the strength of functional differentiation
 
 
 Example of Comparison of the Types of Systems Differentiation in an auto manufacturer
 
 
 With Functional Differentiation, more types of possible relations btwn subsystems means more variation to use to select structural responses to change in the environment
 
 
 With Functional Differentiation, the different types of relations btwn subsystems multiply
 
 
 The more complex forms of differentiation do not exclude the less complex forms, and may require the less complex forms
 
 
 We tend to view modern systems as functionally differentiated, but other forms continue to exist w/in modern society
 
  Problems of Functional Differentiation  
  The central problem for society of functional differentiation is that what is necessary for a system w/in society may not be necessary for society as a whole  
  What is necessary for society, may not be dealt w/ by any functional system  
  There may not be any functional system that has a code that can represent the problem adequately  
  Examples:  the economic system does not represent ecological problems & the legal system has laws that allow pollution that are not economical  
  Problems btwn systems are often caused by functional differentiation; i.e., the development of different systems  
  Functional differentiation requires the displacement of problems from the level of society to the level of subsystems  
  Subsystems gain independence & flexibility in making decisions using its own codes, but is still dependent on other subsystems to move the system as a whole  
  The greater independence of functional systems creates greater vulnerability of the system as a whole  
  System Theory's recognition of the problems of functional differentiation is similar to Durkheim's understanding of organic solidarity & the division of labor where he posits that people's understanding of their dependence on each other in complex modern society is a major social force holding society together  
  Luhmann has examined ecological problems through system theory's concept of functional differentiation  
  Modern society has no specific differentiated system to deal w/ ecology  
  Everything happens in an environment & systems operate to take from an environment what they need & ignore the rest  
  The environment is a problem, or something to deal w/, only if it can be represented in that system's code  
  Example:  The law can move against polluters only if what they do can be represented as illegal  
  System Resonance means that there is an exchange of info & resources btwn systems or btwn systems & their environments that is healthy & sustainable for the parties involved  
  Functional systems produce both too much & too little resonance to problems in their environment  
  Too little resonance w/ the environment means that the system does not react well to problems that cannot be represented by their environment  
  Example:  Environmental groups may want auto makers to produce less polluting cars but auto makers will not react unless it affects their profits  
  Too much resonance w/ the environment means that the system reacts too much w/ the environment & may be overwhelmed or absorbed by the environment  
  Too much resonance may lead to reactions in other functional systems because the systems are interdependent  
  Example:  Mass transit may develop to deal w/ auto pollution  
  Reactions to the environment or to other systems has unpredictable consequences w/in complex interdependent functional systems  

 
Top
  
Example of Differentiation of Ford

As production modernized, it became to difficult for one plant manager to handle all the details in a production plant.

Ford differentiated production into engine assembly plants, transmission assembly plants, drive train assembly plants, & final assembly plants


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Codes
External
Links
  -  Project:  Codes & Social Structures 
Link
  A code is the basic language of a functional system
 
  A code is a way to distinguish elements of a system from elements that do not belong to the system
 
  One type of code is for
 
  -  scientific systems which distinguishes truth from nontruth
 
  -  economic systems which distinguishes payment from nonpayment
 
  -  legal systems which distinguishes legal from nonlegal
 
  Every communication w/in a system uses a particular code
 
  Codes limit the kinds of permissible communication
 
  A communication must use the code of the system to be part of the system
 
  W/in the scientific system, we find codes of truth
 
  NASA usually uses a scientific system using the code of truth / nontruth, but it also has a budget & thus must use an economic system w/ the code of money
 
  For Luhmann, no system uses & understands the code of another system & there is not way to translate the code of one system into another
 
  Other theorists disagree w/ Luhmann, saying interdisciplinary / intersystemic communication is possible & necessary
 
  Because systems are closed, they react only to things happening in their environment & communications by other systems is seen as noise
 
  Communications by other systems may be translated into communications w/in the system so a scientific system can do an economic analysis of its projects
 
  See Also:  Habermas on Communicative Action  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Luhmann's Sociology of Knowledge
External
Links
  See Also:  
  -  Systems Theory  
  -  Epistemology & the Sociology of Knowledge  
  For Luhmann, the principle question for sociology is:  "What is society?"  
  Luhmann's system theory defines society as the "all encompassing social system including all other societal systems"
 
  Luhmann's concept of society is identical to the concept of a world society
 
  For Luhmann, there can be only one society
 
  A social system is every system producing communication as its basic element to reproduce itself
 
  A societal system is a functional system like the economy, science, & law w/in the all-encompassing system of society
 
  An all-encompassing world society has no boundaries in time & space
 
  An all-encompassing world society has no address & no other societies in the environment
 
  As many epistemologists note, a major issue for the construction of knowledge is how the theorists can get outside the system to observe it objectively
 
  There is only one answer:  for Luhmann, society can only be observed only from w/in
 
  In examining society, no perspective is right; each perspective is legitimate
 
  How can we arrive at a single way of gaining info about the social world?
 
  A commonly shared perspective can not be achieved since there is no position outside the system from which to evaluate it
 
  The fact that there is no outside position from which to evaluate perspectives means that any methodology is acceptable whether it be reading the press, observing, etc.
 
  Neither science nor any other system has a privileged position
 
  Luhmann has the problem of unlimited varieties of equally valid observations of society
 
  Luhmann believes he has found a solution to the epistemological problem
 
 
 Society described itself through legends & myths in ancient times & through science today  
 
 For Luhmann, sociologists are able to scientifically observe these society's self descriptions via myths, legends, etc.  
  Sociologists can observe the relationship btwn the observations of myths, legends, etc. & their own & drawn conclusions about the relations btwn society & its semantics, i.e. the self-descriptions of society  
  Observation of society is not arbitrary because there are structural conditions for the soundness of representation & there are historical trends in the evolution of semantics strongly limiting the range of variation  
     See Also:  Lyotard, 1984  
     See Also:  Post-Modernists  
  Sociology is able to recognize the connections btwn the kind of correlations btwn social structures & semantics  
  Luhmann reconstructs the historical usage & meaning of terms in relation to changing social structures, taking semantics as an expression of the interpretation of social structures  
  Sociology should investigate the changing semantics in relation to changing social structures  
  Luhmann has explore the semantics of morality, individuality, law, knowledge, poetry, & love  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  a  Critique of Systems Theory 
External
Links
  There are FOUR major critiques of systems theory including the fact that 
A.  Evolution is not necessarily progress 
B.  There is both differentiation & dedifferentiation 
C.  Many systems are open & dependent
D.  Relativism is inherent in systems theory 
 
  A.  EVOLUTION IS NOT NECESSARILY PROGRESS   
  Habermas et al argue that what system theorists see as necessary evolutionary development is regressive & unnecessary 
 
  Society may develop into a closed system of functionally differentiated realms unable to act in the name of the social whole 
 
  For Habermas, the development of isolated, functionally differentiated realms is something to resist 
 
  For Habermas, theories should be developed to help counter the isolation of functional differentiation, not to make it appear as inevitable 
 
  B.  THERE IS BOTH DIFFERENTIATION & DEDIFFERENTIATION  
  Rasch finds two counter processes to differentiation 
 
  Luhmann sees differentiation as the key to describing the development of society & increasing the complexity of social systems to deal w/ their environment 
 
  Rasch notes that there is a process of dissolving boundaries 
 
  One of the processes of dissolving boundaries is dedifferentiation 
 
  An example of the process of dissolving boundaries via dedifferentiation is the melding of high culture & popular culture 
 
  An example of the process of dissolving boundaries via dedifferentiation is deindustrialization 
 
  Note that dissolving boundaries via de-differentiation may actually be a processes of creation or of destruction, i.e. creative destruction  
  The second process of dissolving boundaries is interpenetration
 
  Interpenetration is the process of building institutions to mediate btwn social systems 
 
  Luhmann's theory sees interpenetration as mal developmental because evolution is only seen as increased differentiation 
 
  The concept of institutional isomorphism is important here because it describes the process through which diverse institutions become more similar because of factors in the environment 
 
     See Also:  Institutional Isomorphism   
  C.  MANY SYSTEMS ARE OPEN & DEPENDENT  
  Not all systems are as closed & autonomous as systems theory assumes 
 
  The assumption of closed systems limits systems theory's ability to describe relations btwn systems 
 
  Some systems do translate each other's codes 
 
 
 Some systems incorporated other systems as their elements   
 
 A critical example of systems incorporating other systems as their elements can be seen in social systems incorporating the psychic system   
  Contrary to systems theory, the meaning of a communication w/in the social system is not completely determined by the social system itself   
  Psychic systems, i.e. individuals, protest, restrict, & expand the meanings that are assigned to a communication   
  Luhmann is correct in noting that the meaning of a communication is not simply the intention of the unit making the communication   
  The intention of the unit making the communication has some, albeit a complex effect on the social meaning, but in the communications process, other actors also have an impact   
  The social system is not simply closed to the psychic system   
  It is possible that an autonomous system such as the political system can be reduced to the status of a subsystem of another system   
  An example of an autonomous system being reduced to a subsystem is seen when politics becoming subsumed to the economy & the code of the political system becomes a variation on the code of the economic system   
  D.  RELATIVISM IS INHERENT IN SYSTEMS THEORY   
  Luhmann's systems theory assumes a variety of equally valid views of society w/o giving priority to one   
  Nevertheless, Luhmann claims social scientists can develop knowledge of society by observing the semantics of the self description of society   
  It is not clear that systems theory can address semantics to any great degree   

The End
 
Top