Autopoiesis
From Geography
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | '''Autopoiesis (Assignment 9)''' | + | '''Autopoiesis (Assignment 9, s0813508)''' |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| + | The biologists [[Humberto Maturana]] and Manuela Verala first introduced the term ‘autopoiesis’. They did that in an attempt to define the difference between living entities and other entities and found that the distinct feature of living entities is that they are autopoietic, which means that they can produce and reproduce themselves (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 4; Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). [[Niklas Luhmann]] used this concept in the context of social systems and linked it also to another concept: self-reference (Arnoldi, 2001, p.4; Bailey, 1997). The concept of ‘autopoiesis’ enabled Luhmann to express meaning, interpretation and communication in terms of systems theory (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). Luhmann gives the following definition of the word autopiosis: | ||
''“[it] refers to systems that reproduce all of the elementary components out of which they arise by means of a network of these elements themselves andin this way distinguish themselves from an environment, whether this takes the form of life, consciousness or (in the case of social systems) communication. Autopoiesis is the mode of reproduction of these systems.”'' (Luhmann, in: Bailey, 1997) | ''“[it] refers to systems that reproduce all of the elementary components out of which they arise by means of a network of these elements themselves andin this way distinguish themselves from an environment, whether this takes the form of life, consciousness or (in the case of social systems) communication. Autopoiesis is the mode of reproduction of these systems.”'' (Luhmann, in: Bailey, 1997) | ||
| - | |||
Luhmann was inspired by the logic of Spencer-Brown, which states that the foundation of any observation or meaningful experience is the drawing of a distinction between ‘this’ and ‘the other’ (Arnoldi, 2001, p.4). Luhmann says that this distinction-drawing is not only an event or something that the system does, but also something through which the system itself is constituted (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). “''The most striking feature of autopoietic systems is their ability to pull themselves up by their ow bootstraps and establish boundaries that distinguish them from their environment.”'' (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). So by drawing distionctions, the system is autopoietic. So ''“[…] the ‘autopoietic event’ for meaning-processing systems is, for Luhmann, the act of drawing a distinction.”'' (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). Koch (2005) links Luhmann’s theory to space in the autopoietic spatial systems approach: ''“A spatial system is an autopoietic, self-referential system that constitutes itself by being different from an environment. The constitution is based on congruency. It’s elements are communications.”'' (Koch, 2005, p. 11) | Luhmann was inspired by the logic of Spencer-Brown, which states that the foundation of any observation or meaningful experience is the drawing of a distinction between ‘this’ and ‘the other’ (Arnoldi, 2001, p.4). Luhmann says that this distinction-drawing is not only an event or something that the system does, but also something through which the system itself is constituted (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). “''The most striking feature of autopoietic systems is their ability to pull themselves up by their ow bootstraps and establish boundaries that distinguish them from their environment.”'' (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). So by drawing distionctions, the system is autopoietic. So ''“[…] the ‘autopoietic event’ for meaning-processing systems is, for Luhmann, the act of drawing a distinction.”'' (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). Koch (2005) links Luhmann’s theory to space in the autopoietic spatial systems approach: ''“A spatial system is an autopoietic, self-referential system that constitutes itself by being different from an environment. The constitution is based on congruency. It’s elements are communications.”'' (Koch, 2005, p. 11) | ||
| + | So: ''“Systems that are able to reproduce themselves by observing themselves are autopoietic systems.”'' (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). Luhmann distinguishes three kinds of systems which are autopoietic: organisms, psychic systems and social systems. All other systems are called ‘allopoietic’ (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). | ||
| - | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| - | Sources: | + | '''Sources:''' |
Arnoldi, J. (2002). Niklas Luhman. An Intorduction. In: ''Theory, Culture & Society''. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp 1355-1372 | Arnoldi, J. (2002). Niklas Luhman. An Intorduction. In: ''Theory, Culture & Society''. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp 1355-1372 | ||
Revision as of 10:53, 19 October 2010
Autopoiesis (Assignment 9, s0813508)
The biologists Humberto Maturana and Manuela Verala first introduced the term ‘autopoiesis’. They did that in an attempt to define the difference between living entities and other entities and found that the distinct feature of living entities is that they are autopoietic, which means that they can produce and reproduce themselves (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 4; Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). Niklas Luhmann used this concept in the context of social systems and linked it also to another concept: self-reference (Arnoldi, 2001, p.4; Bailey, 1997). The concept of ‘autopoiesis’ enabled Luhmann to express meaning, interpretation and communication in terms of systems theory (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). Luhmann gives the following definition of the word autopiosis:
“[it] refers to systems that reproduce all of the elementary components out of which they arise by means of a network of these elements themselves andin this way distinguish themselves from an environment, whether this takes the form of life, consciousness or (in the case of social systems) communication. Autopoiesis is the mode of reproduction of these systems.” (Luhmann, in: Bailey, 1997)
Luhmann was inspired by the logic of Spencer-Brown, which states that the foundation of any observation or meaningful experience is the drawing of a distinction between ‘this’ and ‘the other’ (Arnoldi, 2001, p.4). Luhmann says that this distinction-drawing is not only an event or something that the system does, but also something through which the system itself is constituted (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). “The most striking feature of autopoietic systems is their ability to pull themselves up by their ow bootstraps and establish boundaries that distinguish them from their environment.” (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). So by drawing distionctions, the system is autopoietic. So “[…] the ‘autopoietic event’ for meaning-processing systems is, for Luhmann, the act of drawing a distinction.” (Arnoldi, 2001, p. 5). Koch (2005) links Luhmann’s theory to space in the autopoietic spatial systems approach: “A spatial system is an autopoietic, self-referential system that constitutes itself by being different from an environment. The constitution is based on congruency. It’s elements are communications.” (Koch, 2005, p. 11)
So: “Systems that are able to reproduce themselves by observing themselves are autopoietic systems.” (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616). Luhmann distinguishes three kinds of systems which are autopoietic: organisms, psychic systems and social systems. All other systems are called ‘allopoietic’ (Gren & Zierhofer, 2003, p. 616).
Sources:
Arnoldi, J. (2002). Niklas Luhman. An Intorduction. In: Theory, Culture & Society. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp 1355-1372
Bailey, K.D. (1997). The Autopoiesis of Social Systems: Assessing Luhmann's Theory of Self-Reference. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, march-april 1997. URL: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7349/is_2_14/ai_n32004129/
Gren, M. & Zierhofer, W. (2003). The unity of difference: a critical appraisal of Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems in the context of corporeality and spatiality. In: Environment and Planning A. vol. 35, pp 615-630.
Koch, A. (2005). Autopoietic spatial systems: the significance of actor network theory and system theory for the development of a system theoretical approach of space. In: Social Geography. Vol. 1, pp 5-14.
