System and environment: notes on the autopoiesis of modern society

Abstract

To describe the basic characteristics of modern society, two levels should be distinguished: the structural and the cultural level. According to the late Talcott Parsons, the dominant value pattern of modern society is the cultural pattern of instrumental activism. What is valued in modern society is not passive adjustment to the exigencies of the environment, but increasing the freedom of action within the environment, and ultimately control over the environment. It is no longer adaptation to the environment, but adaptation of the environment to social needs. On the structural level, new patterns of societal differentiation have emerged. According to Niklas Luhmann, the pattern which characterizes modern society is one of functional differentiation. Functional subsystems impose their particular perspective on the world. The environment is perceived through different lenses (e.g. through a political, legal, economic, educational or scientific lens). These different perceptions are incommensurable. As a consequence, society cannot control its overall impact on the environment. Its structural and cultural characteristics limit its sensitivity vis‐à‐vis the environment. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science

“…The links between Social theory, systems ideas and organisations were further developed by Luhmann who was inspired by Parsons'systems approach, but noticed several inconsistencies that led him to base his theory on communication rather than action and autopoiesis (for a critical overview of Luhmann's ideas see Mingers (Mingers 1995)). There are many applications of Luhmann's ideas to organisations and in areas such as governance and public administration eg (Buchinger 2006;Dunsire 1996;Kickert 1993), and the environment (Entwistle 1999;Vanderstraeten 2005), Education (Vanderstraeten 2002) and IS (Cordoba 2007). …”

Is the future a political economy? Functional analysis of three leading foresight and futures studies journals

“…Modern man naturally insists on the separation of powers, talks business, and avoids religion in small talk. Next to organization, functional differentiation is therefore considered a key principle of modern societies (Luhmann 1977;Leydesdorff 2002;Beck, Bonss, and Lau 2003;Vanderstraeten 2005;Brier 2006;Bergthaller and Schinko 2011;Jönhill 2012). While organization is routinely taken as standpoint of observation in foresight and futures research (van Notten et al 2003), functional differentiation is still implied rather than applied in the field.…”

“…In the light of the function systems' fundamental incommensurability (Vanderstraeten, 2005;Jönhill, 2012) and autonomy (Tsivacou, 2005;Valentinov, 2012), there is no way of arguing that the economy or the political system is more important than health, sport, art, or religion, per se. On the other hand, there is plenty of (supposed) evidence of such imbalances, with the most popular ideas being that either the economy or the political system is the most dominant function system (Risse, 2003;Wallerstein, 2003;Foucault, 2008;Urry, 2010;Lash, 2007).…”

Booties, bounties, business models: a map to the next red oceans

“…The distinction of function systems such as the political system, the economy, religion, art, or education is considered a key principle of modern societies (Leydesdorff, 2002;Beck et al, 2003;Berger, 2003;Vanderstraeten, 2005;Brier, 2006;Kjaer, 2010;Bergthaller and Schinko, 2011;Jönhill, 2012). Modern man talks business and avoids politics or religion in small talk; considers payments for votes as corruption; and discriminates between show trials and normal cases.…”