LC 00488

Second-order cybernetics (a.k.a. neo-cybernetics, or the cybernetics of cybernetics) recognizes the role of an observer in observed systems. The role of an observer cannot be ruled out in the way systems are perceived. Our actions in the present are guided by our experiences we gained in the past. In a sense, we can predict the future. We build a mental model of reality that shapes the way we look at objects, like things, other human beings and situations. That is, we behave according to our worldviews comprised of practices and experiences driven by assumptions and emotions. This is who we are. Our behavior is self-referential, i.e., our future thoughts and actions are guided by past experiences. We make our own decisions, although circumstances might limit our options, or even more extreme, we might be coerced in a particular behavior.

We are constantly sensing the world and adapt where deemed necessary. Adapting to changing circumstances in the environment but also the concepts and ideas put forward by other people. Maturana and Varela equated cognizing with living:

cognizing = sensing the world → adaptation = living.

In order to adapt, there must be a difference that makes a difference (Gregory Bateson, 1 januari 1972). That is, a difference according to our worldviews (self-referential) and the (implicit) decision (autonomy) to adapt in the sense of reshaping our worldviews (autopoiesis).

More formally, the process of cognizing and adaptation can be written in the formula: O = WV(O). We view an object (O) according to our worldview (WV), which can be anything including a non-animated thing (for instance a chair) or a complex situation involving several stakeholders holding different opinions, and create a mental picture of the object (O). In the process of perceiving, our worldview is adapted repeatedly. In the end, we might reach a fixed point in which our mental picture corresponds with the object. Our worldview is a moving target and is continuously adapted in this process. Beware of the fact that the fixed point only applies for ourselves. It becomes a fixed point because in the end there is no difference anymore that makes a difference. No matter how someone looks at the object from different angles, the perceived object remains the same. It has become a static mental model of an object reflecting the real (dynamic) object somewhere out there in the world.

• O = WV(WV(O))
• O = WV(WV(WV(…)))

Thus, by continuously applying our worldview to perceive an object, a fixed point is reached eventually: O = WV(O). Von Foerster called these fixed points eigenforms (H. von Foerster, 1 januari 1981) thereby acknowledging the groundwork of Spencer-Brown's Law of Forms. Again, although a fixed point can be reached, this does not mean that we have a complete perception of the object or even a correct one. It simply means that there is no difference anymore.

For interested readers, a bright and erudite account of observing systems can be found in Processes and Boundaries of the Mind (Yair Neuman, 1 januari 2003). Louis Kauffman presents an interesting cybernetics take on the fixed point equation O = WV(O).

• Lees hiervoor:
  Second-Order Cybernetics
• Lees hierna:
  Self-observation

Referenties

• Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Gregory Bateson, Jason Aronson Inc, 1 januari 1972.
• Objects as tokens for eigenbehaviours, H. von Foerster, Observing Systems, Systems Inquiry Series, pp. 274-285, 1 januari 1981.
• On the cybernetics of fixed points, Louis Kauffman, Cybernetics, 1 januari 2001.
• Processes and Boundaries of the Mind; Extending the Limit Line, Yair Neuman, Spriner Science Business Media, 1 januari 2003.