LC 00488: verschil tussen versies

Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
 
(8 tussenliggende versies door dezelfde gebruiker niet weergegeven)
Regel 1: Regel 1:
•Our actions in the present are guided by our experiences we gained in the past. In a sense we can predict the future. We built a mental model of reality that shapes the way we look at things 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.
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.


•Our behavior is self-referential, i.e., we refer to our own practices and experiences to guide us in future actions.
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:


•We make our own decisions, although circumstances might limit our options, or even more extreme, we might be coerced in a particular behavior.
cognizing = sensing the world → adaptation = living.


•Mutual influences:
In order to adapt, there must be {{Cite|resource=Resource Bibliographic Reference 00088|name=a difference that makes a difference|dialog=process-bibliographicreference-dialog}}. 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).


•We cannot stand on our own. 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.
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 {{Cite|resource=Resource Bibliographic Reference 00087|name=eigenforms|dialog=process-bibliographicreference-dialog}} 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.


•Cognizing = sensing the world → adaptation = living.
For interested readers, a bright and erudite account of observing systems can be found in {{Cite|resource=Resource Bibliographic Reference 00078|name=Processes and Boundaries of the Mind|dialog=process-bibliographicreference-dialog}}. Louis Kauffman presents an interesting {{Cite|resource=Bestand:Cybernetics of fixed points.pdf|name=cybernetics take on the fixed point equation O = WV(O)|dialog=process-file-dialog}}.
 
•There must be a difference that makes a difference. That is, a difference according to our worldviews (self-referential) and the (implicit) decision (autonomy) to adapt including to reshape our worldviews (autopoiesis).
 
•More formally O = WV(O). We view according to our worldview an object (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. 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 continuously adapted in this process. Beware for 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 we look at the object from different angles, the object remains the same in our perception.
 
•O = WV(WV(O))
 
•O = WV(WV(WV(…)))
 
•In the end, provided the recursion stops in the sense that there is no difference anymore that makes a difference, a fixed point is reached: O = WV(O)
 
•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. A worldview provides a way to look at the world, like glasses. It is how we look and we do not know what we miss by perceiving the world according to our worldview (glasses). That is, everyone has its blind spots. Critical thinking is shifting the attention from first order observations (observing the O) to second order observations (observing the WV). We need others to pinpoint our blind spots.
 
We act and react on each other. This is how culture originates end evolves.


{{LC Book config}}
{{LC Book config}}
Regel 33: Regel 22:
|Sequence numbers=;
|Sequence numbers=;
|Context type=Situation
|Context type=Situation
|Heading=Blind Spots
|Heading=Observing systems
|Show referred by=Nee
|Show referred by=Nee
|Show edit button=Ja
|Show edit button=Ja

Huidige versie van 11 nov 2022 om 23:51

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).























Referenties



Overgenomen van "https://projectenportfolio.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00488&oldid=92340"