Not wishing to trigger anyone, but. Here this is.

source:

Three forms of meaning and the management of complexity. – PsycNET

Three forms of meaning and the management of complexity.

---

---

Peterson, Jordan B.

Citation

Peterson, J. B. (2013). Three forms of meaning and the management of complexity. In K. D. Markman, T. Proulx, & M. J. Lindberg (Eds.), The psychology of meaning (p. 17–48). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14040-002

---

Abstract

We live in a sea of complexity (Peterson & Flanders, 2002). The boundaries of the objects we manipulate are not simply given by those objects. Every object or situation can be perceived in an infinite number of ways (Medin & Aguilar, 1999), and each action or event has an infinite number of potential consequences. We frame our objects by eradicating vast swathes of information, intrinsically part of those objects and categories but irrelevant to our current, subjectively defined purposes (Norretranders, 1998). How do we manage this miracle of simplification? This chapter addresses this question from a neurodevelopmental and evolutionary perspective. The world manifests itself to us in the form of meaning. Such meaning, however, does not take a single form. Instead, it makes itself known in three different classes. The first class includes the most basic, universal and evolved forms of functional simplifications. This class, meanings of the known, familiar, or determinate world, includes the meanings of individual and social identity that simplify and structure the world. The second class includes those that arise to challenge the integrity of our current known or determinate worlds. This class, meanings of the unknown, foreign, or indeterminate world, includes the meanings of anomaly or novelty—the unexplored world. The third class includes those that arise as a consequence of the integrated interaction of the first two classes. This class, meanings of the conjunction of the known and the unknown, includes the meanings arising in the course of voluntary exploratory behavior. These are the existential meanings intrinsic to individual experience. Consideration of all three classes provides a comprehensive, differentiated portrait of meaning, free from paradox. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

pdf:

Click to access Peterson%20JB%20Three%20Kinds%20of%20Meaning%20Final%203.pdf

David Chapman: “It is not entirely clear that anything can be reduced to anything else”

source:

Reduction: the Cheshire cat problem and a return to roots | SpringerLink

Reduction: the Cheshire cat problem and a return to roots

• Kenneth F. Schaffner 

Synthese volume 151, pages377–402(2006)Cite this article

Abstract

In this paper, I propose two theses, and then examine what the consequences of those theses are for discussions of reduction and emergence. The first thesis is that what have traditionally been seen as robust, reductions of one theory or one branch of science by another more fundamental one are a largely a myth. Although there are such reductions in the physical sciences, they are quite rare, and depend on special requirements. In the biological sciences, these prima facie sweeping reductions fade away, like the body of the famous Cheshire cat, leaving only a smile. … The second thesis is that the “smiles” are fragmentary patchy explanations, and though patchy and fragmentary, they are very important, potentially Nobel-prize winning advances. To get the best grasp of these “smiles,” I want to argue that, we need to return to the roots of discussions and analyses of scientific explanation more generally, and not focus mainly on reduction models, though three conditions based on earlier reduction models are retained in the present analysis. I briefly review the scientific explanation literature as it relates to reduction, and then offer my account of explanation. The account of scientific explanation I present is one I have discussed before, but in this paper I try to simplify it, and characterize it as involving field elements (FE) and a preferred causal model system (PCMS) abbreviated as FE and PCMS. In an important sense, this FE and PCMS analysis locates an “explanation” in a typical scientific research article. This FE and PCMS account is illustrated using a recent set of neurogenetic papers on two kinds of worm foraging behaviors: solitary and social feeding. One of the preferred model systems from a 2002 Nature article in this set is used to exemplify the FE and PCMS analysis, which is shown to have both reductive and nonreductive aspects. The paper closes with a brief discussion of how this FE and PCMS approach differs from and is congruent with Bickle’s “ruthless reductionism” and the recently revived mechanistic philosophy of science of Machamer, Darden, and Craver.

pdf:

https://link.springer.com.sci-hub.se/article/10.1007/s11229-006-9031-2

source:

Epistemological and empirical challenges of Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory: an interview with professors Álvaro Pires and Lukas Sosoe

Epistemological and empirical challenges of Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory: an interview with professors Álvaro Pires and Lukas Sosoe

DESAFIOS EPISTEMOLÓGICOS E EMPÍRICOS DA TEORIA DOS SISTEMAS DE NIKLAS LUHMANN: ENTREVISTA COM OS PROFESSORES ÁLVARO PIRES E LUKAS SOSOE

Álvaro Pires, Interviewees¹ 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5927-9091

Lukas Sosoe, Interviewees² 
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0416-3475

Lucas Fucci Amato, Interviewers³ 
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8923-8300

Marco Antonio Loschiavo Leme de Barros, Interviewers^4  5 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9465-8783

Gabriel Ferreira da Fonseca, Interviewers^6  7 
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7401-7644

¹ University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

² University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg

³ University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

⁴ University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

⁵ Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil

⁶ Estácio University Center of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil

⁷ Salvador University Center (Uniceusa), Salvador, Brazil

---

INTRODUCTION

Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998) built one of the most encompassing and abstract sociological theories of the 20th century. Bringing to sociology the radical constructivism developed by transdisciplinary scientists such as the mathematician George Spencer-Brown, the physicist Heinz von Foester, and the biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela, Luhmann renewed the bases of understanding society and its subsystems – including law, science, politics, economy and many others. Two decades after the death of this German sociologist, his views on world society, communication and functional differentiation have given rise to an immense body of literature that focuses on analyzing a variety of questions. But how to deal with the scale and abstraction of this theory and apply it to the understanding of localized legal phenomena, such as crime and punishment, or ethics and courts?

In this interview, this discussion was posed to two leading Luhmannian scholars who work specially in the Francophone academy. Álvaro Pires, Distinguished University Professor at the University of Ottawa (Canada), and Lukas Sosoe, Full Professor at the University of Luxembourg, were interviewed in São Paulo, on August 22, 2019. Professors Pires and Sosoe have parallel academic trajectories, having worked together in some projects and symposiums. Professor Pires conducted pioneer works on empirical and criminological research with systemic approaches. Professor Sosoe works with legal theory, ethics, contemporary political philosophy and European studies. He has worked on translations to the French of many books by Niklas Luhmann. In this interview, both scholars explore the limitations and potentials for addressing empirical and historical questions within systems theory and present their views on the epistemological innovations that radical constructivism brings for socio-legal studies.

Continues in source:

https://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1808-24322021000100700&script=sci_arttext

The primary audience were 3^rd year undergraduates at The University of Hull working on a module called SMART: Critical Systems Thinking and the Management of Complexity

https://youtu.be/T3LyUv7LZLk

You can also click here to see all the events in a browser. Note that we have moved into summer time and all meeting times therefore are GMT+1 or CET+1.

______________________________________________________________

  SCiO UK

SCiO UK “Metaphor” Special Virtual Development Event – April 2021

Mon 12 April 2021 19:00–21:00 GMT +1

This Virtual Development Event will be a Metaphor Special.   SCiO’s Development Days offer an opportunity to draw upon the collective expertise of SCiO members in a friendly and supportive atmosphere. By taking Development Events online, using the Zoom meeting platform, we aim to make them accessible to more SCiO members Development Events are both for members who are just starting out on a journey to explore Systems Thinking approaches, and for those who have many years of exploration and practice….

Members only; FREE to members; Online event (Zoom); English; Book now

SCiO UK Virtual Open Meeting – May 2021

Mon 17 May 2021 18:30–20:30 GMT+1

Virtual Open Meeting: A series of presentations of general interest to Systems & Complexity in Organisation’s members and others. SCiO organises Open Meetings to provide opportunities for practitioners to learn and develop new practice, to build relationships, networks hear about skills, tools, practice and experiences. This virtual session will be held on Zoom, more details will be confirmed nearer the time…

·         topic to be confirmed – Ben Simpson,  Denis Bourne

·         The Arts and Systems Thinking  – Tom McDermott

All welcome; FREE; Online event (Zoom); English; Book now

“Later in the bar” – SCiO UK May 2021

Mon 24 May 2021 19:00–21:00 GMT+1

“Later in the bar” is a SCiO UK networking event where we try to recapture some of the features of meeting in the bar after an open meeting. This is an opportunity to mingle freely (online) and set your own agenda. These social networking events are different from the open days (speakers and discussion) and member-only development days (each agenda slot filled set by members for learning discussions). Social networking events combine some initial small group work and provide completely open opportunities to mingle as individuals and groups. The format will vary slightly based on numbers.

All welcome; FREE; Online event (Zoom); English; Book now  

______________________________________________________________

  SCiO Belgium

SCiO Belgium – digitale meeting editie april 2021

Wed 28 April 2021 18:00–20:30 CET+1

Virtuele meeting (Zoom) waar we telkens inzoomen op één topic gebracht door een inspirerende spreker, waarna we een mind-openende én verdiepende dialoog houden. 19:00 Welkom & introductie 19:20 Netwerk moment SCiO-stijl 19:30 ‘Reorganiseren voor groei tijdens Covid’ – Wim Focquet – DPD – HR Directeur (Nl) 20:30 Verdiepende dialoog 21:15 Conclusies & dankwoord. Het Belgische netwerk is een Nederlandstalig netwerk. SCiO is een breed netwerk van professionals in organisatie ontwikkeling, organisatie design, en de systemische bege….

Members only; FREE; Online event (Zoom); Dutch; Book now

______________________________________________________________

   SCiO DACH (Deutschland, Österreich, Schweiz)

SCiO DACH: One System – One Hour: System 3*

Fri 16 April 2021 17:00–18:00 CET+1

Moderiertes Diskussionsforum über die Eigenschaften und Aufgaben des Systems 3* im VSM. Basis der Diskussion sins die Bücher “Viabilitiy of Organizations Vol. 1-3” von Wolfgang Lassl.

Members only + Guests; KOSTENLOS; Online event (Zoom); German; Book now

SCiO DACH: Kybernetik-Stammtisch

Fri 21 May 2021 17:00–19:00 CET+1

Offenes Format zum freien Austausch und zur Diskussion über Themen wie Systeme, Systems Thinking, Organisationsformen und -Entwicklung, Viable System Model, usw. Alle Interessierten sind herzlich willkommen!…

All welcome; KOSTENLOS; Online event (Zoom); German; Book now

______________________________________________________________

  SCiO Espana

SCiO Espana – La evolución organizacional – Abril 2021

Tue 27 April 2021 19:00–21:00 GMT+1

La evolución organizacional La esencial triple pregunta de los seres humanos, “quién soy, de dónde vengo y a dónde voy”, es perfectamente aplicable a las organizaciones que, en definitiva, no dejan de ser agregaciones de personas conformando un sistema complejo. En este pequeño espacio  vamos a realizar un rápido recorrido a las tipologías organizativas, sus estados de evolución y cómo descubrir “dónde está” cada una, aspecto fundamental para valorar cuáles son sus posibles opciones de transformación y evolución desde una perspectiva consciente y sostenible.  Presentado por Pedro Martín de Hijas.

All welcome; FREE; Online event (Zoom); Spanish; Book now

______________________________________________________________

  SCiO Nederland

SCiO-NL April 2021 meeting – Imagineering

Fri 9 April 2021 14:00–16:00 CET+1

This month SCIO-NL will be hosting a presentation on Imagineering. People most commonly associate ‘imagineering’ with Disney, but this is definitely too limited a view.  Imagineering includes elements of complexity theory and systems thinking and uses this knowledge specifically in a human-oriented approach to change. The presentation will be given by Iris de Jong, who has a degree in imagineering and uses it successfully as an independent contractor. The presentation will be in English, so international members are more than welcome….

Members only + Guests; FREE; Online event; English; Book now

A May event is to be posted. Please check on the website.

source:

Systems Thinking Ontario – 2021-04-12

April 12 (the second Monday of the month) is the 89th meeting for Systems Thinking Ontario. The registration is on Eventbrite at https://pattern-language-schuler.eventbrite.ca

Patterns and Pattern Languages Supporting Cross-boundary Collaboration

For our April session of Systems Thinking Ontario, we will be honoured to have Douglas Schuler join us online from Seattle.

Doug was exposed to the original A Pattern Language in the mid-1970s. It aimed to generate towns and buildings that would be alive and life-affirming. That framework and perspective served to orient and structure collaboration under the auspices of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR). The Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing conference in 2001 attracted over 100 pattern proposals. These were ultimately transformed into the Liberating Voices pattern language containing 136 patterns by 75 authors. This body of work is available online and in a book published by MIT Press in 2008.

This pattern language addresses collaboration and civic intelligence, a critical under-developed resource necessary for democratic societies and public problem solving. Doug has led workshops in his teaching at the Evergreen State College, and with community groups designing actions and projects, around the world.

Doug is looking forward to an open discussion on the potential for patterns and pattern languages to help address wicked problems on a large scale, via technology, loose coordination, and social commitments.

Douglas Schuler is currently chair of ACM SIGCAS and president of the Public Sphere Project as a non-profit organization in the State of Washington. Doug is Professor Emeritus at The Evergreen State College, former Chair of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), and a founding member of the Seattle Community Network (SCN).

Venue:

• The link for a Zoom conference will be sent upon preregistration.

Suggested pre-reading:

Public Sphere Project

• Ongoing work at https://labs.publicsphereproject.org/

Seattle Community Network

• “Defund Big Tech, Refund Community”, https://techotherwise.pubpub.org/defund-big-tech.

Christopher Alexander’s early work.

• In 1968, Christopher Alexander wrote about “Systems Generating Systems“.
• Also in 1968, he was developing “A Pattern Language Which Generates Multi-Service Centers“.
• Alexander published A Pattern Language. in 1977, then The Timeless Way of Building in 1979. These works targeted built environments (i.e. architecture of physical places).

Agenda in original link:

Systems Thinking Ontario – 2021-04-12

Please comment at the original link https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6782692265593737216/

Looking for a few good starter papers and books on the history of complexity science, theory and applied practices. I’m particularly interested in the key research disputes, different traditions and paradigmatic/theoretical separations. Could be from the humanities, or natural or social sciences. I want to ease myself in and then explore from there. What’s worked for you?

Post | Feed | LinkedIn

Stafford Beer Collection.- Intro to Cybernetics Liverpool Poly 1991

Stafford Beer Collection.- Intro to Cybernetics Liverpool Poly 1991 – YouTube

source:

ASC: Foundations: History: Timeline

A Timeline for the Evolution of Cybernetics
ON THIS PAGE:PrehistoryHistorical EraThe FutureOther Relevant Timelines

One good way of obtaining a historical overview of a discipline is to review a summary outline of its evolution. This page offers a summary timeline of events relevant to cybernetics.Unfortunately, assembling a linear timeline for cybernetics is not as straightforward as is the case for other disciplines. Cybernetics precipitated out of diverse threads of work fortuitously intersecting during the 1940’s. In the ensuing decades, the themes circumscribing cybernetics’ original definition diverged again to engender or facilitate the rise of an even greater diversity of fields, labels, and disciplines.The timeline below is derived from a number of reference sources. It is deliberately intended to reflect at least a sample of the many subjects and disciplines from which cybernetics descended and into which its themes subsequently flowed. In the early stages, this timeline focuses on the theme of control. As it approaches the 20th century, it begins to reflect developments in fields such as philosophy, biology, mathematics, etc.There is no claim that this timeline is comprehensive, though it’s the most detailed one to be found anywhere on the Internet. If you would like to contribute specific and significant items to be included in this timeline, please contact the Webmaster.

source (with full pdf)

Systems Thinking: A Comparison between Chinese and Western Approaches – ScienceDirect

Systems Thinking: A Comparison between Chinese and Western Approaches☆

lXingPan^aRicardoValerdi^bRuiKang^aShow moreAdd to MendeleyShareCitehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.01.108Get rights and contentUnder a Creative Commons licenseopen access

Abstract

This paper presents a comparison between Chinese perspectives on systems thinking and ideas from the West, primarily the U.S. and the U.K. In particular we focus on the debate between reductionism and holism which is one of the classical subjects of study in the philosophy of science. Just like the West, China experienced theoretical debate between holism and reductionism which spanned across a broad range of fields such as traditional Chinese medicine and reliability-centered systems engineering. The Chinese developed their own oriental systems methodologies based on the philosophical foundation of ancient oriental philosophy thoughts and dialectic principle, the most distinctive of which include the Meta-synthesis Approach and the Wuli– Shili–Renli approach. In the Western approach to systems thinking there are similar concepts of holistic thinking, synergism, and cause and effect. However, interesting differences exist between China and the West in the role of intuition in decision making. We explore these differences and discuss the implications for applying each approach in different problem solving contexts.

pdf: https://link.springer.com.sci-hub.se/chapter/10.1007%2F0-387-21722-3_11

Objects: Tokens for (Eigen-)Behaviors | SpringerLink

Objects: Tokens for (Eigen-)Behaviors

Keywords

Stable Behavior Mathematical Biophysics Behavior Figure Logical Calculus Notational Abbreviation These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

A seed, alas, not yet a flower, for Jean Piaget to his 80th birthday from Heinz, von Foerster with admiration and affection.

This contribution was originally prepared for and presented at the University of Geneva on June 29, 1976, on occasion of Jean Piaget’s 80th birthday. The French version of this paper appeared in Hommage a Jean Piaget: Epistémologie génétique et équilibration. B. Inhelder, R. Garcia, J. Voneche (eds.), Delachaux et Niestle Neuchatel (1977).

and

Eigenforms – Objects as Tokens for Eigenbehaviors – Kauffman (2003)

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Eigenforms-Objects-as-Tokens-for-Eigenbehaviors-Kauffman/a0e14bcc782a0f7c066d753ec7ded68ea8fcc224

Eigenforms – Objects as Tokens for Eigenbehaviors

• L. Kauffman
• Published 2003
• Computer Science, Psychology
• Cybern. Hum. Knowing

This essay is a contemplation of the notion of eigenform as explicated by Heinz von Foerster in his paper [4]. In that paper Heinz performs the magic trick of convincing us that the familiar objects of our existence can be seen to be nothing more than tokens for the behaviors of the organism that create stable forms. This is not to deny an underlying reality that is the source of these objects, but rather to emphasize the role of process and the role of the organism in the production of a living map that is so sensitive that map and territory are conjoined. Von Foerster’s papers [4,5,6] in the book [3] were instrumental in pioneering the field of second order cybernetics. The notion of an eigenform is inextricably linked with second order cybernetics. One starts on the road to such a concept as soon as one begins to consider a pattern of patterns, the form of form or the cybernetics of cybernetics. Such concepts appear to close around upon themselves, and at the same time they lead outward. They suggest the possibility of transcending the boundaries of a system from a locus that might have been within the system until the circular concept is called into being, and then the boundaries have turned inside out. As Ranulph Glanville has pointed out “The inside is the outside is the inside is the…” Forms are created from the concatenation of operations upon themselves and objects are not objects at all, but rather indications of processes. Upon encountering an object, after that essay of Heinz, you are compelled to ask: How is that object created? How is it designed? What do I do to produce it? What is the network of productions? Where is the home of that object? In what context does it exist? How am I involved in its creation? Taking Heinz’s suggestion to heart we find that an object in itself is a symbolic entity, participating in a network of interactions, taking on its apparent solidity and stability from these interactions. We ourselves are such objects, we as human beings are “signs for ourselves,” a concept originally due to the American philosopher C. S. Peirce [9]. In many ways Heinz’s eigenforms are mathematical companions to Peirce’s work. We will not follow this comparison in the present essay, but the reader familiar with Peirce is encouraged to do so.

pdf https://cepa.info/fulltexts/1817.pdf

Despite the fact that I tend to believe that systems, complexity, and cybernetics are better viewed as part of one extended and intermingled family of ideas and approaches, and that there are other and better ways to divide the field that these broad headings (see https://stream.syscoi.com/2020/04/21/bringing-together-some-reason-and-old-threads-on-systemsthinking-is-complexity-is-cybernetics/#comment-478 ) , it is possible at the very least to distinguish a number of pieces and perspectives which focus on concepts of complexity etc.

From a recent request on linkedin, I have curated some of them (posted here within the last few years), which I think, together, form an interesting overview (they include links to some more authoritative overviews, but this list in no way claims authority):

Warren Weaver – classic 1948 paper ‘science and complexity’

Science and complexity – Weaver, 1948 (classic paper introduction 2004)

A useful comparison of Gershenon (2020) – an avowedly ‘complexity’ approach with Espinosa, Harnden, and Walker (2007) – an avowedly cybernetics approach:

Guiding the Self-Organization of Cyber-Physical Systems, Gershenon (2020) cf Beyond hierarchy: A complexity management perspective , Espinosa, Harnden, and Walker (2007)

A good facebook comment by Gerald Midgely on ‘complexity science’ in comparison with cybernetics and systems thinking:

Bringing together some recent and old threads on #systemsthinking is #complexity is #cybernetics

A historical account (from 2019) which draws on a few key methods:

Complexity and systems thinking – January 2011, Merali and Allen

Emergence: complexity and organisation (2004)

Systems theory and complexity – Emergence: Complexity and Organization – Richardson (2004)

Some quotes from the depths of history on complexity concepts

some quotes on the theme #complexitythinking is #systemsthinking (is #cybernetics)

A request (not mine) from twitter for books about complexity:

Books on the topic of complex adaptive systems

Editorial by Carlos Gershenson (highly focused on computational work):

Editorial: Complexity and Self-Organization

A big and good resource which (I don’t have to say it, perhaps) seems to me not to credit systems and cybernetics appropriately
https://stream.syscoi.com/2021/03/03/complexity-explained/

An introduction to complexity theory:
https://stream.syscoi.com/2021/02/28/an-introduction-to-complexity-theory-by-jun-park-medium/

‘Dancing landscapes’, a piece which focuses on a key concept form Scott E Page’s ‘understanding complexity’ Great Courses course

Dancing Landscapes – artilce by Tim Maly, RISD Center for Complexity, and sources from Scott E. Page and his ‘Understanding Complexity’ course on ‘The Great Courses’

Three approaches to complexity by second-generation representatives of key thinkers:
https://stream.syscoi.com/2021/03/15/video-complexity-and-the-social-world-building-on-the-legacy-of-allen-byrne-stacey-and-cilliers-complexity-physics-org/

A piece from Martin Reynolds on ‘traditions of complexity and systems science’

Traditions of ‘Complexity and Systems Science’?

from January 2021 – Causality and complexity: the myth of objectivity in science – Chem Biodivers 2007 – Mikulecky
https://stream.syscoi.com/2021/01/30/causality-and-complexity-the-myth-of-objectivity-in-science-chem-biodivers-2007-mikulecky/

From a management blog – Herding Cats – a compendium of resources

Herding Cats: A Compendium of Managing Complex Systems

In the words of the Santa Fe Institute:
https://stream.syscoi.com/2020/11/16/what-is-complex-systems-science-and-reading-list-santa-fe-institute/

Others using the word:
Alicia Juarrero
https://stream.syscoi.com/2021/02/07/systems-and-constraints-discourse-martin-gurri-interview-with-alicia-juarrero-2020/

Thea Snow:

Embracing complexity in government – a story about gardening and thinking in systems :: Thea Snow :: City of the future :: Participate Melbourne

 Complexity Weekend Online Community of Practice   Join the May 2021 cohort of this unique Applied Complexity journey, featuring a Pre-Weekend experience starting 3/21 and a fully-interactive team-forming Weekend experience Friday 5/21 through Sunday 5/23 Register Now (closes April 26th) or Join Mailing List (Registration fee is offered on a sliding scale) What is Complexity?

Complexity Weekend | May 21, 2021 – May 23, 2021

 Complexity Weekend

Online Community of Practice  

Join the May 2021 cohort of this unique Applied Complexity journey, featuring a Pre-Weekend experience starting 3/21 and a fully-interactive team-forming Weekend experience Friday 5/21 through Sunday 5/23

Register Now (closes April 26th) or Join Mailing List

(Registration fee is offered on a sliding scale)

What is Complexity?