Introduction to Systems Thinking with Pauline Roberts, Hosted online, 2 March 6pm AEST (paid) | Humanitix

source:

Introduction to Systems Thinking, Hosted online, 2nd of March | Humanitix
Introduction to Systems Thinking Event Banner

Liquid Forest Labs

Introduction to Systems Thinking

Tue 2nd Mar 2021, 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm AEDT

Price$128 AUD + BFGet Tickets

Event description

Taking a Systems thinking approach is becoming ever more popular in our complex world. Working across traditional boundaries, forming networks, co-ordinating, collaborating and adapting to our changing environment can pose us with some significant challenges.

In this session you will learn what we mean by ‘Systems thinking’. Why it has emerged as a way of thinking to help us move forward and why it is applicable in our world of work. We will look at how Systems thinking helps us to create the conditions for positive change to emerge. You will also learn some tips about the application of Systems thinking ideas and approaches and the opportunities and challenges that application of the thinking might present us with.

Learning Goals

  • learn what we mean by ‘Systems thinking
  • understand what are differences between systems thinking and other forms of thinking
  • learn about some of the major approaches to systems thinking
  • learn some some tips about the application of Systems thinking ideas and approaches 
  • develop an appreciation of some of the opportunities and challenges that application of the thinking might present us with

About the Facilitator

Pauline Roberts is a Systems Practitioner and independent consultant who has worked with a wide range of organisations, such as the NHS, Local Authorities, Ministry of Defence, pharmaceutical industry, charities and voluntary groups, applying systems thinking (in particular the VSM) to identify areas for improvements.

She is a Visiting Lecturer at City University Business School, London, in undergraduate Applied Systems Thinking and an Associate Lecturer with the Open University on the MSc Systems Thinking in Practice courses. 

Format

Presentation with some opportunities to interact

Intended audience

Anyone can attend this session. No prior knowledge of System thinking is required.  The only thing required is a willingness to engage with different ideas and explore the complexity around you. 

What Attendees Get

  • List of useful references on systems thinking and its various approaches
  • 10% discount on any Liquid Forest Lab course – valid for 6 months 

Course Length

Online, 2h including 5-10 minutes break 

Price

AUD $135 – one off introductory discount of 30%  (AUD $195.00 – full price)

Additional discounts:

  • AUD $128 – early bird 5% until 1 week before first day of course

book at source:

Introduction to Systems Thinking, Hosted online, 2nd of March | Humanitix

The Cybernetics of Ohno’s Production System:

Harish's avatarHarish's Notebook - My notes... Lean, Cybernetics, Quality & Data Science.

In today’s post, I am looking at the cybernetics of Ohno’s Production System. For this I will start with the ideas of ultrastability from one of the pioneers of Cybernetics, Ross Ashby. It should be noted that I am definitely inspired by Ashby’s ideas and thus may take some liberty with them.

Ashby defined a system as a collection of variables chosen by an observer. “Ultrastability” can be defined as the ability of a system to change its internal organization or structure in response to environmental conditions that threaten to disturb a desired behavior or value of an essential variable (Klaus Krippendorff). Ashby identified that when a system is in a state of stability (equilibrium), and when disturbed by the environment, it is able to get back to the state of equilibrium. This is the feature of an ultrastable system. Let’s look at the example of an organism and its…

View original post 2,075 more words

The Secure Base Model

source:

A Secure Base

Model (https://sites.uea.ac.uk/providingasecurebase/the-secure-base-model)

A Secure Base

What is a secure base and why is it important for children’s development?

A secure base is provided through a relationship with one or more sensitive and responsive attachment figures who meet the child’s needs and to whom the child can turn as a safe haven, when upset or anxious. When children develop trust in the availability and reliability of this relationship, their anxiety is reduced and they can therefore explore and enjoy their world, safe in the knowledge that they can return to their secure base for help if needed.

The concept of a secure base is important, because it links attachment and exploration, and provides the basis of a secure attachment. A securely attached child does not only seek comfort from an attachment figure, but through feeling safe to explore develops confidence, competence and resilience.

Do adults also need a secure base?

Yes. As we move through the lifespan, we form new attachment relationships with friends and partners. These relationships serve the same function for adults as for children; they provide a secure base which offers comfort and reassurance and at the same time, allows us to operate in the world with confidence. In the words of Bowlby:

All of us, from the cradle to the grave, are happiest when life is organised as a series of excursions, long or short, from the secure base provided by our attachment figures. (Bowlby 1988)

What happens when children do not have a secure base?

Early experiences of separation or neglectful or abusive parenting will cause children to remain anxious and to distrust close relationships. Children adapt to the lack of a secure base by developing different patterns of behaviour. For instance, they may become wary and defended or especially needy and demanding of care and attention. Some children with unpredictable or frightening care may try to make their environment more predictable through role-reversing and controlling behaviour. All of these behaviours are characteristic of insecure attachment patterns.

What happens when children are removed from a harmful environment?

For many children, serious experiences of neglect and maltreatment will have had a profound effect. They will have developed negative expectations of adults as part of their internal working model of relationships. They will transfer these expectations into new environments (such as foster or adoptive families or in residential care), along with the patterns of defensive behaviour that have functioned as survival strategies in the past. In these circumstances, children will find it hard to let adults come close enough to establish trusting relationships and provide a secure base. The risk, then, is that feelings and behaviours might become fixed in destructive loops and the damage of the past will not be healed.

What can be done to help?

Attachment theory would suggest that exposure to warm, consistent and reliable caregiving can change children’s previous expectations both of close adults and of themselves and there is ample evidence from research and practice to support this (Howe 1996, Wilson et al 2003, Cairns 2003, Beek and Schofield 2004,).

The role of adults who can provide secure base caregiving, therefore, is of central importance. They must take on a parenting / caregiving role for the child, but they must also become a therapeutic caregiver in order to change the child’s most fundamental sense of self and others (internal working model). In order to achieve this, they must care for the child in ways that demonstrate, implicitly and explicitly to the child, that they are trustworthy and reliable, physically and emotionally available and sensitive to his or her needs. In addition, they must be mindful of the protective strategies that the child has learned in order to feel safe in the past and adjust their approaches so that their parenting feels comfortable and acceptable to the child rather than undermining or threatening. The ensuing relationships will provide a secure base, from which children can develop and be supported to explore and maximise their potential.

This outcome may be supported by the use of the secure base model across all services to vulnerable children.

soucre:

A Secure Base

key papers:

Bowlby’s Secure Base Theory and the Social/Personality Psychology of Attachment Styles: Work(s) in Progress – Waters et al (2002) – https://dtreboux.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/waters-convergent-validity.pdf

Waters, E., Crowell, J., Elliott, M., Corcoran, D., & Treboux, D. (2002). Bowlby’s secure base theory and the social/personality psychology of attachment styles: Work(s) in progress. Attachment & Human Development, 4(2), 230–242. doi:10.1080/14616730210154216 – https://sci-hub.se/10.1080/14616730210154216

Internal Family Systems

The Internal Family Systems Model (IFS) is an integrative approach to individual psychotherapy developed by Richard C. Schwartz in the 1980s.[1][2] It combines systems thinking with the view that the mind is made up of relatively discrete subpersonalities, each with its own unique viewpoint and qualities. IFS uses family systems theory to understand how these collections of subpersonalities are organized.[3]

Internal Family Systems Model – Wikipedia

IFS Institute – What is Internal Family Systems?

https://ifs-institute.com/

Tasting the Pickle: Ten flavours of meta-crisis and the appetite for a new civilisation – Jonathan Rowson

Tasting the Pickle: Ten flavours of meta-crisis and the appetite for a new civilisation Jonathan Rowson Feb 9th, 2021 “There is a process of reckoning going on around the world, heightened by the conditions of the pandemic and the palpability of our fragility, inequality and interdependence. There is a climate emergency that requires urgent action, but the precise nature, cost, location and responsibility of that action is moot. There is a broader crisis of civilisational purpose that appears to necessitate political and economic transformation, and there are deeper socio-emotional, educational, epistemic and spiritual features of our predicament that manifest as many flavours of meta-crisis: the lack of a meaningful global ‘We’, widespread learning needs, self-subverting political logics and disenchanted worldviews. These different features of our world are obscured by their entanglement with each other. It is difficult to orient ourselves towards meaningful action that is commensurate with our understanding because we are generally unclear about the relationship between different kinds of challenge and what they mean for us. That’s what this essay is about. The world is in a pickle, and, daunting though it is, we need to learn how to taste it. Tasting the pickle well requires, in the spirit of Vivekananda, finding joy and releasing energy through the right kinds of discrimination.” – Jonathan Rowson

continues source:

Tasting the Pickle: Ten flavours of meta-crisis and the appetite for a new civilisation – [ Perspectiva ]

Evaluation – Special Issue: Policy Evaluation for a Complex World – Volume 27, Number 1, Jan 01, 2021 (all open source)

source:

Evaluation – Volume 27, Number 1, Jan 01, 2021


Evaluation

The Tavistock Institute

1.264 Impact Factor 5-Year Impact Factor 1.949Journal Indexing & Metrics »

Table of Contents

Special Issue: Policy Evaluation for a Complex World

Previous IssueVolume 27 Issue 1, January 2021Guest Editor: Pete Barbrook-Johnson, Brian Castellani, Dione Hills, Alexandra Penn and Nigel Gilbert

Table of Contents (PDF)Editorial Board (PDF)

Editor’s Note

Free AccessEditor’s NoteElliot SternFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 3–3Abstract 

Introduction

Free AccessPolicy evaluation for a complex world: Practical methods and reflections from the UK Centre for the Evaluation of Complexity across the NexusPete Barbrook-JohnsonBrian CastellaniDione HillsAlexandra PennNigel GilbertFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 4–17AbstractPreview 

Articles

Open AccessDon’t panic: Bringing complexity thinking to UK Government evaluation guidanceMartha BicketDione HillsHelen WilkinsonAlexandra PennFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 18–31AbstractPreview 
Open AccessHow does the commissioning process hinder the uptake of complexity-appropriate evaluation?Jayne CoxPete Barbrook-JohnsonFirst Published November 27, 2020; pp. 32–56AbstractPreview 
Open AccessParticipatory systems mapping for complex energy policy evaluationPete Barbrook-JohnsonAlexandra PennFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 57–79AbstractPreview 
Open AccessBuilding a system-based Theory of Change using Participatory Systems MappingHelen WilkinsonDione HillsAlexandra PennPete Barbrook-JohnsonFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 80–101AbstractPreview 
Open AccessDiagnostic evaluation with simulated probabilitiesBarbara BefaniCorinna ElsenbroichJen BadhamFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 102–115AbstractPreview 
No AccessCased-based modelling and scenario simulation for ex-post evaluationCorey SchimpfPete Barbrook-JohnsonBrian CastellaniFirst Published January 14, 2021; pp. 116–137AbstractPreview 

source:

Evaluation – Volume 27, Number 1, Jan 01, 2021

Corona-induced Cohesion – strategic structures – Velitchkov

source:

Corona-induced Cohesion – strategic structures

strategic structures

Menu

SKIP TO CONTENT

Corona-induced Cohesion

The balance between autonomy and cohesion is one of the three balances, essential for everything living and social. It’s fascinating to watch when there is a shift both in the balance itself and in the way it is achieved. The times of Coronavirus are exceptionally rich in new ways of maintaining social cohesion.

There are various factors and forces for cohesion. They can be distinguished once in terms of origin and influence, and then for different system scales – individual, organization, society. This way, there are nine categories: individual factors for individual cohesion, individual factors for organizational cohesion, individual factors for the cohesion of society, then organizational factors for individual cohesion, organizational factors for organizational cohesion and so on for all nine combinations.

Some factors work in similar ways at different scales, others not. For example, the need for safety, the need to reduce uncertainty, and the need to increase self-esteem, are individual facts for both organizational and societal cohesion.

Most ways to increase cohesion reduce autonomy. This is the case, for example, when social cohesion is achieved through any form of centralization of decision-making power.

But there can be an increase in cohesion without reducing autonomy. In fact, it can even do the opposite, enable it…

continues in source:

Corona-induced Cohesion – strategic structures

Viable Systems Model: More Support Tools Needed – Kirikova (1999)

Viable Systems Model: More Support Tools Needed
Marite Kirikova
Department of Artificial Intelligence and Systems Engineering, Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia
Marite.Kirikova@rtu.lv
Abstract. Stafford Beer proposed a Viable Systems Model, which was supposed to support successful management of enterprises. Since then numerous research works have referred to that model in management, information systems, and computer sciences. However, in the area of enterprise modeling there is a shortage of tools that would give an opportunity to create detailed enterprise models that would adhere to the VSM and would also be applicable for advanced model visualization and analysis. If available, appropriate modeling tools could help to utilize such features of VSM as fractality, distributed control, and variety handling mechanisms; and provide the possibility of overall adherence to those principles of cybernetics that become increasingly important in modeling enterprises in a socio-cyber-physical context.
Keywords: VSM, fractal systems, service systems, variety management, distributed control

pdf

Click to access paper3.pdf

THE EVOLUTION OF ORGANIZATIONAL CYBERNETICS – SCHWANINGER (2006)

Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae Online, e-2006, 865-880

THE EVOLUTION OF ORGANIZATIONAL CYBERNETICS – MARKUS SCHWANINGER

Received April 24,  2006

ABSTRACT. The purpose of this contribution is to give an overview of the origins and further developments of Organizational Cybernetics, its transdisciplinary nature and its links to different areas of science, i.e., both natural sciences and the humanities.

pdf

Click to access 2006-78.pdf

Changing the system: Brian Eno and James Thornton in conversation | Science and Industry Museum

source:

Changing the system: Brian Eno and James Thornton in conversation | Science and Industry Museum

CHANGINTHE SYSTEMBRIAN ENAND JAMETHORNTOICONVERSATION

TOGGLE BUTTON TO PLAY OR PAUSE THE VIDEO

Join Brian Eno in conversation with James Thornton, CEO and founder of ClientEarth, a pioneering environmental organisation, and discuss how we can use the power of the law to protect the planet. This special event will be chaired by science, natural history and environmental broadcaster Liz Bonnin.

Discover how we can use the power of the law to fight against climate change, protect the environment and build a future in which people and the planet thrive together.

Liz Bonnin will lead the conversation with Brian Eno, who is a dedicated climate campaigner and Trustee of ClientEarth as well as a renowned musician, record producer and visual artist, and James Thornton as they talk about their pioneering work using the law to bring about systemic change that protects life on Earth.

ClientEarth’s team of lawyers, scientists and policy experts have used their environmental expertise to achieve powerful change, from winning court cases over illegal air pollution, to writing laws to ensure that there will still be fish in the sea in the future.

Hear more about the landmark changes in law and policy which have been made possible by their work and discuss their predictions for the future and ideas for what we can all do to play our part.

Please note: This virtual event will not be available to watch again, so book a ticket to make sure you don’t miss out. 

Book now to watch this event online

This event is part of the Science Museum Group’s series of Climate Talks

Join Brian Eno in conversation with James Thornton, CEO and founder of ClientEarth, a pioneering environmental organisation, and discuss how we can use the power of the law to protect the planet. This special event will be chaired by science, natural history and environmental broadcaster Liz Bonnin.

Discover how we can use the power of the law to fight against climate change, protect the environment and build a future in which people and the planet thrive together.

Liz Bonnin will lead the conversation with Brian Eno, who is a dedicated climate campaigner and Trustee of ClientEarth as well as a renowned musician, record producer and visual artist, and James Thornton as they talk about their pioneering work using the law to bring about systemic change that protects life on Earth.

ClientEarth’s team of lawyers, scientists and policy experts have used their environmental expertise to achieve powerful change, from winning court cases over illegal air pollution, to writing laws to ensure that there will still be fish in the sea in the future.

Hear more about the landmark changes in law and policy which have been made possible by their work and discuss their predictions for the future and ideas for what we can all do to play our part.

Please note: This virtual event will not be available to watch again, so book a ticket to make sure you don’t miss out. 

Book now to watch this event online

This event is part of the Science Museum Group’s series of Climate Talks.

INFORMATION

  • FREE FESTIVAL TALK
    • DATE: Monday 15 February 2021
    • TIME: 19.30
    • PRICE: Free (booking essential)
    • LOCATION: Online
    • AGE: Suitable for ages 14 and older

book at source: FREE FESTIVAL TALK DATE: Monday 15 February 2021 TIME: 19.30 PRICE: Free (booking essential) LOCATION: Online AGE: Suitable for ages 14 and older BOOK TICKETS NOW

Changing the system: Brian Eno and James Thornton in conversation | Science and Industry Museum

A systems thinker thinks in systems about systems | Massimo Curatella

source

A systems thinker thinks in systems about systems | Massimo Curatella

 by Massimo Curatella / 0 Comment

A systems thinker thinks in systems about systems

Thanks to the participants of this online discussion group, I had the opportunity to reflect upon the role and the identity of a system thinker.

A systems thinker is not a person who thinks about systems, a systems thinker is a person who thinks in systems, first, and then, maybe, about systems. Or, even better, a systems thinker is a person who thinks in systems about systems.

Systems Thinking is an outcome. You get to it if you consider all components of a system defined by an arbitrary boundary. You are part of the system you are considering. The thinking is demanded of your brain, the systemic outcome depends on if and how you are considering the relationships and the interactions between all components of the observed system. And this is just a starting point. I see no religion, no dogma, no convictions if you go through the approach of Critical Thinking and mitigating biases when you are observing, pondering, and intervening. I see Systems Thinking as a huge amount of work, requiring discipline, focus, concentration, and collaboration much needed to be more effective and efficient in letting the thinking be of elevated quality. That’s also why I think the best Systems Thinking thinking can happen in the context of facilitating collective intelligence composed of diverse, integer, generous people (and machines).

source:

A systems thinker thinks in systems about systems | Massimo Curatella

Metaphorum webinar series fornightly in the first half of 2021 – and appeal for future webinars

Weednesdays 5-6:30pm uk time, fortnightly from February 24th-May 26th

Following the first webinar in 2021 from Prof. Mike Jackson, we are pleased to announce the next webinar series which will run until the end of May. You can find the recordings of previous webinars on our webpage.

http://metaphorum.org/metaphorum-webinar-series

The program for the next three months is detailed below. See more details of each webinar on the link above.

We will be using the recurrent Zoom link for this webinar series:

Metaphorum Webinar Series
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81943981395?pwd=UldHZ0RESGVPQTE2RDNoSWU2UWt2Zz09
Meeting ID: 819 4398 1395
Passcode: 758276

For anyone interested in offering a webinar for the next series (Jun 2021 to Dec 2021), please contact us at Metaphorum.org@gmail.com, sending us the following information:

  • name, title, description of the webinar, brief cvs with your picture
  • dates on which you are NOT available (we run the webinar series on Wednesdays  5:00-6:30 pm UK)

We will review the proposals and will  accept the most innovative and high- quality proposals (hopefully on new topics not presented before in other Metaphorum events). We shall let you know shortly after receipt of your proposal if it has been accepted and discuss your availability.

Best regards,

Angela, Allenna and Jon

METAPHORUM WEBINAR SERIES
AGENDA FEBRUARY – MAY 2021

DateSpeakerTitle
February the 24thProf. Raul Espejo“The Enterprise Complexity Model: An Extension of the
Viable System Model for Emerging Organisational Forms”
March the 3rdDr. Martin Pfiffner
 
The third dimension of organizing
 
March 17thDr Igor Perko
 
Invoking AI technology in organisations – a systemic examination
March 31st,Dr. Raghav Rajagopalan
 
Meta Rational Ways of Knowing
 
April the 14thDr Angela Espinosa
 
Sustainable Self Governance:
Early alarms from the COVID19 Pandemic
April 28thDr. Alfredo del ValleThe Participatory Workspace (PWS):
 An online, complexity management and communications tool
May the 12thDr Allenna Leonard
 
A VSM reflection on US politics and democracy
 
May 26thDr. Bernhard Sterchi
 
Alignment and autonomy on the last mile of execution – in defense of the wriggly lines
 

CybSights Insights: Putting on CyBeer Goggles( in public administration) Tickets, Tue 23 Mar 2021 at 18:00 UK time | £20 for CybSoc membership for the year

source:

CybSights Insights: Putting on CyBeer Goggles( in public administration) Tickets, Tue 23 Mar 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite

MAR 23

CybSights Insights: Putting on CyBeer Goggles( in public administration)

by CybSights: The Insights Series Following£0 – £20

Event Information

View the world as a cybernetician. Tim Falkiner explores POSIWID, isomorphism, & variety balance rooted in town planning & law.

About this Event

The Insights Series is an eclectic and learned collection of monthly events on the 4th Tuesday of each month hosted by Cybernetics Society. There will be lectures, seminars, conversations, debates, participation, all advancing our knowledge of cybernetics and related disciplines and their applications to real world needs.

Cybernetics is the science of achievement, the great meta-discipline of our time.

The CybSights Insights series is normally curated and hosted by the Secretary, Angus Jenkinson, FCybS. Attendance is free. Non-members are invited to make an optional donation or to Join.

In this session we welcome an Australian.

We are particularly delighted to be able to welcome Tim Falkiner with his experience in town planning, law, and legilstion with ‘homeskooled’ cybernetics.

Putting on our CyBeer Goggles

The underlying object of this discussion is to have the participants exercise their ability to think in cybernetic terms. To put on “cybeer” goggles and view the world as a cyberneticist. Cybernetics is a large field, but Tim has selected three cybernetic topics to explore. In three 25 minute segments, Tim will (i) explain what he understands of each topic; (ii) give some applications of that law or technique and (iii) invite the participants to give examples of how they apply the laws and techniques in their own professions or lives.

POSIWID The purpose of a system is what it does. Our purpose often defines the extent of the system or systems. It is helpful, in considering the purpose of a system from an objective, scientific, cybernetic viewpoint; to use Stafford Beer’s concept of POSIWID.

Isomorphism – The control system is isomorphic with the system under control. The town planner, J. Brian McLoughlin, writing about urban and regional planning systems, makes the point that control systems must have the same form and operation as the systems which they control —an application of the Conant-Ashby theorem:

“… the control devices for any system have to be isomorphic with the system to be controlled, that is, they have to be of similar form. This enables us to say that the planning process must have a similar ‘shape’ to the human ecosystem.”

Balancing variety – Given the control system must be isomorphic with the system under control, and given the infinite variety involved in real-world systems, a regulator must balance the resources available to it with the system to be controlled. Problems of increasing, decreasing, and balancing variety in time are considered.

Tim Falkiner – Crown solicitor, town planner, barrister, legislator

Tim lives in Melbourne, Australia with a career blending law and town planning. This gives experience in law as a regulator, system design and the science of cybernetics. As town planner, legal officer in the Victorian Ministry for Planning and Environment and the Crown Solicitor’s Office of Victoria in the Constitution, Legislation and Advisings section, he gained wide experience of land use planning and environmental legislation. He wrote the specification for the first computerised tribunal registry system in Victoria. Tim has practised as a barrister and is a life member of the Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association. He learned cybernetic controls systems theory in 1976 and found other parallels (e.g. between Garth Thornton’s book “Legislative Drafting” and Frederick Brook’s book on the development of the IBM System 360 and OS/360, its operating system). He is the author (1982) of “Scientific Legislation – The Use of Cybernetics and Software Engineering Knowledge to Explain What Legislation Is, How it Behaves and How It should be Designed, Maintained and Replaced” influenced by Stafford Beer’s cybernetics. He is now revisiting it to reconcile Beer’s definition of planning as a continuous process of making and discarding plans, with the difficulties, so clearly outlined by software engineers of maintaining legislation in the face of continuous change towards a future more dynamically adaptive legislative style based on cybernetic principles.

Join us, and engage in the dynamics of these key concepts

The sessions are designed for audience participation!

book at source:

CybSights Insights: Putting on CyBeer Goggles( in public administration) Tickets, Tue 23 Mar 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite

Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods Tickets, Tue 23 Feb 2021 at 18:00 UK time | £20 CybSoc membership for the year

source:

Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods Tickets, Tue 23 Feb 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite

FEB 23

Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods

by CybSights: The Insights Series Following£0 – £20

Science is headed for a turn, waking up to another level of logic that recognises the observer’s in both the world and the making of science

Cybernetics is the science of achievement, the great meta-discipline of our time.

The CybSights Insights series is normally curated and hosted by the Secretary, Angus Jenkinson, FCybS. Attendance is free. Non-members are invited to make an optional donation or to Join. Follow us for news of future events.

We are particularly delighted to be able to welcome an eminent member of the cybernetic discipline discussing the very future of science.

The initial generation of cybernetics was keen to develop smart technology and to show the parallels between machine and human, after all people implanted human designs into their machine organization. Later cybernetics was more concerned about the processes of the living, as well as the ways in which the ‘observation process’ (whether done by a robot, frog, or person of some cultural background) shaped knowledge and behaviour. This was also part of an evolving shift in the understanding of the world . A next step is a shift in the understanding of science itself. Dr Stuart Umpleby is a leading thinker in this movement and this session should be a treat.” — Angus Jenkinson, Secretary of CybSoc

Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods —Colloquy

book in source:

Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods Tickets, Tue 23 Feb 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite

Insights Series: Humberto Maturana on Autopoiesis and Cybernetics Tickets, Tue 25 May 2021 at 18:00 | £20 for Cybernetics Society membership for the year

Insights Series: Humberto Maturana on Autopoiesis and Cybernetics Tickets, Tue 25 May 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite
  • MAY 25

Insights Series: Humberto Maturana on Autopoiesis and Cybernetics

by CybSights: The Insights Series Follow£0 – £20Tickets

About this Event

The Insights Series is an eclectic and learned collection of monthly events on the 4th Tuesday of each month. There will be lectures, seminars, conversations, debates, participation, all advancing our knowledge of cybernetics and its applications to real world needs.

It is the science of achievement, the great meta-discipline of our time.

Events are normally curated and hosted by the Secretary, Angus Jenkinson, FCybS. Get in touch of you have an idea. Attendance is free. Non-members are invited to make a donation or Join.

The Cybernetics Society has been hosting conversations and lectures since the late 1960s. We also have an Annual Conference. Videos are shared on our YouTube Channel.

Humberto Maturana on Autopoiesis and Cybernetics

Dr Humberto Maturana Romesin HonFCybS

Assisted by

Sebastián Gaggero, operational leader of Matritizica, Chile.

Angus Jenkinson: “I am delighted to let you know that Humberto Maturana, one of our Hon Fellows, will provide an overview of the main elements composing the understanding of the living within autopoiesis, a ley cybernetic paradigm. Be prepared to listen slowly to the mature understanding of one of the great scientists of our time. As you probably know, Dr. Maturana was a co-founder of Autopoiesis with Dr Francisco Varela. Associated with the Macy conference generation, he came to prominence in one of the most influential papers in the history of science co-authored with Lettvin, McCulloch, and Pitts: “What the Frog’s Eye Tells the Frog’s Brain.”

(Proceedings of the IRE 47, no. 11 (1959): 1940-1951).

In 1974, he and Varela published their first major paper on autopoiesis with R Uribe: “Autopoiesis: The Organization of Living Systems, Its Characterization and a Model.” In 1978, he published Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living with Varela. In recent decades, Humberto Maturana has collaborated extensively with others.

I remember reading with huge excitement Maturana and Varela’s 1987 landmark text, The Tree Of Knowledge: the Biological Roots of Human Understanding. The original edition was developed and published in a closed edition in 1985 by Maturana, Varela, and Rolf Behnke, a member of the Chilean government, who had conceived and funded a project to provide an alternative view of life to the Organisation of American States (OAS). As Varela explains, they wanted to put an alternative epistemology into the world of biological science and did so by what could be called the ‘cheeky method’ of pretending that it was a basic textbook. The naive reader could read it as such while the professional would see a stark contrast to the standard textbooks. Why was it so exciting? It proposed another view of life, of intelligence, and an inversion of the standard model of competition. For many like myself who are profoundly uncomfortable with the Darwinian struggle for existence model and the neo-Darwinian selfish gene, it was a wonderful, provocative, and profoundly thoughtful presentation of another way of understanding life itself and life’s understanding of itself.

The fundamental concept — a complete self-referential architecture of thought — that he initiated was “autopoiesis” of course, a fully interactional analysis of the co-dynamic of cognition and life of any kind. Organisms maintain their own identity (by what I have called active causation) through circular organization, which

constitutes a homeostatic system whose function is to produce and maintain this very same circular organization by determining that the components that specify it be those whose synthesis or maintenance it secures.

While to an observer, this is “structurally coupled” to their environment, each living organism lives life within its own cognitive world — the “Leibnizian Gap” of disconnect between mentality, nervous system, and world. It is a position that benefited from his reading of von Euxküll. Along with and embedded in this are other key ideas: the co-evoluton of species and their ecosystems; the biology of love, constructivism; fundamental relativity (a notion that upsets many scientific apple carts); and the biological basis of cognition, and the work he is engaging on now that he will speak of. Cognition and learning are then a fundamental input into evolution.

He is then a precisely creative mind and a giant of cybernetics whose ideas controversial or mainstream must be engaged with. In particular they have great responsance for understanding not merely living organisms but social forms.

In Maturana’s early fundamental paper of 1975, The Organization of the Living: A Theory of the Living Organization (International journal of man-machine studies 7, no. 3 (1975): 313-33), he proposed: The fundamental feature that characterizes living systems is autonomy, and any account of their organization as systems that can exist as individual unities must show what autonomy is as a phenomenon proper to them, and how it arises in their operation as such unities. Accordingly the following is proposed.

(1) That autonomy in living systems is a feature of self-production (autopoiesis), and that a living system is properly characterized only as a network of processes of production of components that is continuously, and recursively, generated and realized as a concrete entity (unity) in the physical space, by the interactions of the same components that it produces as such a network. This organization I call the autopoietic organization, and any system that exhibits it is an autopoietic system in the space in which its components exist; in this sense living systems are autopoietic systems in the physical space.

(2) That the basic consequence of the autopoietic organization is that everything that takes place in an autopoietic system is subordinated to the realization of its autopoiesis, otherwise it disintegrates.

(3) That the fundamental feature that characterizes the nervous system is that it is a closed network of interacting neurons in which every state of neuronal activity generates other states of neuronal activity. Since the nervous system is a component subsystem in an autopoietic unity, it operates by generating states of relative neuronal activity that participate in the realization of the autopoiesis of the organism which it integrates.

(4) That the autopoietic states that an organism adopts are determined by its structure (the structure of the nervous system included), and that the structure of the organism (including its nervous system) is at any instant the result of its evolutionary and ontogenic structural coupling with the medium in which it is autopoietic, obtained while the autopoiesis is realized.

(5) That language arises as phenomenon proper to living systems from the reciprocal structural coupling of at least two organisms with nervous systems, and that self-consciousness arises as an individual phenomenon from the recursive structural coupling of an organism with language with its own structure through recursive self-description.

Humberto Maturana Romesin HonFCybS

Born September 14, 1928, Dr Maturana is a Chilean biologist and philosopher, co-developer of autopoiesis as the biology of cognition and life, with affiliations to second-order cybernetics. He has collaborated with many, including particularly Francisco Varela, Ricardo B. Uribe, Ximena Dávilahis, Rolf Behnke, Gregory Bateson, Gerda Verden-Zöller (on the Biology of Love), Walter Pitts, and Oliver Lettvin. In 1954, after his first qualifications at the University of Chile, he was awarded a scholarship by the Rockefeller Foundation to study anatomy and neurophysiology at University College, London. He obtained a PhD in biology from Harvard University in 1958. In 1994 he received Chile’s National Prize for Natural Sciences. His work influenced Niklas Luhmann, Fernando Flores and Julio Olalla, and many others, not all of whom Maturana has agreed with. Gregory Bateson, asked who would continue his work, replied, “A man by the name of Humberto Maturana out of Santiago, Chile. He has been doing some very interesting research that compliments my work.” (Ruiz, 1997)

Biologist Jakob von Uexküll’s Umwelt was one of Maturana’s own inspirations. During a period of illness, he reflected and realized:

“…that what was peculiar to living systems was that they were discrete autonomous entities such that all the processes that they lived, they lived in reference to themselves … whether a dog bites me or doesn’t bite me, it is doing something that has to do with itself.”

—Ramage, Magnus, and Karen Shipp. Systems Thinkers. Milton Keynes, UK: Springer, 2009.

We are very grateful to Sebastián Gaggero for joining this meeting as a co-presenter also supporting any translation requirements. He is the present operational leader of Matritizica, which was co-founded by Humberto Maturana and Ximena Dávilahis to humanize organization in Chilean corporations. Matríztica is also interested in developing the phenomenon of learning. This involves experiencing what moves us emotionally, what triggers curiosity, in processes of self-transformation while engaging with others. It aims to provide programmes of inspiration and learning with a reflexive attitude, with awareness of our observing and acting in our co-existence… within organizations, family, schools, etc.

book at source:

Insights Series: Humberto Maturana on Autopoiesis and Cybernetics Tickets, Tue 25 May 2021 at 18:00 | Eventbrite