source:
CybSights: The Cybernetics Difference, Jenkinson and Kawalek – YouTube
CybSights: The Cybernetics Difference, Jenkinson and Kawalek
1 view•Premiered 7 hours ago20SHARESAVECybernetics Society47 subscribersSUBSCRIBED#purpose # causality #wicked_problems #ecological design #cybernetics The Cybernetics Society hosts two talks by and a conversation with two of its fellows on future science and society. Angus Jenkinson FCybS and Peter Kawalek FCybS propose 1) a revised logic of causality‚ i.e. active and passive causality — wicked problem dissolving — and the moral order of nature, including purpose, and 2) sympoiesis as a feature of (Donna Haraway’s conception of) the Chthulucene age – a higher variety, multi-species, ecologically conducive era of diverse relationships. It leads to conversation about competition and cooperation, the nature of life, and what we humans want to do with our purposefulness in the making of the world. Angus Jenkinson is the Secretary of the Cybernetics Society, with career as business professor, tech entrepreneur and CEO/company chair, designer, and consultant to many organisations internationally. He is an organisational philosopher developing a scientific theory of organisations, called propriopoiesis. In the talk, he uses various film images to discuss active and passive causality; His thesis is: 1— When science rejected goal-driven behaviour in the 1600s it lost the ability to explain the behaviour of every living creature and every social institution. When cybernetics brought it back in the 20th century it provided the foundation for understanding and resolving the most difficult challenges of our time and times to come. Cybernetics proved that there was active causality. All living creatures actively produce what they do. And do their best to make sure that nothing prevents it. That turns our understanding of the world inside out. And restores common sense. 2 — It turns wicked problems into tame problems with designs that produce the desired outcome with exquisite precision. 3 — Cybernetics is founded on the join between people and their world, living creatures and their world. That’s why it can help with ecological, social, and design challenges, from AI to saving butterflies and forests. 4 — The world of the 21st-century therefore has two great orders of nature. The first is the world of passive causality, mechanical objects and technologies, things. Scientific technology has been mostly brilliant at this. (But they can do harm to the living.) The second is the world of active causality, the living, and the technologies that reflect this. Scientific technology has varied from the so-so to the awful at this. This century we need to solve the problems of the past for the sake of the future. The problems and ways to deal with them are social, technical, and eminently practical. Professor Peter Kawalek FCybS is Director of the Centre for Information Management at the School of Business & Economics in Loughborough University. He has additional visiting positions and has wide experience working with organizations including Siemens AG., SAP, IBM, Office an Taoiseach (Prime Minister) in Dublin, the Department of Communities and Local Government, and more. He reviews and comments on Donna Haraway’s reconceptualization of autopoiesis as sympoiesis. She sees the Chthulucene – a higher variety, multi-species, ecologically conducive era of diverse relationships to replace the Anthropocene – as a desirable evolution. Peter follows Stafford Beer’s critique of the failures of thought, curricula and teaching, which impoverish thinking and so impoverish the world. With Donna Haraway’s work, like Stafford’s, he felt a surge of excitement at its rich potential to consider ‘what worlds world worlds’. Look out for the variety expressed in kin, plantations and string figures.
thinking really adds value when you realise that the world of projects is imperfect and uncertain, not deterministic, and has a significant human dimension where ’soft’ systems thinking comes into play. Not only do tasks often take longer to complete than anticipated due to unforeseen events and re-work, but we often start projects without a clear understanding of what the project’s objectives are. Systems thinking gives us the tools to attempt both complicated projects (with many interfaces and distributed supply chains – such as building a new aircraft) and complex projects (where stakeholders don’t agree on the fundamental objectives – such as building a new runway for London or using IT to deliver improved healthcare services). Ultimately, systems thinking helps us to do a better job of managing risk and project scope.
Systems Community of Inquiry 
You must be logged in to post a comment.