Search results

Agonistic antagonistic general system theory and praxis were born in the medical field, but may be defined now from an epistemological and biomathematical point of view, and are used in other fields. Reviews classical notions in General Systems Theory (GST), such as auto‐organization, hierarchy, the “middle way” etc. Discusses bilateral strategies, which are seemingly contradictory and the paradoxical unilateral strategy. Suggests that, if the efficient control of certain systems is at stake in such strategies, they ought to be scrutinized by the cybernetical community.

When confronted with issues dealing with first and second order cybernetics, it seems that the manner of defining the former has been somewhat caricatured. The second appears to sometimes give rise to conclusions which are almost opposite to those of Wiener by questioning the possibility of a control for a system. We find in Wiener’s research a prefiguration of the autonomy concept, which, in our opinion, could bring an explanation – and a solution – in cases where control elicits some perverse effect; an acceptance of positive feedback if it serves a desired purpose; the central importance held for him by ergodic theory that we use in an addendum on imbalanced strange attractors control; the idea of a knowledge which may be the fruit of the control; an interest for logical paradoxes he put in relation to communication in nervous system; and already the notion of dialogue in the core of the relation man/man or man/machine. Of course, Wiener did not accord an equal development to all his insights, but we have not yet finished scrutinizing his writings. First and second order cybernetics perhaps form an agonistic/antagonistic couple of which neither element could overshadow the other.

The founders of cybernetics and systems are presented, among them N. Wiener, W.S. McCulloch and L. von Bertalanffy. Some precursors are cited from antiquity to 20th century. The basic concepts are exposed: feedback, quantity of information, requisite variety, homeostasis, local and global points of view, oprn systems, autopoiesis. The roles of the observer and of the actor are emphasized. Future is considered in three directions: development of epistemology and of praxiology, symbiosis of man and machine, role of requisite variety in the survival of mankind.

It seems necessary to consider the functioning of biological systems on the basis of agonistic and antagonistic actions of a couple of elements. Here, the adrenal postpituitary system is considered. We show how such a view allowed us to give an account of diverse phenomena, noticeably the lack of response to Cortisol. It gave also rise to “paradoxical” therapies in the sense that both hormones had to be administered in case of an imbalance. A mathematical model helps one to become accustomed to these notions and, perhaps, is able to directly improve therapeutical strategies.

Agonistic antagonistic system theory and praxis were born in the medical field, but may be defined now from an epistemological and biomathematical point of view. Describes new developments in agonistic antagonistic (AA) theory and presents new applications. These include new mathematical approaches that involve variable parameters and partial derivatives in models for the regulation of AA couples (MRAAC). Gives new biomedical applications and, in explanation, a mechanism called “pathological homeostasis” (PH) is introduced. Also provides details of therapeutical trials. Suggests systems science or cybernetical strategies which are likely to have a broad field of application, particularly among decision makers in general.

The paper discusses possible implications of Heinz von Foerster's notion of second‐order cybernetics for management thinking. The purpose of this paper is to outline challenges of as well as prospective further developments for management theory that emanate from second‐order cybernetics.

As a conceptual paper, the paper tries to develop its findings through theoretically applying von Foerster's insights to management thinking's conventional assumptions. When looking for applications of von Foerster's approach within the social sciences, at least in german‐speaking countries one sooner or later comes across Niklas Luhmann's system sociology. Hence, Luhmann's version of the theory of the observer is introduced and its take on organization and management is briefly outlined. Drawing upon von Foerster's and Luhmann's reflections, possible implications for management thinking are presented – ideas that might be disagreeable for “classical” management science but might set out a path for further developments of management thinking.

What difference might second‐order cybernetics (and autopoietic systems sociology) make for management thinking? As a conclusion, deliberately poignant statements are formulated, calling for a higher degree of self‐reflection, for critical readings of conventional texts, for more complex descriptions of organizations and for a more modest, low‐key take on management theory's endeavours.

Whereas first‐order cybernetics has been fairly well‐received in management theory, second‐order cybernetics, which poses troubling questions to conventional epistemologies, remained relatively unpopular. Acts of “observing observers” reclaim these questions, possibly leading to valuable insights for researchers and reflected practitioners alike.

Presents the fixed‐point paradigm and its aspects from vector algebra to dynamical systems, not forgetting eigenbehaviours. Then considers the problem of subjects (and objects) in interaction, using the author's concepts of observation operator, pragmatical operator and epistemo‐praxiological loop which give rise to the intervention of a fixed point. More precise conclusions are obtained in the recurrent case. A comparison is made with Heinz von Förster's views on subject and object.

The aims of cybernetics and of system research are shown to embody a strong bias towards biological studies. Cybernetics subsumes the ideas of “experimental epistemology”, a study which attempts to explain mental processes over the whole range of viewpoints from the single‐cell recordings of the neurophysiologist to concept‐formation and representation of knowledge. Studies which are more restricted in scope have been of practical value; “experimental epistemology” is a long way from achieving its goal. It has, however, provided useful stimulation and has an interesting bearing on viable systems other than nervous systems.