Search results

This paper aims to offer an integration of Vladimir Lepskiy’s third-order cybernetics and Raul Espejo’s Viplan methodology. Key ideas are mechanisms for social responsibility and a methodology to improve them through self-developing reflexive-active environments.

The authors propose a methodology based on modern philosophy of science, which sets the foundation of ontological cybernetics, constructed by subjects with different epistemological stances. This methodology includes considerations for social values, worldview principles, multiple viewpoints and subject-oriented information and communication platforms.

Current negative trends in socio-economic and environmental developments are associated with weaker social responsibilities of those holding power in society. To increase their social responsibility, the authors argue it is necessary for them to have more effective governance and development mechanisms. The proposed methodology ensures more effective interactions of stakeholders toward creating, regulating and implementing societal problem-solving.

This paper offers an initial theoretical conceptualization and illustration of social responsibility, which would benefit from further conceptual developments and practical applications.

The methodology helps increasing the level of social responsibility of all participants in control and development processes in social systems. The proposed approach allows ensuring the inclusion of stakeholders in societal problem solving through participatory methods and democratic approaches.

The conceptual and methodological ideas of this paper are based on the authors’ original research. The methodology and model of ontological cybernetics proposed in this paper are based on organizational cybernetics and modern views of philosophy of science. The methodology and model include basic ontological values and principles.

There is a field needing both cybernetics and systems theory: business as one way to viability – “business cybernetics” might have to emerge. The purpose of this paper is to address this issue.

A first draft of business cybernetics (BC) notion is presented. Discusses the definition of business systems (BSs) and their need for requisite holism, our understanding of cybernetics, our understanding of the (general) systems theory and systems thinking, differences between some versions of systems theories and cybernetics, and add our draft cybernetics of BSs, finishing with BC as a case of interdependence between business practice, systems theories and cybernetics and resulting conclusions.

It was not found, although quite some literature was studied and quite some practical experience in business, both as employees and as consulting instructors was collected. It is clear that cybernetics and (general) systems theory were created at about the same time by two different groups of scientists. They both dealt with complex rather than complicated entities/features/processes and they both tried to stress relations between parts of reality, which used to be considered separately and one‐sidedly rather than (requisitely) holistically.

Later on, their “war against a too narrow specialisation” did not end in their general victory, but rather in application of their fruitful findings inside many specialised disciplines of science and practice. This is good, but not good enough, uncovered topics remain. Business is one of them.

Links both cybernetics and systems to an emerging “business cybernetics” in an innovative approach.

This bibliometric mapping study aimed to provide comprehensive insights into the global research landscape of cybernetics. Utilizing the biblioshiny function in R Studio, we conducted an analysis spanning 1958 to 2023, sourcing data from Scopus. This research focuses on key terms such as cybernetics, cybernetics systems, complex adaptive systems, viable system models (VSM), agent-based modeling, feedback loops and complexity systems.

The analysis leveraged R Studio’s biblioshiny function to perform bibliometric mapping. Keyword searches were conducted within titles, abstracts and keywords, targeting terms central to cybernetics. The timespan, 1958–2023, provides a comprehensive overview of the evolution of cybernetics-related literature. The data were extracted from Scopus to ensure a robust and widely recognized source.

The results revealed a rich and interconnected global research network in cybernetics. The word cloud analysis highlights prominent terms such as “agent-based modeling,” “complex adaptive systems,” “feedback loop,” “viable system model” and “cybernetics.” Notably, the journal Kybernetes has emerged as a focal point, with significant citations, solidifying its position as a key source within the cybernetics research domain. The bibliometric map provides visual clarity regarding the relationships between various concepts and their evolution over time.

This study contributes original insights by employing advanced bibliometric techniques in R Studio to map the cybernetics research landscape. The comprehensive analysis sheds light on the evolution of key concepts and the global collaborative networks shaping cybernetics research. The identification of influential sources, such as Kybernetes, adds value to researchers seeking to navigate and contribute to the dynamic field of cybernetics. Furthermore, this study highlights that cybernetics not only provides a useful framework for understanding and managing major economic shocks but also offers perspectives for understanding phenomena in various fields such as economics, medicine, environmental sciences and climate change.

The aim of this paper is to elaborate the connection between the evolution of cybernetics and the development of scientific rationality (classical, non-classical, post-non-classical) and to emphasize the relevance of the formation of post-non-classical cybernetics for self-developing reflexive-active environment (the third-order cybernetics).

This paper includes interdisciplinary analysis of the evolution of cybernetics and possible directions of its development.

A connection between the types of scientific rationality (classical, non-classical and post-non-classical) and the stages of the development cybernetics is presented. Classical rationality is first-order cybernetics dealing with observed systems (an external observer). Non-classical rationality is second-order cybernetics dealing with observing systems (built-in observer). Post-non-classical rationality is third-order cybernetics dealing with the self-developing reflexive-active environment (distributed observer).

This is an initial theoretical conceptualization, which needs a broader assessment and case studies.

This proposed direction for the analysis of cybernetics opens new approaches to social control on the basis of the subject-focused models and integration of traditional cybernetic tools.

Third-order cybernetics will promote the development of civil society. Direct democracy receives new tools for development.

The value of this research is in the interdisciplinary analysis of the cybernetics evolution and in new possible directions for its development.

The study aims at defining solvability at the cross‐roads of cybernetics and problem‐solving. The cases of solvability being focussed on are generated by intervention, and as a result, their approach encounters circular and undisciplinary solving problems. This is why definitions of the third‐order circularity and the undisciplinary framework are analytical and restrictive. The second part of the study is particularly concerned with the construction of an arguably cybernetic model of the solving process, and the formal requirements endorsing the research programme. Finally, far‐aiming conclusions are drawn referring to the epistemic consistency of the third‐order cybernetics and problem‐solving, in an attempt to unify these two, already converging, scientific endeavours.

What is systemicity and what is its relationship to third-generation cybernetics, will be explored here. I begin where my published work in social complexity theory let off: What is the benefit of studying experienced emergence versus attributed emergence? And how do we account for researcher reflexivity in the study of emergence? Is systemicity really an ontological given; that is, an inevitability of any rigorous relational position? Or, is it more an accompaniment to a layered (physical, life, social) epistemology? Or, is systemicity an invitation to acknowledge the ontological limits of perception, cognition, and truth? And finally, assuming that systemicity represents third-generation cybernetics, where and how in organizational studies do we recognize our own reflexivity and relation to what we study, to whom we address our ideas, and how we communicate?

Anticipating behaviour and responding to the needs of complexity and problematic issues requires modelling to facilitate analysis and diagnosis. Using arguments of anticipation as an imperative for inquiry, the purpose of this paper is to introduce generic modelling for living systems theory, and assign the number of generic constructs to orders of simplex modelling. An nth simplex order rests in an nth order simplex cybernetic space. A general modelling theory of higher orders of simplexity is given, where each higher order responds to every generic construct involved, the properties of which determining the rules of the complex system being that is represented. Higher orders of simplexity also explain greater degrees of complexity relatively simply, and give rise to the development of new paradigms that are better able to explain perceived complex phenomena.

This is part 2 of three linked papers. Using principles that arise from Schwarz’s living systems set within a framework provided by cultural agency theory, and with a rationale provided by Rosen’s and Dubois’ concepts of anticipation, the papers develop a general modelling theory of simplex orders. They show that with the development of new higher orders, paradigm shifts can occur that become responsible for new ways of seeing and resolving stubborn problematic issues. Part 1 established the fundamentals for a theory of modelling associated with cybernetic orders. Using this, in this part 2 the authors establish the principles of cybernetic orders using simplex modelling. This will include a general theory of generic modelling. In part 3 the authors shall extend this, developing a fourth-order simplex model, and exploring the potential for higher orders using recursive techniques through cultural agency theory.

Cultural agency theory can be used to generate higher simplex through principles of recursion, and hence to create a potential for the generation of families of new paradigms. The idea of conceptual emergence is also tied to the rise of new paradigms.

The use of higher order simplex models to represent complex situations provides the ability to condense explanation concerning the development of particular system behaviours, and hence simplify the way in which the authors analyse, diagnose and anticipate behaviour in complex situations. Illustration is also given showing how the theory can explain the emergence of new paradigms.

Cultural agency can be used to structure problem issues that may otherwise be problematic, within both a top-down and bottom up approach. It may also be used to assist in establishing behavioural anticipation given an appropriate modelling approach. It may also be used to improve and compress explanation of complex situations.

A new theory of simplex orders arises from the new concept of generic modelling, illustrating cybernetic order. This permits the possibility of improved analysis and diagnosis of problematic situations belonging to complex situations through the use of higher order simplex models, and facilitates improvement in behavioural anticipation.

The purpose of the paper is to propose an effective approach of artificial intelligence (AI) addressing social-humanitarian reality comprising non-formalizable representation. The new task is to describe processes of integration of AI and humans in the hybrid systems framework.

Social-humanitarian dynamics contradict traditional characteristics of AI. Suggested methodology embraces formalized and non-formalized parts as a whole. Holonic and special convergent approaches are combined to ensure purposefulness and sustainability of collective decision-making. Inverse problem solving on topology spaces, control thermodynamics and non-formalizable (considering quantum and relativistic) semantics include observers of eigenforms of reality.

Collective decision-making cannot be represented only by formal means. Thus, this paper suggests the equation of hybrid reality (HyR), which integrates formalizable and non-formalizable parts conveying and coalescing holonic approaches, thermodynamic theory, cognitive modeling and inverse problem solving. The special convergent approach makes the solution of this equation purposeful and sustainable.

The suggested approach is far reaching with respect of current state-of-the-art technology; medium-term limitations are expected in the creation of cognitive semantics.

Social-humanitarian events embrace all phenomena connected with individual and collective human behavior and decision-making. The paper will impact deeply networked experts, groups of crowds, rescue teams, researchers, professional communities, society and environment.

New possibilities for advanced AI to enable purposeful and sustainable social-humanitarian subjects. The special convergent information structuring during collective decision-making creates necessary conditions toward the goals.

This paper aims to combine several modes of thought based on systems organization and observing systems in order to construct a model for a “designerly way of thinking”.

The approach is to regard design as a “groundless field of knowledge” that may source methodological insights from cybernetics, systems theory, cognitive studies and complexity theory, among others.

The focus of this research is to model an adaptive frame‐of‐reference that design students may use in order to construct their own autopoietic identity systems. The semantic question “How does a student obtain information about design?” is changed to a structural question “How could students acquire a structure enabling them to operate innovatively in a modern design environment?” With the backing of cybernetic principles, it is apparent that this process is not only feasible but also preferable.

While the practical use that can be made of any design theory is not within the remit of this paper, it is nonetheless the goal of theory to enhance the individual's analytical and communicative skills.

This paper suggests an autopoietic model‐for‐becoming that can have the virtual potential of bringing one to understand the grey areas of human‐object relationships.