Search results

In 1974, Heinz von Foerster articulated the distinction between a first‐ and second‐order cybernetics, as, respectively, the cybernetics of observed systems and the cybernetics of observing systems. Von Foerster's distinction, together with his own work on the epistemology of the observer, has been enormously influential on the work of a later generation of cyberneticians. It has provided an architecture for the discipline of cybernetics, one that, in true cybernetic spirit, provides order where previously there was variety and disorder. It has provided a foundation for the research programme that is second‐order cybernetics. However, as von Foerster himself makes clear, the distinction he articulated was imminent right from the outset in the thinking of the early cyberneticians, before, even, the name of their discipline had been coined. In this paper, the author gives a brief account of the developments in cybernetics that lead to von Foerster's making his distinction. As is the way of such narratives, it is but one perspective on a complex series of events. Not only is this account a personal perspective, it also includes some recollections of events that were observed and participated in at first hand.

To preface Part II of the special issue focusing on the work of Heinz von Foerster.

Outlines the contribution made by Heinz von Foerster.

Highlights his role as the founder of second order cybernetics.

Provides an outline of the importance of Heinz von Foerster's contribution to cybernetics.

The paper serves as an introduction to the special issue on Heinz von Foerster. Major episodes of his life are sketched and related to his scientific convictions regarding transdisciplinary research and radical constructivist. In the second part the contributions to the issue are summarized. Finally, the relevance of Foerster's work is discussed.

The arguments are based on the scientific literature.

Foerster argued against reductionist science and in favor of transdisciplinary research in order to trigger further scientific developments.

By using transdiciplinary and choosing the constructivist perspective, science will increase its productivity. This should be reflected in science policy.

By pointing at the variety of his scientific output and his influence on many colleagues and students, the paper is in support of Foerster's non‐reductionist worldview.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the influence of the late Heinz von Foerster in the life of an admirer and friend who remains a leader in the field of family therapy.

The approach is autobiographical. The method is (loosely) process recall and personal theoretical reflection. Objectives are achieved by organizing major tenets of von Foerster's constructivism into personal categories of meaning.

Findings included a deep philosophical influence on the author's professional life; an abiding impact on his personal life; and a durability of von Foerster's ideas across disciplines, time, and the ever‐changing theories and politics of the mental health profession.

This paper adds value to the social sciences in general, and to the field of family therapy in particular, because it highlights the interconnectedness of person and profession and the confluence of the messenger/message. Some might say this is cybernetics in vivo. There may be little that is “new” in this paper in terms of theoretical constructs, but the autobiographical nature of the reflections may be its most valuable contribution to others struggling with such concepts.

Herbert Brün was a composer of many things including electronic and computer music. His compositions were, by design, nested in his passions for designing a new society – without violence. In this article, the author attempts to address several of Brün’s concepts relevant to his desire for social change. This paper was stimulated by a panel discussion about Brün at the 2018 American Society for Cybernetics (ASC) conference “Framing a Reality and How It Matters in a Shared World.”

Herbert Brün nested his communication in what he labeled “anticommunication,” which requires a listener to generate new ways of listening. As a video ethnographer, the author had many opportunities to videotape Brün, beginning with our first encounter at the 1992 ASC Conference in Washington State. During the past several decades, the author has composed a variety of movies in which the video footage of Brün and others that the author associates with cybernetics is used. Excerpts from many of these movies are embedded in the links located in the references section of this paper.

Brün’s cybernetic formulations for designing social transformations explored in this paper include his ideas on floating hierarchies, anticommunication, his notions on a circularity of needs, peace as a need, articulating desires, composing as an element of daily life, and the retardation of decay.

It is the author’s desire that this paper encourages the reader to explore some of Herbert Brün’s formulations for designing social change and transformations.

Based primarily on the belief that it is man who constructs reality, a trend has grown in recent years to regard cybernetics as superseding the scientific methodology. Shows the untenability of this belief, its reliance on imprecise language, in particular on the ambiguous term “system”, and reiterates that sound cybernetics is just a part of the scientific tradition, firmly rooted in two Objectivity Axioms. The constructivist trend has drawn attention away from serious and difficult problems, and put the focus on the superficial and the trivial. Offers some suggestions as to how the cybernetical movement can regain contact with the advancing frontiers of science.

Briefly describes the impact that Wiener’s work had on language and communication. He believed that a message was “a sequence of measurable events distributed in time” – a signal that could only be interpreted by a receiver who was in possession of the particular code. This went against the traditional beliefs of semantics that meaning travelled in a communication channel. Bemoans the fact that Wiener’s insights on this subject did not become established but hopes one day that they might.

From the radical constructivist point of view the mainstream conception of memory as an encoding‐storage‐retrieval device is considered questionable. The paper aims at an alternative perspective on memory and its interaction with cognition.

The argumentation is based on various experimental data such as cognitive problem‐solving, change blindness, and childhood amnesia. Theoretical insights of the radical constructivist epistemology developed by Heinz von Foerster and others contribute as well.

Describing memory as storage‐retrieval device separated from cognition is rejected. Rather, memory is the expression of a static snapshot of otherwise dynamical cognitive processes. As an embodied network of constructive components, the evolutionary evolved cognition‐memory compound is not geared toward reproducing “true” facts. Rather, its goal is to produce structure that maintains coherence with the rest of the network.

Memory research should not judge recognition in terms of “correct” or “false” but rather reassess its performance in terms of the super‐ordinate cognitive faculty.

The results imply that the role of memory should be reconsidered both in memory research as well as in practical areas such as psychotherapy and law.

The new characterization of memory rejects the narrow computational theory of mind. It provides a better account for memory distortion phenomena such as false recognition, intrusion, and confabulation.

It was a rare pleasure to have known Gordon Pask. Here is a brief tribute.