autopoiesis007

4

Eric Lindblom

Transforming:

---

It is also interesting to add "coexistence of organizational closure and structural opening." (credit: Renato Proietti)

Open and closed systems:

My suspicion is that there is no such thing but rather all systems are opening and closing (unfortunately for the finite human mind at the same time in a quantum manner). I am finding that concept to be fascinating as it could be applied to Dr. Maturana's submarine. That would cloud the discussion wonderfully.

In contradistinction, please allow me to cloud the disscussion horribly! To autopoiesis and open and closed systems (organizational and structural systems), I would like to add equalfinalty! (What I am suggesting is to apply General Systems Theory at this point.) That is to say that in a self shaping, autopoietic system, there is multicausality for the same result: equalfinality. (That is Maturana's submarine. It is equal final.) What happens, in that case, is definition. The submarine arises because it is defined. (I don't claim credit for that concept of closed systems being defined as it comes, according to McQuillan, from Paul de Man. McQuillan, M.(2000) Paul de Man. London:Routledge. The Paul de Man construction is that as a system closes, it does so through definition. Worse, that defined system (closing), according to this guy named Lindblom, is artificially constructed by the human mind or what Einstein called statistical and what I call a manufactu ( made) referent.

To pursue this admittedly complex thought: Equifinality, then, has definition (closing) through organizational closure. There is our definition. My question in that case is in a closing system where closure is through definition, would that system also be structurally opening? Look at Maturana's submarine. True, false, falsefiable? What?

How in the world would that definition happen? Here is a possibility. I refer to the Stephen Hawkings disclosure fairly recently that information leaks from a black hole! Is that organizational closure and structural opeing? I would guess yes. How can we know? What is the epistemology, here? We'd know, I am theorizing, because the leak of information from a here-to-fore defined and closed system curves as does light in a gravitational field and as does gravity in a light field! (I take credit for that idea and call it, arrogantly, The Lindblom Transformation!) Let's, just for fun, turn Information Theory on its head. That is to say information from Dr. Hawkings black hole bends. Why? According to a Theory of Everything (mine) where light bends in a gravitational field, then everything bends including information! What a concept!

This gets interesting. It could bend your head! As organizational closure and structural opening arises, then both would curve! (I curse that recursion!) The key (an isomorphism) then is to see in a multidisciplinary manner what can be described by physicial observation and experience vis a vis John Dewey. That is to asky, how would informational, mental and social processes work based on observations made in physics such as the various black hole phenomena? Is there a Lindblom Transformation in all sciences (and arts)? I would say yes. It is an isomorphism. Hooray!

How does the transformation work? So, then, I'd like to suggest taking this thing in steps. The first step in any kind of comprehension of this complexity of systems and subsequent understanding of any of it is to ask Dr. Glasersfeld what he means (now) by radical!

Then, we apply that to what we are asking through the use of isomorphism not to mention unity of science! How? We reapply Dr. Piaget to Dr. Glasersfeld! I hope the good doctor wouldn't mind. (ie: http://www.oikos.org/Piagethom.htm ) I'd like to suggest, of course, that Dr. Glasersfeld has already answered the question of what is radical. Click "Oikos" (trans: home and hearth)!

Imagine that.... please!