You are on page 1of 105

THE VIEW FROM THE PARADOXICAL

WORLD

A thesis by Ricardo

submitted

for

the

degree

of

Doctor

of

Philosophy

Berenguer

Uribe

Department

of

Cybernetics,

Brunel

University

October

1983

iii

Brunel University, Uxbridge Department of Cybernetics Ricardo B. Uribe, "The View 1983

from

the

Paradoxical

World"

ABSTRACT

The

consequences which

of are to

using

such

complex in our that from

tools

as Logic as

and thinking we The social

Mathematics, living ourselves interplay (objective) Paradoxes, returned 1. solve" paradoxes nature system tionary of to them.

so ingrained precisely disucssed

own nature Nature in

organisms, are

explain are

which

imbedded, the

a new perspective. world this and light. the

between world

individual with for the am not

(subjective) clarity Logicians observer, alone in under

emerges

a nightmare their cradle, I

and Mathematicians, where this no hunt endeavour is to into of this the set

are up to

Though

consider the nervous

from the

a different living today

perspective, and to

new insights the working

organization the opportunity

allow

strengthen

revolu-

viewpoint. experiments performed on a multicomputer unities, are realization suggest more a ner-

Several of vous

organizationally system than the where time

closed processes and

(paradoxical) and descriptions

fundamental

concepts While explored,

space. of this will new approach already enjoy remain them. still to be

consequences reader

a sensitive

iv

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS FOREWORD ...

.......................
*. &*0a000000000.

vi
7

INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1:

................... PARADOX .....................

006a9a4 12

Preliminaries The world Logical Logic

.................. ....................

12 13 language ....
0

language and the from the

and paradoxical

17 22 27

observer
000e00.00*0*0&00

Paradoxes
The CHAPTER 2: view

paradoxical

world ............

...

.....

33 39 39 39 41

INTERACTIONS Unities Example Autopoiesis Autopoietic Survival

AMONG UNITIES

..................... ..................... ................... unities ..................... ...............

41 46 51 51 53

CHAPTER 3:

TIME

AND SPACE .................. ..................

Preliminaries Time Time CHAPTER 4: ....................... and space

.................. CLOSED UNITIES ............. transfer ......


0

56 ......... 58 58 60

ORGANIZATIONALLY Modelling Interactions and

simulating and information

Organizational
Descriptions,

closure
processes and processors ......

62
64

CHAPTER 5:

MULTICOMPUTER REALIZATION A set of microcomputers set-up ................... I................... 2................... 3................... 4................... 5................... 6................... system -

AND EXPERIMENTS .............

....

71 71 75 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Experimental Experiments Experiment Experiment Experiment Experiment Experiment Experiment The nervous

...............

0*000a0000

85
87 90 94

CONCLUDING REMARKS ...................... REFERENCES .......................... APPENDIX ........................... Realization Diagrams Experimental of the set of microcomputers .....

94 95

..................... set-up revisited ..........

98

vi

ACKNOWLEDGENENTS

I want

to

express

my gratitude Pask, to who,

to with

the

following

people: patience has suggestions develop-

To Professor given to me precious

Gordon stimuli

unending my work stages

continue

and wise of its

steer

my presentation

through

several

ment. To Professor more than Heinz von Foerster whose steps young I have followed admire. me

once and whose forever Paul of Weston the

mind I shall discussed

always with

To Professor several versions

who patiently

manuscript. who made invaluable suggestions to

To my sister improve the

Gabriela

manuscript. my students new ideas this to who were sometimes experience come. so kind so far will to let themselves their be

To many of involved endeavours. their youth in

these

from help

immediate

I hope that alive for

them to keep

years

Le ciel Pour

donne

le f eu er

f aire

Venf le miel le

L'enfer., Pour f aire

ciel

FOREWORD

The perspective reject, sists the of points to

presented creativity affirming

here,

which

the of

reader

can accept which also

or con-

as a result and negating,

exploration thereby

an endless

changing,

present Through

circumstances. a contrapuntal and their -study of the individual being I propose -which that and the to

social escape

being

corresponding already conceived

knowledges,

a situation creativity the

among us human beings as above. here, It every is

endangers without the social

my contention to stress

perspective or cooperative

presented drives

attempt will

of human beings through to to hands

end as a This trend

restricted latter that

and selective alternative

cooperation

association. a deleterious a more or less of those of

has already

contributed

will

render "burning

more and more individuals at the stakes" at the (by

agonizing to "defend

entrusted the game. of all

and protect" of

the

accepted

some) rules social

Those

defenders are

human rights

and the shielded and what "social same social, if

inclinations developed

human beings ties, charitable or

increasingly organizations

inside not

communi-

from being". if

the

atrocities

committed

provoked

by this are or

Of course are also

human beings beings find of

but

we forget

that what

they this

individual we will

do not we striving We must for

understand an anthill that

entails, for

ourselves

and not human of if a

a community

human beings. their

realize

beings group

can relinquish of individuals

autonomy the

when they goals of

become part group,

and pursue

the

even

these

goals

go against especially it is

their if

own goals they are

or not

those

of

their the

fellow group. in

human beings, Therefore, what follows

members of that

an observer's to

perspective in

I present again an a

and my aim is perspective. to

stimulate I

my reader escape

observer's social artist, image,

Although I hope, observer

cannot perhaps

the use of an

language that in its

do this,

even more than to reconstruct

a sensitive own terms.

will

be able

my

INTRODUCTION

It the long

has been the that they is

aim of perceive

many people through

to know (and sense organs. this

understand) However, as

world

as there

more than

one individual,

endeavour suggests). of

has been This

two-faced, double struggle has taken

individual of

and social

(as B. Russell source

nature

knowledge these of

has been the of which

a continuous knowledge impersonal is the is

between the

two forms science, knowledge;

knowledge. aims at

Social a totally which

robes

knowledge, only

scientific

and of scientific It is

language, knowledge. not essential

means of for

"communicating" social since knowledge. this

Language for verbally can only his indiviand hope (her)

essential dual hence that

knowledge cannot

one cannot " his this, music, these

be expressed artist art artist

be "communicated. recipient And to prose, peculiarity try of

A gifted (her) the

a sensitive

recreates uses

own experiences. language etc. meant only the like

an artistic .. are do, from to if not but what

poetry, of

painting, languages is

sculpture, that they

and the to to

"communicate" stimulate itself in in

something the is. recipient Not only

as scientific something if an artist but

languages different tries also

language

express recipis,

herself ient does of not

(himself) her (his)

scientific takes

language, her (him)

the that

message the

literally, itself, her

go beyond will

artistic in it

language a barren is only land. the the

(his)

experiences In the these

be lost language that really

scientific

truth

or

falsehood that

of

statements

matters, for

diverse

meanings are

same statements

have

different

individuals

usually

considered knowledges

irrelevant, are often

with unwisely

the

result

that

individual

and social

confused. * "There one is is are two ways of getting in definition;

We quote to know what of other other is

B. Russell: a word words,

means: which

by a definition 'verbal'

terms the

called the

by frequently it denotes is It
possible

hearing present, is
in

word when the is called ostensive


since words verused

object

which

which that

'ostensive'
definition bal in that child words are while definition the

definition.
is alone

obvious
the

beginning, of the

presupposes You is learn 'rain', the a plane in this

a knowledge can learn

'definiens'.

by a verbal with the five meaning or word 'bed'.

definition sides, of but everyday These a

a pentagon does such taught the not as

figure way

'sun',

'dinner'

by using child is the is

appropriate the that of his

emphatically

noticing meaning

object the child

concerned. comes to attach and

Consequently, to the word

a product to his

personal

experience, and his

varies A child attach formed torrents. connect It language,

according who

circumstances experiences

sensorium. will that

frequently idea

a mild 'rain'

drizzle from tropical child

a different by a child

to

the only and

word

who has

experienced a long-sighted the tries measure word to of 'bed'.

A short-sighted different is true that images

will

with

education a certain

depersonalize success. 'Rain'

and with

* Russel,

Ref.

37,

p.

4.

is

no longer from what they

the

familiar toward

phenomenon, the but earth', H20.

but and As for which

'drops 'water'

of water is no and

falling longer oxygen, learned matter. of of words the

clouds

makes you wet, have verbal whether as your

hydrogen have to be

definitions

by heart; And so,

you understand instruction

them does not the world

proceeds, from

becomes more and more separated you acquire the art the of art

the world

senses;

using of

words playing in ever the the

correctly, fiddle; in

as you might the of that

acquire

end you become such phrases that

a virtuoso

manipulation remember completely thoughts

you need hardly

words

have meanings. character, for to the

You have become inmost But you try language emotions. and what and dry. nearer the less we come to is in the the unayou to be a very

a public are suitable hope find

and even your encyclopedia. and if

can no longer lover you will in

be a poet,

your

depersonalized the desired

not

successful sacrificed communicate It the is

generating to to

You have you can

expression turns out

communication, be abstract that of logic, different the

an important abstractness

fact

complete

voidable meaning should cated 13841'. exactly Pure

difference attached to

between a word. at idea

people

I see no reason all between

why there edu-

be any difference persons in the

two suitably

conveyed 'not'

to them by the word are capable of having

The words the

'or'

and for

same meaning

two different works with

logicians. concepts which

mathematics,

throughout,

are

capable

of is

being that

completely they are derive the

public nothing of

and impersonal. from privacy. constantly the senses, The body transmessages

The reason and that is

the

senses

source

a sensitive

recording from are the

instrument, outside quite

mitting reaching reaching have tween ing of

messages one body another,

world; the

the

never

same as those exigencies be-

though

practical disregarding

and social the

taught the

us ways of percepts we have of

differences In

neighboring the the to

persons.

constructaspect most

physics our

emphasized which is akin pursuit

spatio-temporal that is

perceptions,

aspect logic

abstract This to rest

and most nearly done in what mantle our the is

and mathematics. in cover order up the

we have communicate in

of publicity, and to " rearing

communicable of oblivion.

a dark can see,

As you rather does it

conventional to to

and education knowledge. Not

are only

crippling inhibit but it

with our

respect faculty

individual

recreate

beyond

language

and peror of and it. when

ception, even

definitely scientists.

destroys

our hope to is of would in the

become artists construction

creative

The emphasis language, devoid

the

(scientific) a common differences The these tages, consider that

contradictions add to but

individual

knowledge language that

certainly advantages, of its

(scientific) common advantages we should what

has obvious we are But

become such stop

unaware

disadvanlet us and in

and wonder. our brilliant this

before

do this we biologist

Piaget, has to have

contemporary

psychologist, us, if we still

say about the artist

and how he could inside us,

stimulate

alive

an even more

serious language

concern is

about

the

extent rest

to which in dark a of

the

(scientific) of oblivion". Mathematics one wonders, of

"covering is

up the

mantle

Piaget in that total

(passionate) a with the

advocate world. his life's

considering it possible, to the

harmony

How is effort sustain

a man who dedicates creature, world of in

understanding strong in conviction mathematical

man as a living that terms, the the "entire

can still reality logical

with

can be expressed

and a fortiori, while *

terms? " when he himself the possible hereditary

concedes nature of

following

considering

logical

structures:

"As a result, which is to

we are a great the

confronted extent

with

a sort but is it

of evolution not is proremifrom a

endogenous of its

grammed as to niscent purely right while of

details

content; section allows

epigenesis point of us to

(as we saw in of logic look to view into for that

2) but of

functional assimilation compelling which us quote that in

no outmechanism, those "

some hereditary its origins in

functions But question "How, between remember prising let

appertain Jean Piaget

the living

organization. the

when he answers **

following

he asks fact,

himself:

are we to

explain real is

the

harmony

that

exists we must

mathematics that one at this that.

and the harmony It

" world? fact

First, --

a real

and a surat once that

must

be emphasized

* Piaget, ** Piaget,

1971, 1971,

p. p.

307. 339.

9
the

entire

world terms

of

reality a fortiori,

can be expressed in logical

in

matheThere

matical is

and,

terms.

no known physical in

phenomenon form,

which

has defied that have

expression

mathematical prove the

and attemps such

been made to

contrary, come to

as Hegel's Biology of unknown there is still forms,

"Naturphilosophie", finds itself

have

nothing.

confronted concluded

by a succession from in this that

and some have to what

a limit However,

can be expressed any decision means such is

mathematical we shall

terms. have

before by what

reached,

to examine up. Can an not

mysteries that is

might

be cleared

explanation mathematical? ever there

be found

intelligible think so,

although although proof

Philosophers to of give

no one has that be called Or can there because it

been able is a kind

any epistemological which

knowledge

can properly * just oneself only

philosophical

as distinct which is

from

scientific.

be an explanation is logico-mathematical? is a tricky

intelligible setting I shall

Since business, biological

up as a up

prophet to now,

say that, of to

any rational,

explanation has proved models,

phenomena be coninsohave con-

such sistent far

as heredity with

and regulations

logico-mathematical arguments this cybernetic and whose of the

and that,

as the

vitalists the

and finalists extent they of their

any validity, formity to

has been to models

of which

themselves to them.

knew nothing

discovery

owes nothing

* See

J.

Piaget,

1968.

10

This

only

goes to of

to

show

that

the

concept was, very in far

of fact, from

finality false. being

as In able form; on in

irreducible the to yet realm express very

mathematization we are any

psychology in

things few

satisfactory are attracted

mathematical to and vitalism way

psychologists many logic ordinal can today

account which

of

the

processes be utilized. is taking with

the

algebraic

Generally a decidedly isomorphisms qualiof perspechuman, bioloto

speaking, tative all tives gical, fairly Perhaps matics into have forgetting "6.1 6.11 The

mathematics trend, and its

involvement up such broad no cannot

kinds that or

has

opened is --

structuralist field --

there physical

apparently that

now be reduced " that that about Logic deludes * them:

elaborate it is the

mathematicization. enormous or still complexity can attain wrote logic are of

and Mathemany of us

achieved what

Wittgenstein of

propositions the the

tautologies. logic say ) of logic appear nothing.

Therefore (They are theories have

propositions analytic that

propositions.

6.111

All to

make a proposition are false.

content

000a*000

6.2

Mathematics

is

a logical of

method. are equations, and

The propositions therefore

mathematics

pseudo-propositions.

"Tractatus L. Wittgenstein: 1974). London, Kegan Paul,

Logico-Philosophicus"

(Routledge

and

II

6.21

A prooosition thought. 0*. 00a0a

of

mathematics

does

not

express

6.22

The logic gies

of

the

world,

which of "

is logic,

shown in is

tautolo-

by the

propositions

shown in

equations Consequently sense that they

by mathematics. logic

and mathematics of linked the of

are

tautological

in (logic) links

the or between

are

aggregates in which

propositions of the

equations them is is

(mathematics) not doubted

validity the

and the

truth

propositions no new thoughts. in

or equations

not

claimed, is

and hence logic

they

generate

Where

or mathematics, drive of every

T ask myself, young human being

such a basic or other living

and contradictory organisms contradict) found efforts, or at

any age which the secure for to

compels

them to

abandon

(change, that they have

and comfortable themselves explore to the leave logic through world

environment previous around

created in order

struggles them, find it or

and create or

a new environment, later. social drive. Without advance least Quite the

only

(change,

contradict)

sooner for

opposite: will

and mathematics, go against this

as tools contradictory

knowledge,

precisely

even suggesting to of

a vitalist consider the living the

position viewpoint escapes the

it

is

my aim to which of at logic

an invitation the organization

from

realms

and mathematics.

12

CHAPTER I PARAD0X

Preliminaries As we know, epic struggle them, logicians against always however, the matter can make about and paradoxes striving chose at the not mathematicians and for to many have a paradox-free hunt for have maintained to have an

claimed

19 solved" Wittgenstein, dealt tion makes doxes with in

discipline. but rather

paradoxes, that * logic also

outset:

he showed about itself.

no proposiSince of all that could I do a paradox parahis

logic

a statement itself, he

a statement in one elegant logic that so, that is he and his

liberated

stroke. mirrors the the to

Wittgenstein world, to ** from

claims one

paradox-free conclude not think

which

assumes I prefer

world

be also

paradox-free. as mainthat

understand only that world part for

Wittgenstein of the world, logicians those only

taining which

logic

mirrors It mirrors are,

part and

paradox-free. logic of it,

seems the

other including to them,

mathematicians, cal aspects

paradoxiapparent through and

which

according be eventually however, and

consequently logic endless agree, and

can

be and will This,

"resolved" might prove to

mathematics.

be an would goal anyway

struggle, since

as many

logicians are always

mathematicians The

new paradoxes

unveiled.

"Tractatus L. Wittgenstein: 3.332,3.333. Propositions ibidem, ibidem, 6.3. Propositions Propositions 6.13,5.511.

Logico-Philosphicus",

5.61,5.632,6.113,6.41;

see also

5.143,

13
is

a logic

and mathematics so they hope,

free sooner

from or

paradoxes,

and this

will

be

attained,

later. we will at the of assume that outset, logic

Following and mathematics they constitute We will of paradoxes so I

Wittgenstein's are free from

approach paradoxes of apart

and as such

a mirror-image consider (or quite

some part from logic

the world. a set us to parajoin-

and mathematics that will is allow indeed not

paradoxical that together

propositions) part of with the world

mirror, doxical. ing the

sustain,,

which

Obviously, hunt of

Wittgenstein, this

we are it

paradoxes

since

from

perspective

appears

clearly In

nonsensical. other words, the the we will other consider two aspects and their of the world, one

paradox-free, mirrors: doxical advocating coexistence *

paradoxical of It logic

corresponding and the we are but paranot the

propositions

and mathematics then, that

propositions. paradoxes of

should of

be clear paradox-free free

instead

logic, logic.

rather

paradoxes

and paradox

The world

"Everything than 1973). can be the

said

is

said

by an observer (Maturana

to another

observer circa

same observer"

and von Foerster,

* Please

see: (Ref. 40). "Laws of Form" Brown: Spencer G. (Ref. 24). "An Approach to Cybernetics" Pask: Gordon Things" for Living "An Epistemology Foerster: Heinz von (Ref. 47). (Ref. "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" Wittgenstein: Ludwig Tractatus" "Introduction to Wittgenstein's Russell: Bertrand (Ref. 55). "Autopoiesis F. Varela: Maturana and Cognition" H. and (Ref. 21).

55).

14

In the into event)

our

social

(logical) comes is

attempts into being

to

create when

(a

description is severed (object,

of)

world, two. is

a universe A distinction defined.

a space of affairs

made and

a state

Objl

Obj2
"Objects"

Obj3

Obj4

and

vice

"Events" creating (von Foerster) 1976) versa

A state Events are

of

affairs

is objects. existing

a configuration

of

objects

and events.

temporal of (the we

The totality However, part of Living zation they space is are in

state are

of

affairs

is

the world. which are

subjects), of are

living

organisms

and observers organisms the

the world. unities (state of (see define through affairs) Chapter whose organi2). As such, in the

autopoietic

organization unities that exist of living or

self-referential which their the

themselves a fundamental

components

distinction: distinction the ment two unity's (defined perspectives (which

specification the

their unity

own boundaries. and its unity niche

This (defined environThese by

determines

own perspective) by the will could perspective always be the

the of

living

and its observer).

an external

arise

when an observer itself) interact.

and a living

organism

observer

15

Living with living,


words: process the *

organisms, niche

with

or without interactions interactions


are cognitive "

a nervous that they are

system, relevant

interact to their

their

through these

and through
toliving is

"know".
and

In Maturana's
living as a expands

systems of of

systems, "The system it nervous

a process domain with

cognition. the living

system

cognitive

by making not it

possible cognition. recursively thereby between repre"

interactions A living interact recursively sentations. In Heinz "The of and relations with

'pure

relations', becomes

does

create can

organism the

an observer of its of

when

representations representations

interactions, relations

generating

von

Foerster's of

words: an observer and of the is the representation 'Objects'

environment between are and

'objects'

'events'. relations. result of

'events' 'Objects'

representations 'events' are

the

computa-

tion

of Since

an equivalence the computation results 'events'

relation. of of are equivalence relations is namely,

not

unique,

the and

these likewise

computations, not unique.

'objects'

This of

explains but

the

possibility

of

an arbitrary (language

number deter-

different,

internally

consistent

mined)

taxonomies.

* Maturana,

1980. 1976.

von Foerster,

16
This of

explains but realities. the

the

possibility

of

an arbitrary (culturally

number

different,

internally

consistent

determined) Since performed relations), prerequisite Moreover, they can only

computation

of

equivalence

relations

is of

on primitive an external of the

experiences environment of

(representations is not

a necessary " in an "environment" cognitive

computation observers within

a reality.

when several orient

interact their

each other

respective

domains. Consequently, the tions observer(s) of the there are (at to least) construct two perspectives its that i. e. realities does not the from (descripassume an of which

can choose world): apart from

1) A perspective the observer(s),

environment the observer(s)

perspective

as individual that assumes i. e. the

(paradoxical)

being(s); as a separate

and 2) A entity from

perspective the

an environment perspective of

observer(s), being(s). first

the

observer(s)

as social

(logical)

From the ties tions only

perspective, recursively

the

observer

constructs

its of from

realirelaan call

through

generating without or other

representations any orientations observers. From the through observers, there" (to

between

representations apart from itself

environment these tive realities, each

We shall second

paradoxical constructs that of

realities. its realities

perspec-

observer environment the the

orientations thereby contain

from-its assuming at least

may include an environment

other "out

existence observers). reality

The construction language

of

an observerthen as a

independent

and a logical

appears

17

natural We shall Even perspective the other

consequence call these in

of

this

choice

of

perspective realities.

by the

observer.

realities, principle, its

logical

though, to at

each observer realities to or

can choose

either one to

construct giving a reality

even wander the other,

from the

will of

emphasis

one or

construction escape from

can be a rather reality (individual) is usually

involved very

process painful. we postulate

and the

a cherished

From a paradoxical or more universes only 4). (or later This that is

perspective, processors) of from and only of

one

independent

and space

and time (see

may arise Chapter perspective into each being.

as a consequence quite different space the

process the

interactions (logical)

social

postulates

then

universes

may come from

Consequently, are

pictures diverse. said

the world

derived

perspective

profoundly

We can say now that tive sen chosen by the

"everything to the

is

said

from

a perspeccho-

by an observer same or another

same or another This

perspective to many

observer". realities.

may lead

possible,

often

conflicting,

Logical

language of

and paradoxical perspective

* language determines it the will the type type of of reality that that the

The choice the observer uses.

constructs Logical language language.

and with realities

language

observer with

be constructed realities,

together together with a

a logical

and paradoxical

paradoxical

is Strictly, there the usual sense of of departure point later.

"language" in thing no such as a paradoxical "Language" is used here only as a the word. become clearer towards that will new concept a

18

In

the

first that of

case, allows

the the

observer development

constructs of social the

a reality knowledge observer

free

from

paradoxes plurality structs knowledge knowledge stand or Let those of

among a consocial

observers. in which

In

the only

second

case

a reality becomes

paradoxes

are

possible,

impossible

and only the

individual

(paradoxical) can take one

can flourish. the other. the

Obviously

same observer

us consider a paradoxical

characteristics language. of a logical

of

a logical

language

and

The essential deny affairs) facts (i. e.

matter the the

language

is of to

to assert state the of

or

existence subject,

or non-existence i. e. with respect

outside being.

observer

as a social A logical (observer)

language

is,

therefore, not social,

irrelevant being. is and it to

for

the

subject

as an individual, of a logical as a social as it

The function subject function logically the basis (observer) in

language being

to have meaning only fulfills

for this

the

proportion

approaches And it (see a picture is

an ideal that

language: it constitutes

perfect for

language. knowledge is

as such

social

Introduction). of the world, i. e. it

A logical depicts of reality

proposition (a logical or non-existence proposition or false, from

reality) of agrees the

by representing state with of affairs. or fails

a possibility

existence A logical

reality

to

agree,

it

is

true

observer's

viewpoint

as a social

being. In false, order the to tell whether must a logical it with proposition reality. is true or

observer

compare

19
Logical contradictory. is or is not,

propositions, Either there propositions cannot there be is

as pictures an event no middle cannot occurs way. make

of or

reality, it does

cannot not;

be an object

Logical i. e. they

statements

about

themselves,

self-referential. are self-referential of of objects these since state and of affairs that in form state to self-referenthe closed of

However, world, loops. affairs tial i. e. The in loops Therefore, world different tial dict loops (change) that

configurations representation is

events

self-referential they lead

logic of

impossible,

propositions. if we are to to consider in self-reference our language in as part we must have of a the

we want domain, of

represent

a paradoxical are or not.

language, possible. If they

which

self-referencan contra-

propositions themselves

These do,

loops they will

be called loops will of not

paradoxical propositions be they considered imply

loops that here, a static irrelevant,

of

propositions. contradict

Self-referential (change) themselves

do not

because a=a, that

by affirming making they

(confirming) the loop and a return

themselves the selfto logic

thereby is,

reference and to The seen with in the

constitute

logical need the for

realities. going beyond that for a logical Wittgenstein perfect Russell language found can when already concerned (Tractatus in be

limitations

conditions

logically a which B.

language

Logico-Philosophicus), his Introduction to the

expounds

brilliantly

Tractatus:

* See

examples

in

"Paradoxes"

below.

20

"His mystical) logic, picture with the

(Wittgenstein's) grows according (true fact which but since it or naturally to which false) of

attitude out the the of his logical fact,

towards doctrine

this in

(the pure is a

proposition and has in It is this

common common of into as of

a certain makes it the is

structure. capable cannot of

structure the fact,

being itself

a picture be put as well

structure a structure they in the refer. very

words, the which of

of words, Everything, idea of of the being

facts is

to which involved must and is, sense.

therefore, expressiveness expressed in in

language

remain

incapable

language, precise Mr.

therefore, This

inexpressible contains,

a perfectly according " that part of to

inexpressible of logic

Wittgensein, propositions that

the whole

and philosophy. of

Logical the world

constitute form. propositions

a mirror-image

has logical loops the world thing of

Paradoxical that there part is of

constitute form.

a mirror-image Therefore, without

of

which

has paradoxical

no such

as a paradoxical

proposition

change

and self-reference. The essential the reality matter of a paradoxical reality) not proper social, language only fulfills language: it language of being. is to create this underin the is to explore

(a paradoxical as an individual,, of

subject

(observer)

The function standing proportion perfect for in the as it language.

a paradoxical and it to is

individual approaches And it knowledge

function

an ideal that

a paradoxically the basis

as such

constitutes

individual

(See Introduction).

21 (Neither perfect not

a paradoxically

perfect but a path).

language their

nor

a logically does

language

seem attainable, showing of

impossibility

prevent

them from loop

A paradoxical That senting affairs. Whether or fails to is, it depicts

propositions (a paradoxical existence of

is

a picture reality)

of

the world.

reality of

by represtate of

a possibility

a paradoxical

a paradoxical agree is

loop

of propositions from the

agrees

with viewpoint

reality as

immaterial

observer's

an individual Paradoxical determine c ange *

being. loops of what they propositions, is the case. being For self-referential, example, since they of a

themselves themselves,
with

can be true

and false,

independent

comparison In being) The

reality. language for to the (the. names itself language to refer of to the state of individual of affairs. by perby dreaming and

a paradoxical there is can

no need "talk"

observer them them

about

state

affairs or

ceiving about

through the can the

senses,

by imagining of affairs exist" the can

them

(e. g. it from the

same state "exist" and

be perceived

imagined,

i. e.

"not of are when

concurrently). observer as an individor a difbecomes

Moreover, ual, whether is being

perspective of it affairs is being only social world"

state

perceived, the observer itself) "outside


k

imagined becomes that the

dreamed social ference

immaterial; (including its

with and the

between

"inside

world"

relevant,

even

crucial. Please forget change. with is

e. g. contradict. implied usually

the

connotation

of

time

that

22

What words of

is

relevant

to

logic

is

the

relation

between on its

the

set

of

a proposition "objective" as the fact

considered which that this

as a fact makes the relation

own account, true to the or false

and the as well

proposition conveys

meaning

observer

as a social

being. viewpoint, considered in order when a person as a metaphysical to explain what is believes subject, happening. without in a proposidoes not

From a logical tion, have the to person,

be assumed

From a paradoxical assuming world the subject

viewpoint, since this

nothing subject is

can be explained part of the

paradoxical

(and What is

hence

cannot to

be metaphysical). a paradoxical of language is the relation

relevant

between state with the of the

a paradoxical affairs particular that

loop it reality that this

propositions

and the of

paradoxical a comparison as well as

may depict, considered relation

independent by the conveys

observer, to the

understanding being.

observer

as an

individual Logical are., not

propositions they are. of not

can only

say how logical

state

of

affairs

what

Paradoxical state of affairs are

loops are,

propositions what they

can only are. of affairs.

say how paradoxical

Subjects

paradoxical

state

Logic

and the

observer by an observer made sentences, of be of can many sorts: of

The utterances sayings,, logic, statements, propositions

propositions, tautologies,

propositions

mathematics,

contradictions,

23

self-referential propositions, However, is not Part hood trivial of the to true etc. to

loops etc.

of

propositions,

paradoxes,

referential

assign and has problem the or

a given caused arises

utterance

to

one of

these

classes

many discussions in relation to

among observers. the truth whether or falsethe with "reality" is

attached is and,

given false it is

utterance. an observer the observer (true,

To decide

utterance I.reality" to

makes a comparison who chooses false the

since the

be considered,

decision

or otherwise)

observer-dependent. Therefore, contradictions) ties. difficulties conflicting passing, these classical in which Social it is conceivable that some difficulties with conflicting us that (e. g. realithese the

may arise (logical)

among observers knowledge

has taught

most of of

can eventually realities reality

be resolved construction participant

through of

a revision a new,

and the

more encomOne of the of dream of

adopted occurred

by the

observers. that

adjustments science, there these

when it

was realized description

a purely

"objective" contained

the world To one absolute the of the

were

no subjects,

contradictions. (i. e. at least not

remove subject) but

contradictions, be accounted an observer's prediction

an observer for: point

had to to

observations of view the

are (Einstein);

relative

observer's observer is

hope for absolute the

vanishes, (see

uncertainty

(Heisenberg) of sorts reality, the observers. the of

von Foerster, in what (e. g. is

1976). observed if a

However, (the world) in

inclusion all

observer difficulties

creates a logical

paradoxes) of

we insist world that

i. e.

a logical

description

includes

24
In thereby latter. the logic

propositions 'primitive truth-values proposition'. 1: r is a

can

be part

of

other with

propositions) respect or to the of

becoming Their

propositions' determine the

truth

falsehood

'composite Example

'composite 'primitive

proposition' propositions'

(with (with

respect respect

to

and to

q), 0.

and

p and

q are

pqr r: pVq FF FT TF TT The truth r. know Only the But, tions that table defines truth the sign of r. anymore, the truth we can conceive or falsehood propositions' truth values of proposianother with determine The 'primitive of of difthe the F T T T V (or) but says nothing about

when the truth perhaps refer or

values of

p and q are

ascertained

we can

falsehood not in logic to

directly

proposition, respect truth or to

thereby the latter. of

becoming Again, the

'primitive their

falsehood

referred

proposition. possible truth or with

propositions' ferent referred


.I

can be seen now as the with respect after to the

statements falsehood the different

observers

proposition, that 2: each

a comparison has chosen. 'primitive proposition'

realities" Example to q). r)

observer

p and q are the 'referred

propositions' (with

(with respect

respect

and r is

to p and

25

pq
is true"

r
F and T (contradiction)

is

false"

FT TF TT

F T T and F (contradiction)

Now the certain That false

truth of if

table

says

something

about

r.

namely

that

for

values is,

p and q,

r is both

a contradiction. true or both Since *r false, r is true and (and reality Otherwise r

p and q are to

which

amounts are not

a contradiction. of reality,

contradictions can picture

tautologies) only is

pictures

(r=F) when p=F and q=T a contradiction Notice that each In of in and hence this

(r=T). or when p=T and q=F cannot determine true a reality.

contradiction without

and false a resolution is aAa, is part defined

coexist of the con-

("fighting" conflict. junction (a) and it

other)

hope for

formal

logic,

a contradiction sentences In most (first fact, e. g.: this

as the

contradictory is always false. (the

i. e.

a and not law of called and is

a basic of logic)

sentential the Law of

calculus

fundamental enunciated

Contradiction as: aAa,

by Aristotle)

expressed

i. e.: out

not above,

(a and not our

(a)) resides now in reali-

However, the ties conflict

as we pointed created between

interest

true

and false

by conflicting

constructed

by different

observers.

* Wittgenstein

op.

cit.:

Proposition

4.462

26
Example r: p: q:
Considering false. If Therefore, a comparison because reality. doxical true or it is r is r with

3: "This

an interesting proposition true" false"


alone, we find then it

case is

to

consider

is

a paradox:

false"

-or is "r is
r

that: is true.

If

is

true,

then

it

is

false,

contradicts any reality.

itself, r * paradoxical, that r, and is in being false, not is so it

independent not

of

p and of

q and logic

of

a proposition mirror indeed

self-referential, being Notice into since one the Notice example (fight)

cannot it can self

logical a mirror a parablends p and but selfblend but q

However, reality. false

-referential, rendering anymore, without do not

true case than

thereby or false

non-sensical true and false. (see oppose The paradoxical rl:

true

a contradiction true and false

reference rather

2 above) each other.

paradoxical loop of

loop

of

proposition (n=l, true"

can 2.3)

be expanded *as)

to

n propositions r2 is

"proposition

r2:

"proposition

r3

is

true"

rn:

I.

proposition

rl

is

false"

It

is

significant of

that

recent

studies have

in

the

philosophical their

foundations

mathematics

and logic

concentrated

* It

affects

(changes)

itself.

27

attention without

in getting

propositions too close

close

to rl,,

r2, into

...

rn

and r above,

but

and running

difficulties. from logic, in some

Although cases theories Anderson it leads

self-reference to interesting

has been banned and fascinating set

mathematical (see A. R.

(e. g. in

recursive Martin,

functions, 1970).

theory)

R. L.

Paradoxes We have namely already mentioned two characteristics * There is of a third dedicate ** paradoxes, one, vicious

self-reference to which in abund, of their but the

and change. Russell

circularity, attention doxes

and Whitehead Mathematica".

special of para-

"Principia they are

Examples

presented logical

almost paradoxes.

invariably This

as abstract latter who want name to on deal

examples

so called from inside

comes obviously with paradoxes

logicians their

and mathematicians disciplines, and the

insistence

abstraction stated existence propositions above, of

has probably our intention

a similar is world it. paradoxical quite

explanation. different: of

As we already we assume the paradoxical loops of

a paradoxical that mirrors of the

and a set

Two examples the electromagnetic

world

are

the Moebius

band and

buzzer:

e. g.

contradiction. Mathematica, " The Theory of

** Whitehead "Principia Russell: and 53). Types (Ref. Logical

28

STAKT

a)
You form

b)

a) ends gluing

can

a ring if end, this

with you you band

a strip give will can one have

of end

paper a half

if

you twist band. clearly

glue

the

together. it to the

However, other of

before The by

a Moebius most

paradoxical performing band, the tinues time. original assuming change. returns from band, blend the

nature the

be grasped starting the the of

following assumes with an R. and

experiment: side Q, marks along

anywhere surface band the with

on the aQ and conthe the again again observer clear a

an observer other the side

Moving

observer Q all

markings the

the

assumption finds

being

on side that whole

Suddenly

observer The

an R marking starts Q markings from viscious It in is the the

changes process path, the is

assumption. side R, only

observer find the

to is

on its fact that

Self-reference to the

evident and the of

same markings, shape of

circularity indeed

circular

path. blending

a paradoxical two sides

an excellent into one.

example

a paradox:

A paradoxical band is the 1. following,

loop

of

propositions belongs true to

that type

mirrors 3 (see

the

Moebius

which 2 is

below);

Statement

29

Statement

3 is

true

n. Notice others

Statement that

1 is

false n corresponds all their the to the twist, and all the by any paran. the it, there

statement and that have the is

to no twist of twists with

Moebius

bands in

generated

odd number doxical b) coil of

mirror-image of statements

a similar like

loop

same number such that

statement through to If

The circuit the

when current armature current the A is at

flows

elecromagnet the the

E, the flow coil, of

attracted contact falls C.

thereby is tact If then

interrupting through

no current at C. the not r.

armature

and makes con-

contact

is

made,

then

the

contact

is

broken.

If

r,

Consequently, (see below), itself that this in

the

mirror-image "This

of

this

paradox is

is

of

type which

as the the

paradox:

sentence

false",

negates

Notice one, reality but

buzzer

circuit you,

actually

* if "works"

you build

happens time of

because is

as an observer, (see Chapter 3).

assume a

which

unfolded

Another

example

a paradoxical

loop

follows:

* It

oscillates.

30
When the lamp L on. allowing sound (E) . the sensitive

armature The light tone

Af

alls,

it

makes contact switch (LSS)

at

C, turning thereby (S)

the

sensitive

closes, the

generator (SSS)

(TG) to closes the

activate energizing armature causes release

speaker

The

switch

the (A) the the

electromagnet that breaks the

The electromagnet C. turning and this, the the

attracts lamp off.

contact silent falls

This to

speaker armature cycle

to be that and

electromagnet at

and makes contact

C, repeating below). loops

the whole

again,

so on and on. Nature wholes, closed the from and is

Type 3 (see rich in

paradoxical (autopoietic)

like

ecological

system-

living unities

organisms (see turnover

and other whose

organizationally transcends It is only

Chapters (change)

2 and 4), of their

identity

constant a logical "outputs" will

"components". unities

perspective and to elude of change

that into

these

seem to have Their in only

"inputs"

themselves.

paradoxical a logical

nature

as long us

as we persist

perspective There

the world. three basic types of paradoxical loops:

are

4F

ab
a, b_, c ........
i---;
ii-i

(odd number of
n are state of affairs j j (i or propositions.

i 9.)

Im-j

means that means that

i affirms i changes

confirms i contradicts

(e. g.:

* Notice in all the different that See also least change. one at language" above.

types "Logical

loop there is always of language and paradoxical

31

Let 1) r

us consider The paradox the

some examples: of Epimenides: Cretan says: 'All Cretans are (that of liars'; mirrors the world), another that i. e. by: "b" the

"Epimenides, the

"Epimenides, state say of "a";

Cretan

says II is the "All

a proposition speaking Cretans Cretan are * itself do not speak liars

affairs and what say

Epimenides, it "b", says, that

is ,

proposition, all is Cretans not a 2) lowing i) true. !P-b Other results: r: a: b:

contradicts

by stating truth,

(including Hence,

Epimenides) the paradox to the type

can be represented 1. paradox

belongs and versions of

Epimenides

give

the

fol-

"I 'I 'I

am lying" sayf am lying' type 1.

or

"I

say:

I am lying"

a____a--b ii) r: a: a iii) "This 'This type

proposition proposition I 'What


'Socrates

is is

false" false'

Socrates:
Plato:

Plato
has

is
just

about
spoken

to

say is
truly'

false'

a: b: c: d:

'Socrates' 'What 'Plato' 'Socrates has just spoken truly' Plato is about to say is false'

changes.

32

type

Evidently, them but 3) "Let of

what

Socrates utter. of of all

and Plato

utter

does not

refer

to

to what Russell's w be the

they

paradox class

classes: those class Hence, not classes which 'x are is not members is w, 'w

themselves. to is other "If 'x

Then, is

whatever not to an x'. 'w is

x may be, giving

a w'

equivalent is a w' In r: a:

to x the

value

equivalent words: w is a w,

a w'. "

then

w is

not

a w"

1w is a

a w' type band: straight of of


.

4) a: b: C:

The Moebius A piece Another Another of

band straight straight band band

piece piece
0

n-1: n:

Another A piece of

piece twisted

of

straight band

band

a' Notice 5) off is if off, that any odd number device If the light of twists generates on if is

type a Moebius it is band. and it

A photosensitive it it is is bright. dark.

turns is

a light on, it

dark

bright

and if

33 In a: b: C: d:

other If If If If

words: dark, light bright, light then on, light then on bright off dark

then off, to: on, offl

light

then

Which a: b: If If

amounts light light buzzer

then then

light light

off on

as the Therefore

circuit.

or

type

It

is

not

difficult devices

to

build

a circuit in such

with a way

more that

lamps

and

photosensitive paradoxical different circuits. natural disregarded above is only suggests when

arranged 3). of is that And inverter all

they clearly

become to digital and

loops

(2 or

this

corresponds in the

arrangements The systems after the these case

gates feedback

field in

of

loops loops

artificial are usually I and 2

may imply the

paradoxical of of close

which

introduction

time.

Examples

possibility branches and

propositional to form arise. loops

branches, that self-

but

it

reference

appears

paradoxes

could

The view

from

the

paradoxical

world have of always considered logic and

Logicians mathematics We have where

and mathematicians only also from the inside logical pervasive.

logic

and mathematics. dictum of everythat

enjoyed the most

and mathematical The realm

as one of

paradoxes

34

we are a view approach cal

considering from the

now, outside

offers into

a new perspective logic and mathematics we will

that

will

provide

and a novel use a paradoxi-

elsewhere to look

as well. at logical

To show this, propositions. decides to

approach Let

us assume that the

an observer In

to

construct this

a reality reality, of of is interrela-

that the which tions esting

includes observer the

observer. its

order

construct

explores

environment

through

interactions

observer

recursively

generates (see

representations It

between to

representations here the for

"The world"). nature of it

notice

paradoxical its it

a recursion: refers it to itself

substituting (i. e. it is

a function

own argument replaces, since

self -referential); goes round

hence the

changes can

(itself); occur In eventually referential itself included since in in over this

and it

and round,

substitution

and over. exploration interact loop. its reality, with of its environment, thereby if the the defining is observer a selfgoing also to be one, affects include will

itself,

Therefore,

observer loops cannot

self-referential this reality

must

and consequently logic the there argument into is

be a logical that

no room for (see the below). nature

a self-reference

(changes) Let defined

us inquire by the

of itself.

this

self-referential

loop

observer defines and what observer

observing a priori is

An observer observer itself itself makes the

distinction a

between

the

observed.

An observer observed

observing observer,

observed

and the

* See

also

"Logic

and the

observer"

above.

35

thereby a paradox itself round

changing blends obviously it

itself

and blending Moreover,

observer

and observed observing goes round

just

as

opposites.

an observer and it also

is since

self-referential itself three

and

observes All

observing conditions itself reality. includes

itself for

observing

itself loop are

and so on and on. met state

a paradoxical

and so an observer of affairs,

observing

defines

a paradoxical

a paradoxical a reality is that

Therefore, this same reality

the

observer It

constructing observer is no longer

a paradoxical and its to

reality. niche

blends It

and observed: necessary entity of the for

observer the

become one. environment to

observer

assume the reality being

as a separate the perspective

and so this observer

paradoxical

belongs (see

as an individual an observer

"The world"). perspective that also

Consequently, of the world

can choose it. of first

a paradoxical observer cannot, since

and become one with perspective with other. the

Another the world observer are they

chooses share cannot unities. each

a paradoxical this perspective the

however, an observer autonomous

be inside However, other,

Observers can., if

independent choose to

observers constructing

do so,

orient

thereby

a common reality most and let (in clearly in

"out the

there". following each of its to confrom only both a can

This metaphor:

situation

can be pictured interact

two observers

us assume that this metaphor) is

them has a Moebius paradoxical contemplate template part

band that of

represents the world. of the the that its other other part

perspective the of whole the

Each observer own band, observer. observer's of each but

free

or part band of of view,

can only Therefore, band is

one observer's two-sided

point

surface.

Moreover,

band that

36
contemplate, construct however, the can be made to a two-sided their reality

coincide "out

and hence there". views of

the

observers retain, In

can

They will the world.

respective (and of clearly world

one-sided there "out

fact,

observers

could there" the

be more than in logical

two)

can make writing that by side, false If in is on

a description their mirror writing all false coinciding the

the

terms

two-sided they all

surfaces construct true

logical

propositions reality other or

world:

a common logical

on one side propositions.

propositions

and on the is logical is true

Whether with

a proposition the assumed the

determined difficulties such

by a comparison arise (e. g.

reality. adjusted the the

paradoxes), the difficulties

reality (e. g.

a way to

eliminate On this

"resolve" the band,

paradoxes). ers could

common two-sided the propositions with

part of

of logic

observ-

include

all

and mathematics as they of the limit band. of its own

and everything their observation each is

would to

be fine the

them,

as long region

common two-sided

However, band, the logic that

observer a one-sided on the

can choose surface. band, appear this

to perceive Opposites all

the

whole

become one and all the propositions i. e. they of

propositions

including to be true

and mathematics, from

and false, (paradoxical)

become paradoxical t ve. * Moreover,

individual logical this

perspecby these paradoxes can-

the whole from

reality

supported because

propositions not picture

crumbles the

perspective reality.

assumed

logical

This .9 the

of Wittgenstein, reminds 'non' corresponds sign

op cit.: to nothing

Proposition in reality".

4.0621

37
If sided

the part

observers of falls the

restrict band, thereby place

their

perspective social recover

to

the

common twobeings, logical

becoming and they

(logical) their

everything reality.

into

again

According aspects of all

to Wittgenstein, propositions. take *

contradictions

and tautology

are

Our considerations tions of logic

us to are

the

conclusion

that

all

proposithe

and mathematics

paradoxical

as seen from

individual

(paradoxical) all the

viewpoint. propositions (the (social) terms terms of equal logic are seen as tautoloor oppose the from inside) an indivieach

Therefore, gies other) or

contradictions from a logical (the

each other (i. e. from

viewpoint blend (i. e. the into from sense and the is

and as paradoxes dual (paradoxical) From the lies to outside the world

each other) the of outside).

viewpoint viewpoint (of ** is mirrored from

logical the (of world

the world

(of

logic) belong

logic) This

subject the

does not subject

logic).

because

(a living does not

organism, belong to

autopoietic) the world the

paradoxical*** by logic. the of outside the world

and consequently

Finally, the

view

renders useless

the to

mirror picture

image of the

non-paradoxical

aspects

Wittgenstein, op. 6.191 6.1131 6.111. Wittgenstein, *** See Chapter 2 op.

cit.:

Proposition

5.143

and Propositions

cit.:

Propositions

6.41,5.631,5.632

38

world the

from

the

perspective existence of

of

the

individual, of

one that state from of

allows affairs.

for A

concurrent view logic

and non-existence indeed,

surprising tive of

the world

impossible

the

perspec-

and mathematics.

39

CHAPTER 2 INTERACTIONS AMONG UNITIES

Unities Unities Unities relate are have state of affairs. of themselves and properties that

properties unities. of a unity

them to

other

The properties unity ponents. A unity which realize the is is defined,

are

determined

by the way this of its com-

and not

by particular

properties

defined the unity

by the

relations It unity.

between is these

its

components which

as a whole. of or the

relations

constitute Unities If a unity

organization

can be closed opens with the observer

open with to

respect

to (also

other

unities. for

respect can write from

an observer a protocol of

a unity),

example, for the

inputs

and outputs open open

unity Then, the is

derive and the

it

an open model deduce,

(another in the

unity). model, observer unity from closed it,

observer of to the

can predict, unity.

behaviour unable

However, an open model behaviour In order

as long for will the

as the unity, the

construct

remains the

a closed

one and its of view.

be unpredictable a of

observer's the

point observer closed

to know about a closed

unity,

can only

construct

model

i. e.

another

unity.

Example Two unities space: A and B move toward each other in a unidimensional

40

.do-

AB
A moves to left a random to their the right of a random number steps. observer is Both are

p
of steps. B moves to with the

number

closed respect to not

unities to all

respect since

an external behaviour A and B will continue the the left. left or

and with

each other concerned. afterwards try

random with meet and they to

respect will the

Eventually since to A will

separate

to This

try

move to

right

and B will

move to to

new unity depending

"AB" will on the if

move randomly result of the

either attempted to of the

right

movements right

of A and B, e. g.,

A tries to the

to move 5 steps left, Thus but the movement

and B tries be 2 steps respect to with

to move 7 steps to the lef t,

"AB" will with

and so on. observer "AB", i. e., respect

"AB" moves

randomly longer

the

external to

A and B no now

move randomly with

respect to

A and B are to

open unities "AB" is

respect unity with with

"AB" and with respect to to the the

each other. Of course A

a closed

observer.

and B remain A similar respect restrictions. then closed larger with to

closed

respect arises

observer. "move" randomly and fewer contact will the with

situation each other Couplings but in

when unities of

spaces

more dimensions than simple

more elaborate once the couplings

be necessary, unities closed respect the will unity, to

have been made, respect to of

integrate which in

and open with turn unity,

a new and and open Of decay the

can become part

an even

larger

and so on and on. by the

course, of the

process

can also

be reversed

spontaneous breaking of

component

unities

or by the

spontaneous

41
coupling. different chemical, tional, general, ponent
.1

The componens spaces electric, psychological, the unities, into couplings but if

would

become closed may not magnetic, social, the are

unities physical

again. but gravitaetc. of In the

The also

and couplings biological,

be only

mechanical, etc.,

geographical, will the restrict unities space, their

"movement" they

coma

complex

can generate their

movement"

a different

thereby original,

disengaging or

coupling(s)

and recovering

even a new freedom.

Autopoiesis Living and as such which i) is organisms their belong to the is of the class the of autopoietic unities

organization as a network

autopoietic of

organization, components of productions and ii) realize the which of

defined

productions same network

participate which of exist.

recursively produced

in these

components the network

same components, in the

productions

as a unity

space

in which

components Thus, organization its

an autopoietic through its

unity

continuously

generates of

its

own of coM7

operation this

as a system in an endless

production of

own components, under for

and does of

turnover

ponents sations

conditions

continuous

perturbations

and compen-

perturbations.

Autopoetic

unities unities formed are closed unities closed autopoietic (having unities unity neither that which inputs

Autopoietic nor of outputs)

by originally to the

become part they

and open with

respect

integrate.

42 The *

closed

model

for

autopoiesis,

with

the

following

key:

* catalyst 4o substrate o link * link * link (unbonded) (bonded, (bonded) end of chain)

Interactions (1) (2) Composition: Concatenation: + 20+00 ++ +0 +oooooooo+ (3) is Disintegration: unity links) +0 0+ 4-+ => +0+ =>
+*0***+

0 => 2whose building are closed that blocks (catalyst, respect in the subto each

an autopoietic unbonded

strate, other

unities

(with

and an external

observer)

move randomly unbonded links respect of

habitat become

(restricted bonded of links

two-dimensional

space);

meet, to

and move no more (at and consequently autopoietic with links respect closes unity to

least

with

the

chain

bonded to

links), the

become part which the they

and open with They can If the

respect still chain the (1) decay

integrate. observer. the

be closed of bonded

external

upon within via

itself the (2),

enclosing enclosure the 2.1. as a unity unities bonded

catalyst,

unbonded

links in

produced the of of chain,

by Interaction links that

can replace as a result

(3). this of

See Figure organization its

The properties mined


*Varela, nization

are (as

not

deterin

by the
F., of

properties

component

defined

Maturana, "Autopoiesis: H., R.: and Uribe, Living Systems, its Characterization and

the Orgaa Model. "

43

AAA4844 A"A A"A

AAA

AA

.14Aa4A

&"A

,..
A"4 8"
4L

*.,..

4.4

4j

4AA

4L

AAA

A...

0*. 00

4
A* 1-0 *004-* 4--a

4% +

44440.4

4AAAAaA

OA

S S... "" 04.4 "A


.. " S4
AAAA

"4

a-*00000-A
000 40

00

't

s+.

""*

.4 O4

A44AA4A44A

A4A446

A.... 000A a--00 40 .A


0A

+4.4

40

,LA,

LaA4,

AAAA

& 4.40

40 0*0.

& C) A

Figure

2.1

44
Interactions). mined by the of

The

properties of

of this

the unity, by,

autopoietic and and are,

unity in

are

deterthe

constitution the network the from with mirror links (1); links links twist.

f act, its

properties nents. should dictory propositions (i)

created

creating, of the and 1): this

compo-

Therefore, be evident circularity that Unbonded Interaction (ii) Unbonded bonded to (iii) The no

paradoxical the comparison the it are Moebius (see

nature of band

organization contra-

following the

paradoxical

Chapter

produced

within to the

the no twist. via of

enclosure

by

corresponds replace in

chain,

(2), (3);

the corresponds

that

decay

as a result

enclosure ensuring and the

prevents the

the

escape

of of

the this

catalyst, same enclounity;

thereby sure

regeneration of the

survival to no twist. decays of the also

autopoietic

corresponds (iv) The the the enclosure survival twist,

as a result autopoietic closes the

of unity;

(3),

compromising corresponds to loop. *

and

self-referential

The paradoxical ent its from itself

nature through

of

autopoiesis turnover paradoxical)

makes the of

unity

differOnly is

a constant

components. organization

(circular,

self-referential,

maintained.

Strictly, there at observer's

the twist can be anywhere in the just as in the Moebius band, all; perspective.

loop or not be it depends on the

45 Autopoiesis observer: observer, Thus, random if it if

and self -organization an autopoietic becomes allopoietic knows, generates for the unity with

are

concepts

relative to an

to

an

opens with respect the model of the the

respect to that of

observer. the pseudo**

an observer number that

example, closed

"seed" for closed

autopoiesiS, model and

and hence deduce with

can construct certainty no longer unities autopoietic to create its

an open model behaviour, an autopoietic are closed unities a new larger cells,

closed for

model that

becomes open observer. that can

and therefore Autopoietic relate that to will other tend

unity, paradoxical through unity which with

unities a reciprocal (which are

opening

may be either autopoietic to the uni-

autopoietic ties,

or not). (and

Examples: hence

become open living neurons to the

allopoietic) (autopoietic

respect which

multicellular integrate; respect

organism (autopoietic) system respect remain

unity)

they with

become open (allopoietic) (allopoietic); to the anthill with ants

nervous with and ants

(autopoietic)

become allopoietic Cells, external neurons

(autopoietic). respect to an

autopoietic

observer. unities in such of This of as living organisms are complex uni-

Autopoietic ties wise, that behave

spaces

many dimensions richness the unities of

(physical is

or otherrestricted, their and more or of

as stated by the

before). behaviour the will

behavior

however, environment less

that less

constitute rigid

through that

couplings, develop

more or

permanent,

among unities.

As a result

* G. Pask: ** Varela,

"An Approach Maturana

to Cybernetics" op. cit.

(Ref.

24)

and Uribe:

46 these respect grate, ant case, unities posite in

couplings, to for the the the

autopoietic larger unity the the (death) cell

unities (autopoietic in the

can become allopoietic or not) that they

with intethe is the

example, anthill, decay

multicellular in society. (birth) of of

organism, When this the

human being or generation of the

component com7

are unity.

simply

aspects

behaviour

the

larger

Survival To explore nisms) into it sent about act chaos sooner state the their niche * autonomous the unities stable, secure (e. g. secure, place, only of living orga-

paradoxically in or of search later. affairs of of This

rejecting a new stable, action

to plunge to the leave pre-

implies

a rejection (implicit

and a prediction affairs which

or explicit) include other

new state unities. of

may or may not is

autonomous

This their

prediction niche

based on an induction and/or their on a deduc(environ-

made on a model tion ment (computation) . **


survival

(environment) of

made in

a simulation

niche

The its

of with

an autonomous the if the to

unity

is (which

intimately may include with

related other

to

interactions unities):

environment the unity can of prey from the

autonomous degree for of

predict its and the survival

a certain it will,

confidence be able unity main

behaviour catch is its

environment escape its

example,

predator. of larger many

When a larger individuals, the

created becomes

interactions of the

goal

or

environment. 4,

See Chapter I-fodelling

1,

"The world%

** See Chapter

and simulating".

47

unity For their flock; are of

even example,

at it

the is in

expense

of

the

individual desert the they enemy; with in

component rodents

unities. will risk the

known that order to

certain distract

own lives soldiers saving the their

predator

away from that the to to

go to war because nation from the

are of

convinced course, respect

they

soldiers own too

enemy are

convinced kill

similarly each other personal of the

their

nation; late,

and so they that they

war only the

realize,

had nothing the survival

against individual with

other

soldier. depends to other on

Therefore, its paradoxical

organism respect of the

(unpredictable) However,

behaviour the requires at least survival

individual (larger behaviour unity.

organisms. unity) of of the

community

individuals individual

a logical with respect

(predictable) to the larger

The behaviour or it

of

a unity that

can be logical, is unpredictable,

that

is

predictable on the

can be paradoxical, of view of the

depending

point

observer. different kinds of interac-

Consequently tions

we can distinguish A and B: of both

among two unities (i) The behaviour doxical) remain (ii) with

unities to

is

unpredictable The unities

(parawill

respect

each other.

autonomous. of

No lasting unity B, but A is the

interaction predictable behaviour with of

may develop. (logical) this to A. unity latter with is

The behaviour respect

to unity

unpredictable its autonomy with

(paradoxical) with respect to

respect

A loses may

B and a larger to B. of

be formed prey

A totally the most

submitted ample meaning

A becomes

of B in

the word.

48 (iii) The behaviour the behaviour

of B is-predictable of A is but unpredictable submitted

with with

respect respect

to A but to B.

Same as (ii) (iv) The behaviours to each other. of

now B is

to A. with formed, the respect and the of the

of A and B are A new larger

predictable unity is to

goals larger Unities all last A or three through unity. different a priori for

A and B become subservient AB. be composite unities.

goals

unity

B can also the

Moreover, their of

in

cases

interacting

unities

can recover exploration out

autonomy larger

a paradoxical

(creative)

the

These ily they able) others, oppress given are,

kinds

of

relative

behaviour of

are

not but

necessarrather, (predict-

as characteristics the result

each unity logical ants

example, of these

of unchecked like certain

behaviour or

unities, that

enslaving that

human beings own people. arises

become armies

and dictators

their

Autopoiesis degrees of

spontaneously is it, sustained

among unities by the relations

of

different between the

complexity, that realize

components into

and may disintegrate

spontaneously

disorder. Living organisms are autopoietic unities. unities identity, they the unities are unities However, the in fact it that and as such is part they in of they their are

organizationally definition close, realized. environment attached to)

closed as autopoietic

open and which their being will (or will they are

without

loss

of

the

universe

Consequently creating other

constantly of

exploring (or that

possibility (autopoietic

attaching or not)

49

not) cial) formed

satisfy

their

autopoiesis. closed of the

In unity

this

process,

a larger or not) will

(somay be away. making of the

organizationally and the autonomy

(autopoietic unities in to cells this the

component created

fade

Multicellular cells larger and (autopoietic multicellular some of

organisms unities) unity. the

were

fashion, autopoiesis

subservient Component nervous made of the

became specialized interacting impulses. among This of the of for which the

them formed with is

system nerve

themselves "language" multicellular undifferentiated individual uses

a "language" isolated organism from

external

environment the .. is principle the

as can be seen from * This "language from with the

encoding. knowledge that

basis

as different operates allows a similar the

social sense

knowledge organs other the

a language

outside

organism, lar larger hives, render larger

and which with

interaction

with This is

multicellubirth of new beeor of later the

organisms unities clubs, the unity.

language. fish colonies,

(simbiosis, political

herds, will, to the

anthills, sooner goals

parties, unities

) that etc. subservient

integrating

Consequently, more ponent the than

the

language

of

interaction point of

can be seen from view of the comfrom

one perspective. it view is of logical a the

From the

unities of

language unity it

outside is

themselves;

point

larger

a paradoxical

"language" Therefore, cal) observer

inside

itself. organism interacts becomes recursively an individual with itself (paradoxithrough

a living when it

* H.

von Foerster,

1976.

50
its thoughts (descriptions, (logical) through is

representations observer its when it

of

interactions). with itself

It

becomes or other

a social observers

interacts

senses. unity of who learns predicting dwell subject by the unities) they other to and crethe envi-

A human observer ates its environment behaviour. (including of

an autopoietic intentions environment and they their

through In itself), this

ronment's unities intention tually through larger their

autopoietic the same Even-

are

predicting

behaviours (autopoietic of interaction, tribe, their with

observer.

two or more observers one or more domains unity autonomy (couple, family,

become coupled integrate society), (i. e. a lose they

community,

and eventually at least

own autopoiesis to the larger

become allopoietic The complexity breaking autopoiesis self-training), the dimensions its of the in

respect of

unity). allows the and

(and couplings

richness) and the cases. to of But

human behaviour of

restoration excessive

autonomy

certain

training

(including sort reduces

as opposed of behaviour with

learning,

of whatever unity

an autopoietic unities are Examples formed, of the

and makes to a simirender the

probable lar

coupling

autopoietic unities

subject which are is it

training. unities

New, larger allopoietic.

component (and in in

these training

the military forced, is there as

similar)

institutions. governments ways through and the or

Sometimes institutions, "education", like. unities It Either

oppressive more subtle

sometimes "cultural" way, results

legacies, are to the the larger

economic same: unities

pressures closed which

autopoietic they integrate.

open with is possible

respect that

some may again.

spontaneously,

creatively,

become closed

(paradoxical)

51

CHAPTER TIME AND SPACE

Preliminaries Unities observer. and complex simple, the are They if dependent are they simple are on the if perspective chosen by the wholes unities. Here If and

considered

as unanalizable component the

considered for the present the

made of observer, context timeless

unities

become, Now. In

spaceless will

timeless

the

an object Now. versa,

be the a grid create

spaceless in which or

Here objects space

and an event, create (see events 1):

Therefore, does not

and vice

time

Chapter

Ob il

ObJ2

J ObJ3

Obj4

"Objects"

"Events" and vice creating 1976) (von Foerster,

versa

A unity or by the

is unity

defined itself 4).

through (e. g. if

a distinction the unity is

by an observer made organizationally

closed,

see Chapter

52 *

All

unities

change. usually

However, gross

the

observer

can choose performed ** In by this for observer In there

perspectives, its senses, the

through unities defines with of are

approximations into

from

which

change a relatively this

themselves. stable stability, into its

manner, itself. brings

observer together

universe(s) the

But'. the

apparent and time things

possibility world there for

space

universe(s). or time: is

a changing is or

no such

as space there

no reference time. In other

them and without

reference

no space

words:

unities that

change, cause

but

the its

observer perspective) the that

makes the uni-

arbitrary ties to

distinctions change of from into objects our

(from

themselves. in time is

Consequently, not something

constancy we discover (invent the in

(identity) or it), learn

environment, in of events through do not

we, space in

as observers, (descriptions). space is

do it

through

distinctions

Likewise, that

constancy observers, But Now, the

(identity) do (invent), space to

something in to time

we, as

distinctions exist in "out prior

(processes).

and time

these space

distinctions. correspond a logical (logical) to

distinctions make of a reality (constructed)

time

and/or

construction supported

there",

that

is,

reality,

by one or more social

Change implies time or space

which process, 4). (see Chapter

is

fundamental a more

notion

than

leads, the distinctions through Every sequence of changes that (a of affairs of a state by the observer, to a recreation made that is, a clock that a cycle, constitutes over and over, unity) (events in) the universe(s) of the observer. can synchronize but its are (cycle) is asynchronous effects itself The clock and is asynchronous A cycle when analyzed, synchronous. whole. if considered as an unanalizable synchronous

53
that

observers environment),

orient

each other

through ("The

that

same reality Chapter recursively 1).

(or

as we saw before space and time

world",

Therefore, observer in that,

are

generated perspective,

by an

adopting time

a logical that that are

makes distinctions same distincprocess) Chapter 4). there is a

a space This

and/or

created

by these (description,

tions. more

suggests notion

distinction space

fundamental For

than

and time

(see

an observer or time.

that

chooses (a*a)

a paradoxical is to the

perspective,

is

no space

Change is

case from

a paradoxical state of

perspective affairs

and nothing change themselves. the

equal

itself.

Paradoxical

Consequently, tives, space time

same observer, observer observer

selecting for that in these

different is

perspecneither creates and time.

can be a paradoxical nor time, or a logical through

whom there recursively

and space

distinctions

same space

Time Time they the circuit analog, can buzzer can has come much certain which too often paradoxes discussed we considering feedback: to the help of paradox is 1. hunters the The case buzzer logic so of

"explain circuit,

away". in

Typical Chapter its

be studied gate

further with

combinational

an inverter

T FT

P4

[H
that its output is is true. true when the With the feedinput

An inverter input is false,

gate

is

such

false and

when the

54

back the are

loop, loop true

the

situation =f

is

"impossible" i. e. the

in

timeless (and

logic the

since input) a

has made true and false, since If the there input

alse,

output

obviously is is

a contradiction.

Or even more,

paradox, circle. true, perfectly "impossible"


In implies no

self-reference, true, with realm it is the of

contradiction false; output, paradoxes. if it is

and vicious false, which the it is is

and the

same happens in the

a situation How is ...


of affairs

possible situation

"resolved"
if p represents another of

in

logic?
a state state of in

logical (which q

terms,

and p this gives p and as Contraq. q,

represents a relation their from us

affairs), time This

indication it as

of expresses

succession truth. because the will the

between is

rather long diction However, ness site It world changes change of can the in

co-existing not-p, from which q is

alright

q is will it "time"

different not is preclude this of cannot

then

the of us to

Law of p and

coexistence force

same law p and

a successiveTwo oppo-

q when

same as not-p.

states

be simultaneous. that "real" say, true there gate from until is has true no "ideal" delay, the tD inverter i. e. if gate the will time in the

may be argued and at from gate) that the any input to

a time to

value not delay we delay:

false, time

output (the

false has

a certain works one

elapsed. gate

Everything as an ideal

fine followed

now because by a time

represent

a real

>O-d

tDI

55 And so when we close because to Il any change (the Il to input will true to

the

loop, affect

there (with if to

is

no conflict delay) from

anymore only to from an it and up

at 0 will tD). from t

no time

Therefore false D'

0 changes but is

true change

false, false

change only

true, there

0 will

after

hence

no conflict. from to false to

But true, t.,

oscillation generates so on,

develops

because of

when 0 changes from true

a new change as time is

itself

false

after

unf olded:

T F
"Vp

"$D

I. t D. *-t . " "


Consequently, replaced that ideal without becomes large delay the

the

time

delay

introduced, situation If of to tD -> the

has for 0,

apparently an oscillation

timeless as time and At the is

paradoxical un folded. frequency

occurs situation

we approach

the

the

oscillation loop.

increases If and the feedback tD a very time loop,

bound. large, tD will is

0 corresponds D= frequency to of

a closed

oscillation loop. and

decreases Therefore, a closed

correspond

an open an open

"something"

between

i.

something between

between having

having

and not having

having

a feedback

loop.

Something reference, It the since

and not

contradictory having the

selfparadox. coexistence time a priori, the other, of

something that

between time is

having necessary of

and not to

appears

avoid

opposites. some time

The existence must Brown elapse refers It takes

opposites

defines from

when one goes to the time

one to of the time

much as Spencer distinction. makes a

appearance to go from

when one to the

inside

56

outside, not the

it case is

takes in not

time the

to

cross of

the

distinction. where the

This

is

clearly of

domain

paradoxes,

co-existence and outside the are

opposites the

challenged. and hence it or

We can be both makes no sense vice versa:

inside

distinction to the

to go from and cross

"inside" irrelevant

"outside"

time

(non-sensical). the unfolding that these for of time liberates remain little, in of the the periodic phenomena paraat

Therefore, (e. g. doxes. all, oscillations) Without would exist time

otherwise

would very observer

as timeless if anything

oscillations, the logical is

logical logical

world. observer. of time

However, Time --

(and

space)

an invention the

can not is of

be perceived no such a process, thing like

through --

senses.

The passage with is also the an

there

can only

be compared (which

workings oscillator). In we at

a chronometer

consequence the same time that for

of

different yet

waters do not

flowing, enter the

says

Heraclitus, This not. But

enter

same river. and are of

suggests Therefore, also we,

any given

identity enter are being

we both the always

are

we can and cannot as living are of organisms, not,

"flow same changing,

events".

always to

flowing the

and hence same state

and are affairs.

able

and unable

experience

Time

and Space Subjects are paradoxical they state explore to to of affairs. They are their chaos sooner in or living

organisms rejecting new stable,

and as such the stable,

paradoxically plunge leave into it

niche search later. of This a

secure, place, only

secure

57

behaviour

entails

a loop

that

will

be called

the

exploratory

loop

and can be represented

by:

CHAOS

ORDER

As long exploratory logical iour., between

as the loop is

individual a timeless with in other

organism

behaves

paradoxically, However,

the a

and spaceless organisms are

paradox.

interaction distinctions chaos

requires

a logical observers

behav-

time

and space

made by the result (see of in

and order, of these space between observer

and time

and space

(are

created)

as a consequence This nism time to and this

same distinctions make the order returns behaviour

Preliminaries). individual orgaloop. and

the

oscillate the

and chaos (creatively) But,

the to

exploratory the timeless

Occasionally spaceless part of

paradoxical a larger the unity,

behaviour. the

as the (and rare.

individual creativity)

becomes slows

oscillation behaviour to is the

down making Time paradoxical organism and space that

paradoxical are

and space

relative which

observer.

Therefore, for in

a the time

behaviour, is

timeless

and spaceless can take observer. itself paradoxical (see place

behaving to

paradoxically, an external

with

respect for are

Consequently, 1). time and space

an observer unfolded

observing when the

Chapter is

behaviour is

abandoned, resumed,

and conversely, time and space

when the vanish.

paradoxical

behaviour

58

CHAPTER 4 ORGANIZATIONALLY CLOSED UNITIES

Modelling

and simulating and simulating as synonyms. difference are sometimes see, carelessly however, confused there is a

Modelling and treated fundamental In defined observer sider a given

As we shall between the two.

Chapter through is the

3 we saw that distinctions set of unities

unities and that that

(state

of

affairs) for

are a given to confor

a universe the observer

chooses

(dintinguish). observer. saw in

Therefore,

one unity

can be a universe

We also living niches or

Chapter distinguish

2,

that

autonomous

unities with

(e. g. their (open an

organisms) (environments) or has

themselves predictions it. However,

and deal based in

through of first

on a model to

closed)

simulation to choose define

order

do this,

observer ical) that

a perspective the

(logical universe

or paradoxor universes

and then will

(distinguish)

be considered. for a given from the unity is made in the unity a universe and its (the components. beis not

A simulation simulator) No distinction tween another closed, ical model" simulation unity, it is different is

one of observer

made by the and simulator.

(or

by the the

simulation)

Therefore, cannot It is

simulation

and hence, organizationally "process" as a between

a simulation open. in which

be organizationally treated or (see by the "classical Pask, 1981). log-

observer is

a relation

satisfied

inputs implies

and outputs a logical

Consequently,

a simulation

perspective.

59

The universe(s) unity can be the (see by itself its

of

a model

and that

(those)

of (closed

the modeled for the

same or

different. Chapter

A model 2) is in

observer) guished which

"Unities", or

another the

unity

distinin can be a

by the are

observer

same universe(s) a model and invite

components

distinguished. (i. e. from distinguish the observer.

Therefore, itself)

organizationally paradoxical A nervous universe(s) tional or

closed perspective system where or or

an unconventional can be distinguished; system (e. g. (or

computer*

can be a a conven-

models

however, that of

computer

a nervous

a mathematician problem are simu-

logician)

solving Consequently, model.

a mathematical there is

logical) thing

lators. (or

no such

as a mathematical

logical) In

a mathematical (compute) arises from the the

(or future ability

logical) behaviour

simulation of the

it

is

possible

to

deduce sity' In it is

simulation

("'Neces** ).

to make infallible open or the future. closed Only

deductions" for the

a model impossible arises

(organizationally to deduce the

observer) is possible

induction

("'Chance' tions ** ). , Modelling

from

inability

to make infallible

induc-

is is

doing

another the

unity. simulator (a unity) act like the

Simulating simulated unity.

making

A model

can be organizationally is organizationlly

closed. open. Chapter 5.

A simulation * ** See "A set

of

microcomputers", 1976.

von Foerster,

60

Interactions

and information Chapter closed their is,

transfer 1 ("The unities) world") interact cognitive when several , they can only observers orient This the ob-

As we saw in (organizationally each other within that

respective in fact,

domains. between

suggests servers.

nothing

communicated

Information (communication) between observer two or itself).

is is

a relative an observer's

concept

and information of the

transfer interaction

interpretation could include

more unities

(which

the

(logical)

In Heinz

von Foerster's is

words a relative to

(von

Foerster, that

1976): assumes structure " of

"Information meaning the only

concept the (the

when related of an utterance

cognitive 'recipient').

observer "The

information

associated ability

with

a description inferences from

depends this

on an observer's

to draw

description. 'Necessity' arises from the ability to make infallible

deductions. 'Chance' inductions. " chance the of) world, it. " contains no information; the environand necessity but to our are concepts to that arises from the inability to make infallible

"Consequently, do not apply to

attempts

create

(a description "The ment is

environment as it is. "

61
Therefore, certain (This ance server tion is is if is

an observer

unable

to

draw

inferences with if

from it. the utterthe

utterance, clearly

no information observer

can be associated For to example,

dependent).

observed would

by the not

"recipient" to draw

happens inferences (or

be a paradox, from it.

ob-

be able with

No informadescription). inter(which

associated

a paradox information

a paradoxical is

As we said pretation could of include

above, the the

transfer

an observer's

interaction observer "out to

between itself). there"

two or more unities But (e. g. this the interpretation interacting

assumes and so it of the

an environment corresponds (see

unities) perspective

a logical 1) .

(non-paradoxical)

world

Chapter

Therefore, mationally synchronization logical conflict observer's unities. bifurcation eyes of the

from

logical a

viewpoint, transfer, asynchronous

unities e. g. unities unities. unities interaction

are through

inforlocal in a an any

open and information of a priori

may occur Moreover, is also

interaction between logical And the two

among independent (or more)

independent of the

interpretation resolution implies the of

among these through in a the

this

"conflict"

(e. g.

principle) beholder:

information logical

transfer

only

observer's

perspective. is i. e. assumed and there is no

From a paradoxical paradoxical information Therefore, pendent unities, of unities transfer the are

perspective, informationally them. of

no environment closed,

between concepts

information,

conflict

between are

indethe of

information a logical,

transfer organizationally

and communication open,

consequence the world.

perspective

62 From a paradoxical closed unities interact

perspective paradoxically,

of

the world, without

organizationally communication.

Organizational "The synonymous

closure concept with of the organizational concept of closure "stability" has become in a dynamic

and generalized "The tioned, change bility concept in in

sense. " has appeared, though not explicitly men-

many contexts thinking about

and reflects what systems

a very are

fundamental sta-

and what

is. " "Every (distinguishable) through its systenr-whole stable (unity) is arising 1976

(distinguishable from it being) 1977).

properties

organizationally

closed"

(see Varela

and Pask In definite

a biological expression 1972; 1976;

context, in the

organizational concept of

closure

has received (Chapter 2).

autopoiesis and Uribe, Autopoietic closure

(See Maturana, and Varela, organizationally teristic of life.

Varela,

Maturana 1981).

1974;

Maturana are

and Ben-Eli, closed

systems is

and organizational

a charac-

As we saw before by an observer unity through made of relations

(Chapter

3),

a unity

can be distinguished whole or as a complex that interact

as a simple simple

unanalyzable

unanalyzable

component

unities

or processes. through systems distinctions or into e. g. by the systems-wholes. a tree of observer Sys-

Unities or by the have

can be organized unity itself, into

tems

a hierarchical

organization,

hierarchical

63
processes: have a closed systems

are

organizationally e. g. are a circular

open.

System-wholes of interthey

organization,

network closed,

actions: organize The closure. component ponent interact, interacting larger in fact

systent-wholes themselves. "wholeness" of

organizationally

i. e.

a unity

is

embodied unity

in is

its not

organizational the of sum of its its

An organizationally unities; it is the

closed

organizational

closure

com-

unities.

Moreover,

when organizationally closure from the have may arise point "inputs" this

closed

unities

a new organizational unities. the are 2). closure However, component

among these of the new

of view

unity they

unities

and "outputs"; perspective

organizationally

open from

(see

Chapter

Organizational However, the interactions

does not

imply

interactional

closure. depending organinforon

can be logical

or paradoxical

perspective

chosen. unities

From a paradoxical distinguish

perspective, and are logical to

izationally mationally tions these are

closed closed. required that

themselves perspective, to be able

From a logical for must the observer

interac-

distinguish this per-

unities

be informationally

open from

spective. In the (see order to "explain" (and "understand") a complex unity, open) being

observer, Introduction

as a social

(logical, 1),

organizationally creates inside arbitrary the is this unity. closed,

and Chapter distinctions organization will not

hierarchies Conseits organi-

through quently, zational

(arbitrary) if the

of

the

unity in

closure

be reflected

"explanation".

64

The observer, closed) it being,

as an individual does not explain with

(paradoxical, organizationally

organizationally closed of unities, one or more

interacts

paradoxically unities. all

them as a component

new larger

Therefore, of "inputs"

hierarchies, are

and the the of

no less

arbitrary of a logical,

notions or-

and "outputs",

consequence the world

ganizationally Organizational it also implies belong an observer (paradoxically) For ganization server

open perspective closure, a paradoxical to the that

(see involves

Introduction). change and so

as autopoiesis, loop. All aspect

organizationally of the world. perspective closed

closed Therefore, can inter-

unities only act

paradoxical adopts

a paradoxical

with

an organizationally a logical is

unity. a closed oroban

an observer (paradoxical

assuming loop)

perspective,

unconceivable with (and

and so this "understand") inputs

can only

interact closed it,

(logically) unity i. e. either making

organizationally puts open; (with the into or

by assuming the unity

and out-

and from otherwise,

organizationally as made of the components closure of

by analyzing that

the do not

unity

inputs unity.

and outputs)

even suggest

Consequently, unities observers in

organizationally reality, (paradoxical)

closed i. e. in

unities the world

are of

the the

only

a paradoxical as individual

beings.

Descriptions, At event this

_processes point we will

and processors introduce the notions while For of-condition they were and asking should

proposed

by Holt "Of what

Commoner (1970) and does a system consist?

themselves:

example,

65

we take of (or which is

processors, they it only take are

inputs made?

and outputs Do they have which Holt

as the states? do)?

elementary Do they When they

entities take space

their time?

realizations Etc. Etc (of

operate, also

do they the

and Commoner suggest and occurrence since at least intuitively in our (of an

notions

of

holding,

a condition) most easily

event). ditions no time shall of

These hold or call

can be grasped occur.

concontext, We holding

and events space the are

However, or implied

assumed of

by these a process, 3,

notions. and the

occurrence a description of

an event, (see

a condition, The concepts

Chapter

"Preliminaries"). descrip-

concurrent in our

processes discussion. such that

and concurrent

tions

will

also (or

appear descriptions)

Two or more concurrent they are not in ordered

processes with respect

are

to

one another,

i. e.

they *

take

place

different

universes Process and space.

or

independent and description

processors. are

more fundamental

notions

than

time

** instead of postulating space and time, universes we can or indepenin a

Therefore, postulate dent

one or more timeless that support

and spaceless processes Now.

processors Here

and descriptions

spaceless

and timeless is "fired" (see Petri,

A process description new

by a descripton 1965 and Holt,

so that

it

elicits

a No

1970 and 1972).

Is universe A (the usual (Pask, it"

is an a priori of connotation 1981).

independent 'universe')

it processor, but with action

is a set built into

** A of consideration careful inaries") should make this Pask 1981). also

in Chapter 3 ("Prelimdiscussion our (see less outrageous appear statement

66

components" occurrence. time

or

"storage is This with

medium" process

are

assumed or

involved without

in (or

this before)

This

(and

description)

and space. Moreover,

corresponds number universes

to a paradoxical of descriptions or independent

perspective. and processes, processors sets will (indepenAll of

a finite of

the

original

assumption as a condition (and

requires, processes not dent fire

sine

qua non, Otherwise,

one or more closed some description above

descriptions). and the action must

a process with involved set

universes built change, into

as conceived them) they will must

processors

collapse. fire defines dynamic

descriptions The closed tains of itself

i. e.

a process. and mainstability Now

or processes

and descriptions unity through the

as a paradoxical closure universes. concurrent in

organizational those are in

the

spaceless

Here and timeless in different must

within universes process lost

Processes and all

and descriptions descriptions involved

fire is

some universe(s); as the that universe(s)

otherwise, or

organizational

closure

as well Assuming

independent

processor(s). closed unity (e. g. closed a paraan

no other interacts this unity

organizationally with the

external unity doxical

observer) considered, perspective. if

organizationally only one perspective,

defines

However, be an external different (or

another observer),

organizationally with its

closed

unity

(that

could

own paradoxical and within with the

perspective, other first universes one in the

processes

and descriptions interacts

independent

processors), Here that

same spaceless descriptions case, these

and timeless fire are

Now, some universes their own processes. i. e. they If

may encounter this is the

do not

descriptions

not

changed,

"remain"

(or

67 they define a logical include "changed"

are

into medium for

themselves) (space the

and,

as a consequence, within unities

they and

a storage

and time) interacting

such universes (that may

perspective an external logical

observer). perspective, static, the i. e. dynamic stability of closure or conrorgan-

From this izational itself ponents become is

closure lost,

becomes the

organizational objects the in secreted

descriptions (or

become "real" in (or ("The

(distinctions "real" events occupy

descriptions)

space),

processes and the the

(distinctions and time 1972). to the observe logical for

processes) 'thing'

time)

processors process, It closure tional spective

space

from

" see A. Holt, is is interesting lost from is of

that

even though this of

organizational same organizathe logical per-

perspective, the emergence origin. the produce In in

closure out

essential

a timeless a logical

and spaceless perspectiveg that

Moreover, machines, puts") must

from

processors components order to

are ("outthey

abstract other

or otherwise, components to

from containg

("inputs"). this viewpoint, enables Therefore3, perspective table",

do this of

according table" "output". the

some form the

storage to

medium a "look-up the corresponding

that

them to match the

"input" that and

descriptions also the generate processors

Itremain .0 and define modify precisely this

logical

"look-up

i. e.

themselves. The descriptions stored (the versa. making one where However) generated in is by processes space fired all the and time by these universes in in one universe another are

distinctions no process if

universe and vice same

descriptions) share the

some or

68

storage interacting those selves) fire

medium,

a common logical This that are logical not

"reality" "reality" changed from those (or

may develop arises "changed"

for

the from themdo not

unities.

precisely into that

descriptions in

some universe, in

i. e.

descriptions

a process

some universe. for the unities

The common storage (their logical support

medium beand

comes an environment time), including descriptions. From a logical and storage tive vanish tion It there" (logical) that ing. creted emergent vented fore, space) of things". these in time is or in which the they "real"

common space (social) their

construct processors

their that

realities, processes and

perspective, (in whole

a processor space). logical If reality

is

process

(in

time) perspec-

description the

a paradoxical

approached,

can be made to and descripNow. blocks" a particular or those now considerare se"are

and so a processor (no is space) in the

becomes process spaceless to think Here that

(no time)

and timeless the "building of

a misconception for the be it or be it the

a priori reality:

construction the these realities

(invention) that that (the that

we invent we are

we adopt,

processors blocks" blocks"

Remember that from process.

"building

"things") constitute

The "building are defined,

the in-

logical with this

reality emergence are

distinguished, not "there" a priori.

created,

and are processes

There(no

the at

processors the It outset is only

(no time) perspective),

and descriptions they are no

(paradoxical from the

emergent

logical (secreted

perspective from the

that processes)

same processors and space.

become "things"

69 All gered in

activity

the

storage

medium fire

(or

environment) in

is

trig-

by descriptions Therefore, within the the

that if

do not these

processes vanish

a certain or processes descripmay

universe. develop tions, fade that

descriptions that are fired

universes in it the space,

by these

activity

storage time

(or medium and the

environment) perspective, perspectives.

away and with will

logical

be replaced

by one or more paradoxical

Moreover, ical) closed be chosen unities or

depending by

on

the

perspective

(logical among in these place not exist

or

paradox-

an observer, (including the

interactions observer) will or take will not

organizationally universes with have with or will without or to

logical

paradoxical, unities space will

i. e.

information outputs; this time

transfer; and

will or will

inputs respect

observer. From a logical through act conflict on perspective the the is two or more of independent unities as the can

only these

interact unities of

resolution same spacetime essential conflict in at if the the and events at " for

conflicts framework. this (logical)

produced Therefore,

existence otherwise, cal ferent location ferent time if

interaction; The logidif-

a non-existent is reflected

cannot following

be resolved. comments: (e. g. they the

perspective events in times. and in

"Two same at the dif-

may only a storage " only "Two if

occur medium) different

same place only if

occur at (e. g. viewpoint,

may only

occur

same

they

occur medium).

different From

places

different these

locations differences

a storage reflect

a logical

independence.

70

From a paradoxical ties flict" there cal can interact can is coexist without with in

perspective, conflict paradoxical a paradoxical in the the

two or more independent resolution. interactions. interaction. following (Logical)

uni"con-

Or better, The paradoxicomment: if "Two difthey occur

no conflict is

perspective events

reflected at

ferent in cal

may occur concurrent concurrence it is

same time

and place

different viewpoint, Therefore,

processors reflects

(universes). independence. perspective

From a paradoxi-

from

a paradoxical clearly latter

that

process concepts special-

and description than ized time

emerge

most These

as more fundamental constitute only a very

and space.

framework.

71

CHAPTER 5 MULTICOMPUTER. REALIZATION AND EXPERIMENTS

A set

of

microcomputers us consider, from a logical perspective, a set of indepen-

Let dent ous) These so that states soon

microcomputers. clocks

By independent

we mean different channel the logical components clock. fixed. of another

(asynchronbetween them.

and no a priori are

"communication" distinguished are defined (by

microcomputers their

observer) whose

boundaries

by those

may be affected see, these

by the are

microcomputer's not the necessarily boundaries

As we shall However, microno

boundaries can grow

microcomputer computer. A description microcomputer when that description) on. Consequently, set of word

inside

can be, word (2,4,8,

in

the .... is

microcomputers, bits) changed

part

or all is

of

and a process into

"fired" (new

(description) will in turn

a new word

that

"fire"

a new process,

and so on and

the

set

of

microcomputers or universes before.

considered that support

can be a processes

independent

processors discussed as

descriptions and

Each microcomputer (and programs)

has a RAM (Random Access (see Figure 5.1). buffers

Memory) Using that

where

data

be stored can tri-state this

appropriate act from like a

interfaces switches)

(e. g. part of

bidirectional

RAM can be completely to another These

detached

microcomputer Bus (ADB)

and be attached

through

an Address-Data can also the be same

and a Control to detached and

Bus (CB). from

two busses

attached

each microcomputer

(using

72 type puter buffer)

of

thereby to

making

part With

of this

the

RAM of

one microcomeach microRAM of is part inside another that of its one its own

accessible

another. (RAM2 in its

architecture, 5.1) of the

computer

can use part

Figure contents. when it "grows"

"mailbox" as a microcomputer RAM (i. e. boundaries, microcomputers synchronism puters or

and modify becomes

What happens relinquishes to include, RAM2.

"smaller" other

RAM2), the

and the busses

(ADB and CB) and that to be independent them together. becoming one. to of

These modified no microcomhas

continue link binds

each other; the

Therefore, After its

interact

without this

the RAM2 contents original microcom-

been modified, puter. processes current. Similarly, its boundaries

RAM2 is

returned remain in

The microcomputers and descriptions

independent

and consequently, are con-

different

microcomputers

when a microcomputer by steering the

becomes

"smaller",

it

changes its with own

internal to

busses execute

away from its program

RAM2. less partial

The microcomputer RAM (i. loss e. of only in

continues RAMI).

Appropriate irrelevant to

software the

can make the of the

RAM totally

independence

microcomputers. Consequently, medium, closed described unities, the set RAM2s may become the of (Chapter by the 4), where the common storage

before supported

organizationally in the

processes logical support creating

and descriptions (social) their space realities processes and time (see

microcomputers, including descriptions. through the

may construct "real" processors

their that

and

Much as the in

observer

distinctions

these

same space

and time

Chapter

3).

73

ff 4-a
m ell fI

r--i

r- co

4- 0
"I

000
Mm0M 4
4 -rl T5 (1) cs-4 4-4 4 -4 -H 71

LA

,Q
(X)

4J
cz

4--l
Z C)

01
C) 0 4 0E

4-3
:: s P4

4
(1) CH 4-4 N -ri 75 CH 4-4 PQ

0Z., -r-I E0=

-j zz PQ =

co

T7

4-

I 0 C

4 z

(2)

bt -T- rX4

II

SI

Co
C 0

II

I'

I
Cd 4

C14

74

If word)

RAM2 is a special

reduced case

to results Here is

only

one storage and this unique

location Itstorage"

(one

computer

location to all difference the access con-

can be the

spaceless This to this

and timeless because there

Now, accessible is an essential with

microcomputers. in to the access

unique

location can access

as compared this

RAM2.

Each microcomputer with Port other I of allows the all

unique

location

currently through Figure this

microcomputers. microcomputers. the

This Port

has been realized I Bus (PIB) to access (see

5.1) location.

microcomputers

concurrently

As we saw before, 8 .... bits) is is turn, 2 4=

part

or all

of

a microcomputer is "fired"

word

(2,4,

a description changed "fire" 2 8= into

and a process a new word

when a word that are

(description) will, 2 2= in 4 or
If described by these

(a new description) There

a new process, 256, or


are if the happens set to

and so on and on. different


unique

16 or

....
in

possible
PIB, of the

descriptions.
location processes (i. e. it fired bein

these

descriptions and

above, descriptions

corresponding upon itself

close closed Now,

comes the

closed)

an organizationally Here emerges. also can and If in timeless another PIB, with the our can universes

unity it of

defines

itself

spaceless

and with set

a paradoxical processes is closed logical a explained the and fired unity perbefore. organizadescrip(or

perspective by descriptions that

closed

another the

organizationally first one unities discussion by and as

emerges spective It should

interact for from

may arise be clear

interacting previous

that processes

tionally tions in

closed one or

unities more

be supported or

independent

processors

microcomputers).

75

Moreover, the tions

since

the

processes unities

and the are

processors

that by the universes at the

support interac-

organizationally among these

closed

generated the i. e.

same processors, support

originally at all,

(microcomputers) there are

no processes

"outset"

no processors. perspective, according (i. e. it to the microcomputers table (stored at the change in the

From a logical contents that that is is of PIB "empty" gradually

a look-up

RAMI) but new

produces (i. e. the it

no changes) produces

outset with

"filled" from

changes) with other

descriptions or existent) in

derived

interactions

emergent

processors. space

The processors from for it the

define point

(distinguish) of an exteras

themselves nal such other logical the

and time

of view to

observer. set of

However, that

a processor supports

remain

processes must

by itself it of

or with

processors

be closed; must

otherwise, or all

collapses. an organizationand space-

Therefore, ally less closed from

a processor unity, i. e.

be part

paradoxical, perspective.

i. e.

timeless

a paradoxical

Experimental

set-up described can support above are universes processes or indepen-

The microcomputers dent processors that

concurrent

and

descriptions. Each microcomputer program described executes flowchart in: independently of Figure setting (concurrently) 5.2. the values of flags the

by the

The initialization and parameters OP192 ....

consists by the look-up

as chosen "empty"

experimenter; table, i. e.

setting

RAMI to at the

F (the

no processors

76

outset); preted,

setting by the

RAM2 to logical of the rest

a random

contents as the

that "noise"

may be interthat starts delaying by the the

observer, organizationally of the

Isoscillation" the start of

closed if

unities;

the

program

so desired

experimenter; After tially read in from the

and finally, initialization the

setting branch, "paradoxical

PIB to the loop" Here

a random description. program if the consists description Now) fires essen(X)

following PlB in (the that

common spaceless universe, different description i. e. to X. loop, by the into PIB, change process i. e. i. e. from (X) the the

and timeless

a process by X ([XI cal loop", in [XI the

contents

of RAM1 addressed the "logifire a

RAMO is if that the

X; or in read from

following

PlB does not

process by X( In

universe, equal

contents

of RAMI addressed

RAMO is paradoxical generated is written

is

the

case and so the by the description is written

new read into

description from PlB. In created changed of the PlB,

fired [XI

RAMI(*X)

logical

loop,

the

storage into

medium and the the shared

processor un-

are

and expanded description is

by writing (X) f rom PlB

RAM2s the the

and into

RAM1, X or

contents

RAM2 which

modified labeled

by other with

universes. the logical around loop the allow (essential) the

The branches experimenter description (For setup,

FLAGI in

(non-essential) some given above. about refer to the the

variants

details

microcomputers Appendix. )

and the

experimental

please

77

JINITIALIZATION [Parameters G41D


Set and RAM1(0, to RAM2(RNs) F)

Set values Flags and

of

[PROMPT

G466---j FD-elayed Sta i rWrite RN in [Display


[Read
_________________________

0 (DO)
MG

PAR'nnYT(I.

AT.

X from
1-

LOOP Write into IA

splay
I

(Dl--)l

IDisplay
fIf

2 Writ-eX into PlBl

<JXI RAM1 0 X? 040-e Z=WRAM2 _Flagl(B2)=l

EX RAM1 PlB

Write into

Z PlB

Make Y=Zl

Make

Y=X
LOGICAL LOOP

Flal (B7 =1
Fla 1 (B6=

Flagl (B4) =1[-W-rite X into (Y) RAM21 oTv-n -6s fFlagl(B3)=

'Write X into 2" other[Y]RA

lother Write

(Y] RAM2sl

Z into

gin

LI, X rite rite into into I' RAM1 RAM1 T Flagl (B5)=1-T

f-

Figure

5.2

78 Experiments In cesses the at following the outset experiments, ("empty" in the universes table), support i. e. universes loops (see is activity the there no proare no

look-up the

processors. between After the

The activity logical

different

oscillates Figure 5.2). and in or may

and the

paradoxical

a dynamic on the loop, the

(and/or particular continue

"static")

equilibrium the

reached

depending the logical in this

experiment, to loop. oscillate

may remain two loops

between

remain alter

paradoxical

A new universe or permanently. closed the set unities

added later

situation

temporarily organizationally inside not (are

The particular result of interactions and are

formed chosen

are for

the the

of universes

experiment either universes (descriptions). Petri activity 01 static" sents the

not)

predefined or function properties

or predetermined (software) their of these

by the nor

structure by the

(hardware) particular

of

"components"

Nets of the

notation network

(Petri,

1965)

is after

to describe used

the

of universes

equilibrium description in universe

has been reached. i j. and the symbol

a dynamic and/or (i) The symbol reprerepresents the different firing of labels

.j

a process

Therefore,

firings

with

are

concurrent

as well

the branches as

that

include

them.

79 ExTeriment Universes: Description I 4 world: B5 0.1,2,3. B4 B3 B2 (See Figure reached: 5.2)

B7 B6 FLAG1= 010000 Dynamic stability

None

RAM2 contents Location Universe\,, 0 1 2 3

reached:

0123 0322 0322 0223 3022

Comments:

No organizationally in the remained

closed unities loop. logical

formed.

Activity

80 Experiment Universes: Description 2 4 world: B5 0.1,2,3. B4 B3 B2 (See Figure reached: 5.2)

FLAGI= Dynamic

B7 B6 100000 stability

RAM2 contents Location Universe 0


1

reached:

12

2 3

Comments:

Some organizationally continues activity loops. paradoxical

to

The formed. closed unities between the logical oscillate

and

81
Experiment Universes: Description 3 4 world: B5 01152,, 3,4,5,6,7,8,9, B4 B3 B2 (See reached: Figure 5.2) A, B, C, D, E, F.

FLAGI= Dynamic

B7 B6 100000 stability

RAM2 contents Location Universe\ 0 1 2 3

reached:

012 3456789ABcDEF 5 39260FB62358098 7 397492B1 6 5922406B218E492 8099283cF23D9A97

2CFF899

Comments:

formed. The Some organizationally closed unities between the logical to oscillate continues activity in RAM2, loops. Notice the agreements paradoxical 2,9 locations and E.

and

82 Experiment Universes: Description 4 4 world: B5 0,1,2,3. B4 B3 B2 (See Figure reached: 5.2)

FLAGI= Dynamic

B7 B6 001000 stability

RAM2 contents Location Univers 0


1

reached:
0123 T-0 1021 2021 2021

21

2 3

Comments:

formed with Several unities closed organizationally in RAM2. The reached agreements many corresponding loop after in the paradoxical some remained activity loop. the logical with oscillation

83 Experiment Universes: Description 5 4 world: B5 0,1,2,3. B4 B3 B2 (See Figure reached: 5-2)

B7 B6 FLAGI= 011100 Dynamic stability

RAM2 contents Location UniverseN 0


1

reached:

2 3

0123 2200 2200 2200 3201

Comments:

formed with many Many organizationally closed unities reached in RAM2. The activity corresponding agreements loop after in the paradoxical some oscillation remained loop. Small organizationally the logical closed with (e. g. (e. g. 1-3-1) larger ones unities are part of 0-2-1-3-0).

84

Experiment Universes: Description

6 4 world: B5 01 B4 Y23 v455 1,697 589 B3 B2 (See Figure reached: 5-2) AB, C D, E F.

B7 B6 011100 FLAGI= Dynamic stability

85

RAM2 contents Location Universe, 0


I

reached:

0123456789ABCDEF F-E F07FD39832F85A 0B74FD398F5E

2 3

Comments:

Many organizationally formed with many closed unities corresponding agreements reached in RAM2. The activity in the paradoxical remained loop after some oscillation the logical loop. Small organizationally with closed (e. g. 0-9-8-0; 2-B-5-F-2) unities are part of larger (e. g. 0-5-B-7-9-8-0; 9-2-F-5-B-7-9). ones Others like 2-B-5-F-2 overlap Branches and 0-5-B-7-9-8-0. 0-I-E like developments. and 5-D-6 may lead to further

The nervous

system potential nature of of its even a primitive components: that define the nervous neuron system cells. themselves individthat can

The enormous arises These in ually support cesses the from are the

autopoietic world

unities (space universes (patterns by these

(distinguish) They are also,

physical or in

and time).

groups,

or independent of nerve

processors

descriptions that are fired

impulses)

changed

by pro-

same descriptions. they interact paradoxically loops by closed by these in which chains same of

From a paradoxical without information are

perspective transfer forming changed closed

paradoxical into others

descriptions processes descriptions.

endlessly

(organizationally

unities)

fired

86

From them dence and are

a logical a priori they

perspective, independent interact transfer.

the

neuron

cells that lose

or

groups their

of indepen-

processors through form unity

when

logically They of the

local loops beholds that

synchronization that the may nervous fire and a physical unities, system loops in may a

information the In are

logical that

include system. process expanding world may which create world, The verses as the

environment these changed loops, into reality where

the

descriptions

do not creating i. e.

themselves, (time neuron and

thereby space),

a logical there"

"out define, the

cells, and

as autopoietic form a nervous and logical

distinguish interaction reality on and activity on.

themselves between (time

paradoxical and space),

a logical and so

i. e.

a physical

complex (each in

generated represent

by only

four

independent of neuron

unicells)

one may also the of above

a population points of even

shown

experiments, system

dramatically a moderate

towards complexity.

potential

a nervous

87
CONCLUDING REMARKS

The paradoxical excellent interplay the living We have living cal point between organism of

nature departure the logical

of

organizational for further

closure exploration

provides of the

an

and the

paradoxical

perspectives

in

and beyond. (paradoxical) part of "drive" their for exploration in

seen how the that

organisms, organizations,

forms

definition that

as paradoximay be also in this of the

can generate their the

new organizations own niche (or

paradoxical same fashion. larger tions) relinquish unity those larger (e. g. even of unity of

and explore However, require

environment) survival

activity

and even the (e. g.

a logical living

behavior organisms. the

logical latter the

interacwill larger or with of this

the

component autonomy goals

These goals of

their if

and pursue collide if with

these kin,

their

own goals

their

especially

they

are not association danger for

components of unities the

unity.

Therefore, carries

any logical a seed of (e. g. of in only this

human beings) non-associated or similar

associated Living will hope for autonomous creatively, It of hope and

and the organisms endure

unities unities implied

other

human beings). complexity without are

moderate statement other of

the

drawbacks

counteraction. unities through is only of great

Human beings, complexity behavior, this that fellow of the exploration

on the capable the

hand,

transcending of the

paradoxical through sort, their out

bonds out of

any association. larger unity,

whaterver to reach

human beings human beings. comfortable

can express Moreover, larger unity

themselves this

paradoxical be a

exploration

should

88
recurrent too often

exercise deprived

of of

the this

creative opportunity

Dowers by

of the

the

human

creature, forces that

crippling

(e. g. protect stand

traditional the by goals

"education", of the as larger

cultural unity. for

legacies These

and so on) considerations approach to

themselves

a basis

a world-wide

human

coexistence. The on all, the biological planet has evolution been so slow the of homo sapiens that it has since been that culturally inherited to belong beings, generation to the in its appearance if at has

barely,

noticed.

However, (social groups)

larger have

unities evolved are

homo sapiens at

integrated erated pace.

an accelbeing and

Acquired directly But

characters from generation characters human

culture, verbally

transmitted graphically.. and or not break Cultural and with cripples the ated cultural pace of shapes those to the

these

larger adapt to

unities them,

the

component

who must

bonds. evolution defines the Often goals these of the larger do not unities coincide

social of the

knowledge. individual. knowledge, evolution. times, ... goals cultures, component

goals social

Similarly, which With is

knowledge the more little motor accelerroom for of

individual (social) "modern

precisely the even leave

" the

prospects

optimism. One of nations, language this and

Nevertheless the oldest

among etc.

larger ) has

unities been

(different

different for their for

logical a common beings). e. g. through and it However, logic cannot

unities

(human

search

a common logical is a goal from the for

language, the larger of view

mathematics, nonsensical

unities of the

be more

point

individual

89

human being, organism. for larger Art interactions unities this

which

is

a paradoxical, paradoxical if it is to

therefore interactions survive

illogical, are

living essential of the

Consequently, living unities. and love, that and quite in are all organism

the

pressures

their

forms,

stimulate for

paradoxical the interacting

timeless

and spaceless from in a logical logical

impossible that persist will

perspective. interactions, than artistic danger to imposed later, on

Human beings them able sion or of

self-imposed, paradoxical

become,

more sooner (e. g. through

incapexprestheir

interactions and thereby

and perception),

a potential

species.

90
REFERENCES

Ashby, W. Ross: Chapman and Hall [21 Ashby, W. Ross: Hall (1972). Ltd. Bateson, (1979). Gregory:

An Introduction (1956). Ltd. Lesign for

to

Cybernetics,

London:

a Brain,

London:

Chapman and

[31

Mind

and Nature,

New York:

E. P. Dutton

[41

Beer, Stafford: "Towards the Principles of Self-Organization, (eds. ) Pergamon Press (1962).
Beer, netics logical print

Cybernetic Factory, " in von Foerster and Zopf

[51

"Managing Stafford: Modern Complexity, " in Cyberin The Collected Works of the Bioof Cybernetics Computer Laboratory, Illinois Blueed. K. Wilson; (1976). Corporation "Self-Organization, M.: in Autopoiesis, Zeleny, (1981). North Holland Autopoiesis, M. (editor) and EvoluNew York:

61

Ben-Eli " tion, Elsevier

71

"Time, Timeless Gnther, Gotthard: Logic and Self-ReferenSysems, " Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, tial 138, pp. 396-406 (1967). Vol. George, (1971). F. H.: Cybernetics, St. Paul's House, London

[8

[91

Howard, Nigel: Press (1971).

Paradoxes

of Rationality,

Cambridge:

MIT

[101

" in "Events and Conditions, A. and Commoner, F.: Holt, ACM Conference Computation, Systems and Parallel Concurrent 1970. Record,
Holt, Alfred A.: A. in Our Own Metaphor, (1972). Knopf Bateson, M., New York:

[121

Hughes, Infinity,

Vicious George: Brecht., Patrick and Doubleday New York: and Company, Cybernetic M.: (1967).

Circles and (1975). Inc. Iliffe

[13]

J. and Valach,, Klir, London Books, Ltd.,

ModellinE,

[141

"Les Limitations Jean: Ladriere, de Logique_Math; dans Collection M. R. Feys (1957). Louvain:

des Formalismes" Internes matique Serie B No. 2,

[15]

la Logique d'Antagonisme et "Le Principe Stgphane: Lupasco, Scientifiques " dans Actualite's et de l'Engergie, (1951). Cie, Editeurs Paris: Hermann and Industrielles,

91
161 Lupasco, Julliard Martin, Haven: Maturana, Editorial Maturana, Collected K. Wilson; Stephane: (1960). Les trois matires, Paris:

Rene

[171

Robert L. (editor): The Paradox Yale University Press (19 H. and Varela, Universitaria, F.: De MAquinas Santi '-go

of

the Liar9

New

[ 181

Seres

Vivos,,

[191

H. and Varela, "Autopoietic F.: Systems, " in the Works of the Biological Computer Laboratory, ed. Illinois Blueprint Corporation (1976). of

(201

Maturana, "Biology H.: of Language: the Episteimology Reality, " in "Psychology and Biology of Language and Thought, " Cornell University, Itahaca, NY (1976). Maturana, London: H. and Varela, F.: D. Reidel Publishing Autopoiesis and Cognition, Company (1980). Universe, Bristol:

(211

[221

Melhuish, George: Rankin Bros. Ltd. Melhuish, Briston:

The Paradoxical (1959).

231

George: The Paradoxical Nature St. Vincent's Press (1973).


to Cybernetics,

of Reality,

[241

Pask, Gordon: An Approach (1972). Hutchinson

London:

[251

Pask, Gordon: The Cybernetics of Human Learning * (1975). Performance, London: Hutchinson Pask, Gordon: Conversation, (1975). ' Elsevier Pask, Pask, Gordon: Gordon: "Cybernetics "Knowledge, Cognition

and

[261

and Learning,

Oxford:

[271 [281 [291

in

Psychology

and Education.

"

Innovation Closure

and Learning of Potentially

to Learn. "

"Organizational Pask, Gordon: Systems. " Conscious

[301

Closure "Organizational of Potentially Pask, Gordon: M. (editor), Zeleny, Systems, " in Autopoiesis Conscious , North Holand (1981). Elsevier York: A.: Petri, C., Greene, (1965? ). Piaget, of sity Automata, " Translated "Communication with Center for Rome Air Development prepared by

New

[311

[321

Biology Jean: Chicago Press Behavior "

and Kn owledge, (1971). and Evolution,

Chicago:

The Univer-

[331

Jean: Piaget, Books (1978).

New York:

Pantheon

92 341 Piaget, Paris: Piaget, Viking Jean: Sagesse et Illusions de la Philosophie) Presses ' universitaires de Fran-e-C(1-9-6-8). Jean: Psychology Press (1975)-, and Epistemology, New York: The

[351

[361

Quine, W- V. Th ine Ways of Paradox, University Press (1976).


Russell, Schuster. Bertrand: Human Knowledge,

Cambridge:

Harvard

(371

New York:

Simon and

[381

Russell, Bertrand: Principles W. Norton and Company, Inc. Russell, Bertrand: Introduction New York: Simon and Schuster. Spencer Brown, G.: (1971). Unwin Ltd. Tibbetts, (1969).
Uribe, Based

of Mathematics,

New York:

W.

f 391

to Mathematical

Philosophy,

[401

Laws of

Form,

London:

George Allen

and

41

Paul

(editor):

Perception,

New York:

Quadrangle

421

"Autop, " in the University R.: of (1975). Educational System (PLATO),

Illinois

Computer

[431

Uribe, R.: Proceedings in Meeting Uribe, R.: M. (editor),

"Organizations of the Society Denver, coord.

" in the 1977 Uncertainty, and for General Systems Research 282-291 (1977). J. D. White, pp. " in Autopoiesis, Zeleny, (1981). North Holland the and a

441

'4odeling Autopoiesis, New York: Elsevier

45

F., Maturana, Varela, organization of Living Model, " in Bio-Systems

"Autopoiesis: R.: H. and Uribe, Systems, its Characterization 5: 187-196 (1974). for Self-Reference, " Int. J.

46

"A Calculus F.: Varela, 5-24 (1975). 2: Syst.

Gen.

[471

Things, for Living "An Epistemology Heinz, von Foerster, Computer Laboratory, Works of the Biological The Colleged (1976). Corporation Blueprint Illinois K. Wilson; ed.

" in

[481

Systems and Their "On Self-Organizing Heinz: Foerster, von Works of the Biological " in The Collected Environments, Blueprint Illinois K. Wilson; Computer Laboratory, ed. (1976). Corporation Memory that it may have "What is Heinz: Foerster, von the Third " Proceedings of Foresignt as well? Hindsight and the Brain Sciences, Future The of Conference: International New York, pp. 19-64 Plenum Press, S. Bogoch (editor), (1969).

[491

93

501

von Foerster, Jr. Foundation.


von Self Foerster, -Organization,

Heinz

(ed. ):

Cybernetics,

The Josiah

Macy,

511

Heinz

(eds). George Zopf, and (1962). Pergamon Press

Principles

of

521

Waddington, C. H.: The Evolution Ithaca: Cornell University Press Whitehead, Mathematica (1978). Wiener, N.: 2nd edition Alfred N. (to *56), and Russell, Cambridge:

of an Evolutionist, (1975). Bertrand: Cambridge Principia University

531

Press

[54]

Cybernetics, (1962). Wiley

Technology

Press

MIT (1948). of

551

Logico-Philosophicus, Ludwig: Tractatus Wittgenstein, (1961). Kegan Paul Ltd. London: Routledge and Investigations, Philosophical Ludwig: Wittgenstein, (1968? 'Company The Macmillan York:
Wittgenstein, Row (1972). Wittgenstein, The University Wittgenstein, University Wittgenstein, California Ludwig: On Certainty, New York: Harper

561

New

[571

and

[581

Philosophical Ludwig: Press California of Ludwig: California Remarks Press Zettel,

Grammar, (1978).

Berkeley:

[591

of

on Colour, (1978). Berkeley:

Berkeley:

601

Ludwig: (1970). Press

University

of

Wittgenstein, UniVersity

Ludwig: of California

Lectures Press.

and Conversations,

94
APPENDIX

Realization An Intel (Figure (to the A. 1).

of

the

set

of microcomputers is the core of each universe available external used

8748 microcomputer Two 8185 1K bytes

RAMs are

the

8748 itself) "permanent" 5.1

RAM for

each unit. other

1K bytes 1K bytes,

of RAM is RAM2 (see as

as the Figures 8-bit reroute

RAMI and the

and A. 1). bidirectional the busses buffers (74LS245) are used to

tri-state (steer) bus, of

ADB and CB. Request Bus) is used to request The access logic to

Another mastership the been busses

ARB (Access

ADB and CB and to access access only

the RAM2s. associated

and the

to RAM2 and the single (8-bit accesses

have

designed A closed

so that chain PIB Figures

are possible. is used as the inter-

74LS373 of for 5.1 that

latches) accesses

unique actions

location (see

concurrent and A. 1). are not

and paradoxical

The peripherals, set ware if of microcomputers, allow the They Receiver

essential

to

the workings load

of the

provide external include

a convenient observer

way to

the softinteract,

and to

to observe

and to

so desired.

USART (Universal a for serial

Synchronous interface to a ter-

Asynchronous minal, (Erasable current hardware),

Transmittter) (several

Baud Rate a

Generator

Baud rates), to store,

an EPROM locally, the in ADB, CB

Programmable program,

Read Only

Memory)

Random Number Generator a appropriate A-2). circuitry

(RNG) (realized to interface with

and the Figure

ARB (see and

95

Diagrams Figure There are Figure A. 1 is 4 of the circuit units circuit in diagram the set. of the peripherals to the of a microcomputer unit.

these the

A. 2 is

diagram

set.

96

Ot

tu wl

ID It

At I* t
046
AS
.4 cr .1, K As

I I -0
t QD

'1

8112 1-4 .

--q -1
We"Oft
i id

iv

X. k,P*. lq P
C4

:>

00
Jw. .-----.. -

-w

EIZEEIRE

Zk ill% Z

lf

X-

1"

fffltffF 9=1
P., KUM "a ;
gift

Q 41q

s
AZ

117 r-IIIIiI-i
iiiii

2
Ul T

ou

kIP

N 'I -4

I'D CIQ
!LII ---T----u

I
kb

ro
I, -:

I
4

k 'to

I
%A

It

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS ADVANCED DIGITAL SYSTEMS LAS


114mang qa, -c4 11

"ICROCOAYROMe

VAI/7
SCALE

m
*ice to

'r-SUMMER 1913
OMA moe00

DATI

MAD9 BY CHU'D BY

Desl""' ic -Z

dvielac-

Fli JB

gt

No.

1,aF 2

Figure

A. 1

97

Qj

)< I-JA

I I
lu

CO lk CIE
--71 4tlk
'

k.

;;I
PA 44 it

b /T
ko

I *0 11

t S? [-I I a
A -1-4
I,

I 111111111 IS

SVX 1 Ers

11 TIIIIIIIII;

l=M

.1 112 AJI 113 A,


Al A A$

tlN

IQ q to

LIL LIE]

I"

I
2zN 4,4s

Hililill
ITT qn . %n 14 t FIT,

'4

2, cQzcb
rn
-Ten

Itc,
I it 3t

61 :x s% %N St e %M
s

er'#

1JuJJJ
rTTTTTI L 11111111 11 11111ill II -TUTTT-FIIF-T-11111111 1 IiI -li ul[]E]: ]=

11uu1

IIIIIIIIIII[Mil

--Tmlll

11
IN

$
'(N

14t a

U44 .I
zin n;:

t
4Q
w

2,1

"N%

[111111]

t,- Z4, ,
'A

lurE
%in Co
1I 4wV

IIIIE

so

l ViMIM
+

11 cv

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS ADVANCED DIGITAL SYSTEMS LAD

p& q,
IMATII

ph'eeqh$
ICLIK

5UM E

MKOCRIPTION

MA DATIC Ent,

NY17-D

lketoux /OB No.,

Z o-v2

Figure

A. 2

98
Experimental The cal

set-up

revisited loop (see Figure 5.2) represents closed the paradoxi-

paradoxical since itself

perspective

after among of this over

an organizationally the universes

unity microcom-

distinguishes puters) activity tions (because will changed Different themselves constantly themselves process doned. Moreover,, cessors or the into can PIB in and

(independent closes upon

a chain in and

processes loop by the

itself), of

the descripfire.

remain over

as an endless processes unities in the PIB they

series

themselves

organizationally interact recursively) As long the

closed

may distinguish (see Figure 5-1) that in PIB is fire not they a aban-

paradoxically changing as the

(and

descriptions

generate.

descriptions perspective

some universe,

paradoxical

from read without and or

this write

paradoxical concurrently i. e. as

perspective different different they occur

two

or

more

profrom at

descriptions events in may occur

conflict, place as long

same time

different

con-

current The the the

processors logical loop

(universes). represents (space and the time) fire logical is perspective since here with

storage descriptions

medium

generated

and expanded Even the

that support expanded table"

do not the here that

a process.

processors are

themselves generated fill the

that and

organizationally with the

closed

unities that from

descriptions a processor

gradually a logical

"look-up

defines

perspective. The where their the shared RAM2 represents organizationally realities. the storage closed Remember medium unities that this or environment construct logical

different logical

common

99 reality fails cal to (contents fire of RAM2) is in

affected

only

when a description i. e. when the paradoxilogical fire perspective. a process in some

a process is

some universe, to enter the that is not

perspective as there the

abandoned

As long universe,

are

no descriptions perspective

logical from this

abandoned. two or more different from the same location Two or more from RAM at the in

Moreover, descriptions RAM if different same time These our logical

logical into at

perspective or read different into at

can be written if it

and only

happens

times. or read

descriptions if and only if

can be written it happens

different since (or is

locations. they should apply also to

considerations realities, of at this to

sound our

familiar environment It

we say to the to contransducers (computer world aspects of to

environment template our

our nervous stage that in the will

). system? possibility translate

interesting

of attaching the descriptions of

microcomputers that "remain"

words) (our the or

RAM2 into

aspects

the physical sense these

environment). physical nervous to world, systems,

Other

transducers by these

could

produced

same or other

microcomputers (computer change until the from the the

and translate to the

them into

descriptions These will physical reached Notice

words) or

be presented the

microcomputers. (aspects stability of the is

maintain

descriptions "static")

world) for that whether all

(dynamic some microcomputers point of view

and/or

or nervous of in the

systems

concerned. loop

paradoxical translated *

(perspective) aspects of

descriptions world"
*

RAM2 are is

into

the

"physical

or not,

immaterial.

"ooo an external the computation

environment of a reality.

is "

not (H.

prerequisite a necessary 1976). Foerster, von

of

100

Notice of that ties). the view of

the the

interplay paradoxical

between loop, the of fill storage view the of

the it

two loops: provides the

from

the point

descriptions realiit provides the (the

create

and expand point that form

(the medium the logical table

logical loop, that

From the descriptions that

look-up

defines unities

processes paradoxical

the .

organizationally

closed

realities) in

The activity bility: unities one, formed, that

these

two loops

leads by the

to

two kinds

of

staclosed

dynamic, and the

represented other, in

organizationally by the

"static,

" represented

descriptions all the

"remain" These several

RAM2, and are

common to some or maintained PIB and (see or

universes. by the

stabilities recursive the

are provoked, loops at play in

perturbed between Figure

RAM1 and RAM2 of 5-2).

or different same

universes

You might also like