1. Stimulus Word, “Bank”
2. Stimulus Word, “Capitalist”
3. Stimulus Word, “Corporation”
4. Stimulus Phrase, “Labor Union”
5. The Doomsday Debate
6. European and American Patterns of Thought
7. An Application of the Correspondence Principle
8. The Dialectics of Science
9. Definitions of First and Second Order Cybernetics
10. Three Versions of Cybernetics
11. Two Paths to a Similar Outcome
|
Demographers |
Von Foerster, Mora and Amiot |
|
It is obvious that such a theory has no relation to reality and is of no value whatever in predicting future populations.
These questions are among the most serious facing the world today, and to give wide currency to such clearly nonsensical ideas as an infinite birth rate and doomsday in 2027 contributes nothing to their solution.
It is not true that population growth rates are positively associated with density, nor even that population growth rates are positively associated with man’s control over nature.
The article sets a record for the entire class of forecasts prepared by the use of mathematical functions for the short length of time required to demonstrate its unreliability.
|
Support of a hypothesis is gained through compatibility with experimental observation rather than by arguments about what should be the case or what should not be the case.
Singularities occur quite commonly in nature and serve as welcome warning signals that some breakdown of the system’s structure is to be expected.
If we apply the “law” of an inverse relationship of population density with growth rate and technological know-how to the development of the human population as a whole over the last couple of millennia, we arrive at the peculiar conclusion that either Stone Age man was a technological wizard who carefully removed his technological achievements or that our population dwindled from a once astronomical size.
The Demographic approach not only fails to describe the past of the human population beyond a dozen generations but also is invalid for projecting population trends over such short an interval as only one generation. However, recognition of an obvious trait in man – his capacity to form coalitions – leads to expressions which adequately describe human population growth over several hundred generations.
|
|
FIGURE 5. The Doomsday Debate |
|
|
Continental Europe |
US and UK |
|
Reason “up” to social context Look for larger categories Plan thoroughly Emphasize the mind German idealism |
Reason “down” to social implications Look for examples and applications Plan to learn from experience Emphasize the world British empiricism or American pragmatism |
FIGURE 6. European and Americans Patterns of Thought |
|
FIGURE 7. An Application of the Correspondence Principle
|
|
|
|
|
Incommensurable Definitions
|
|
Correspondence Principle
|
|
|
Revolutionary Science
|
|
|
FIGURE 8. The Dialectics of Science |
||
|
|
||
|
Author |
First Order Cybernetics |
Second Order Cybernetics |
|
Von Foerster
Pask Varela Umpleby
Umpleby |
The cybernetics of observed systems The purpose of a model Controlled systems Interaction among the variables in a system Theories of social systems |
The cybernetics of observing systems
The purpose of a modeler Autonomous systems Interaction between observer and observed Theories of the interaction between ideas and society |
|
FIGURE 9. Definitions of First and Second Order Cybernetics |
||
|
|
Engineering Cybernetics |
Biological Cybernetics |
Social Cybernetics |
|
The view of epistemology |
A realist view of epistemology: knowledge is a “picture” of reality |
A biological view of epistemology: how the brain functions |
A pragmatic view of epistemology: knowledge is constructed to achieve human |
|
A key distinction |
Reality vs. Scientific Theories |
Realism vs. Constructivism |
The biology of cognition vs. the observer as a social participant |
|
The puzzle to be solved |
Construct theories which explain observed phenomena |
Include the observer within the domain of science |
Explain the relationship between the natural and the social sciences |
|
What must be explained |
How the world works |
How an individual constructs a “reality” |
How people create, maintain, and change social systems through language and ideas |
|
A key assumption |
Natural processes can be explained by scientific theories |
Ideas about knowledge should be rooted in neurophysiology. |
Ideas are accepted if they serve the observer’s purposes as a social participant |
|
An important consequence |
Scientific knowledge can be used to modify natural processes to benefit people |
If people accept constructivism, they will be more tolerant |
By transforming conceptual systems (through persuasion, not coercion), we can change society |
|
FIGURE 10. Three Versions of Cybernetics |
|||
|
A coherence conception of knowledge |
|||
|
Knowledge as an individual activity |
3 Second order cybernetics
|
4
|
Knowledge as a group activity |
|
German idealism 1 |
Vienna circle 2 |
||
|
A representation conception of knowledge
FIGURE 11. Two Paths to a Similar Outcome |
|||
