rc51 newsletter issue 26 · 2015 rc51 newsletter issue 30 (summer issue) july 2015 ......

2015

RC51

Newsletter

ISSUE 30 (SUMMER ISSUE) JULY 2015

EDITOR: Dr. Juan Carlos Barrón Pastor

[email protected]

Editor’s Presentation 2

Juan Carlos Barrón Pastor

RC51 Letter from the President 3

Chaime Marcuello

12th International Conference of Sociocybernetics (Yokohama, Japan) 5


The RC51 Culture Discussion

6 Bernd R. Hornung

Participation of Sociocybernetics at the 1st Anticipation conference (trento, Italy)

8 José Amozurrutia

Call of papers 3rd ISA Forum of Sociology and 14th International Conference of Sociocybernetics (Viena, Austria) 15

ISA RC51

RC51 Newsletter Summer Issue

2

Hello!

Finally the RC51 Sociocybernetics’ newsletter is here. I sincerely apologize for the delay. The plan was to have one issue previous to the conference in Zaragoza, and a second one after it. It is my full responsibility this plan did not happen, and I am very sorry. So, here it is, the 2015 summer issue of the RC51 newsletter.

In this issue you will find a letter from the President of the new board of the Research Committee, Chaime Marcuello Servós. In his message, Chaime announces some exciting challenges and activities that hopefully will allow the RC51 members staying in tune, to use some of the social media tools available to have a better idea about our friends into the RC51 are doing, and to improve the impact and presence of the RC51 among other academic groups.

Bernd Hornung send us a memorable reflection about the culture of discussion within the RC51 at this year’s conference, in Zaragoza, Spain. This year I could not accompany you, but I missed you!

Pepe Amozurrutia also delivered a reflection for this issue. It is about some possible inputs that sociocybernetics could contribute to the discussion of concepts and theories of anticipation. Pepe´s essay shows a first approximation intending to bring closer some thoughts expressed by some authors organizing the 1st Conference on Anticipation. This event will take place in Trento Italy, in November this year. There will be a team from sociocybernetics attending the conference, in the next issue we will let you know how the experience occurred.

At the end of this issue you will find the call for papers for the ISAA 2016 conference in Viena. Its deadline is September 30, so hurry up! It would be great to meet each other again in this magnificent city.

I am very happy this issue could finally appear. I really hope we can be closer through our social media, please feed the Facebook page, share the news, and keep updated your profiles and academic activities. If we use those nodes, we may take advantage of this controversial technology to keep us present and close.

All best


RC51 Newsletter Editor

[email protected]

EDITOR’S

PRESENTATION


3

Dear RC51 member,

First, tempus fugit and many small —and sometimes big— bureaucratic issues accelerate this impression. At the end of 2014, our RC51 Board elections were done. After this process the new board was elected. I want to thank to all who supported our Board member’s candidatures. It is an honour and a responsibility. We have a challenge in our hands. We have to continue the excellent work done by our past presidents, Bernd Hornung, Bernard Scott and Eva Buchinger and, if it is possible, we will try to improve in those areas were it could be necessary.

Second, I apologize for the delay in the distribution of this Newsletter. Until now, different issues imped to prepare and release this Newsletter. We will try to be on time, next issues. The administrative tasks, some unexpected details in organizational targets consume more time than we had. However, the cooperation of all board members had help to deal with all of this and, specially, to solve the fail of Berlin as site for our 13th Conference. Finally, we celebrated it at Zaragoza University thanks to Pedro Escriche and his local team. At the inaugural session we recognised the helpful support of Zaragoza University represented by the rector, Manuel López, and the Faculty of Economics for helping us to organize the 13th International Conference on Sociocybernetics.

This has been the second time that RC51 organises a conference in Aragón. Fifteen years ago, in 2000 we celebrated the 2nd International conference on Sociocybernetics at Panticosa. Many things have happened since then. Fifteen years ago we were at the beginning of our path.

As you know, our RC51 was instituted inside the International Sociological Association in 1998 at Montreal World Congress of Sociology. In 1999, we had the first RC51 conference at Orthodox Academy of Xania, in Crete. During that time we had the very active and passionate work of Felix Geyer behind all of us. Then I started to read and to learn about Sociocybernetics, first order cybernetics, simulation, Wiener, Pask, Buckley, von Foerster, Luhmann, and so on. I want to remember the hard work of our past presidents and all of the past board members and members, in general, they help us to be here.

PRESIDENT’S

PRESENTATION


4

And now, this new board and this president have to follow the “challenge of Sociocybernetics”. And this means that we have to work for the next period of 4 years, in my case as president of the RC51, with the collaboration of very good colleagues of the board. We have some challenges to face, at least in two complementary levels. One are very practical and pragmatic issues, we could call ISA bureaucratic targets. Other is more complex and challenging: to deep and advance in creating a strong literature, concepts, theories, empirical evidences, etc., etc. on Sociocybernetics perspective.

About the first, we need to increase the number of RC51 members. ISA rules changed in Yokohama World Congress and this is a very important target to have more options. This is a common task of all us, we need to recover lost members and get new ones. And the best way is to show with facts. That is the RC1 is active, attractive for scholar exchange and a good place to learn with others.

About the second, we need to advance in showing the relevance of Sociocybernetics as paradigm of social sciences in a world increasingly complex. If we have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. We need to read Wiener, Ashby, Pask, von Foerster, Maturana, Luhmann, Geyer… and so on. However, we need to propose and advance tracing paths to steer a global world with more data than never. We need to publish, maybe no more and more, but better, and this means improving the Journal of Sociocybernetics among others issues like books and seminars. We need to propose a common research and, why not, an international open course on Sociocybernetics.

We can imagine a wider horizon for Sociocybernetics. Only we need to go step by step. I am looking forward to learn and to share our time in the next four years.

Best wishes

Chaime Marcuello-Servós

President of RC51


5

12TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF SOCIOCYBERNETICS (YOKOHAMA, JAPAN)


6

THE RC51 CULTURE OF DISCUSSION

SOME REMARKS AFTER THE ZARAGOZA CONFERENCE 2015

BERND R. HORNUNG

There are conferences, in which time-keeping is well-organized and very strict. In Medical Informatics Conferences, for example, I found 15 minutes per paper divided into 12 minutes presentation – sorry, if the most important conclusion comes in munute no.l4: no conclusion! - and 3 minutes for questions – sorry, if the answer to question 3 comes only in minute no.4: no answer!

RC51, since its very beginnings, has been different. Well-organized (I hope), but not so strict! This was also the pattern in the Zaragoza Conference of Sociocybernetics 2015. The reason is the philosophy behind RC51 conferences. They are not meant to enhance the egos and the CVs and reputations of the individual participants and they are not planned as showcases for selling the brilliance of each participant. Instead, they are intended to be a place of exchange and collective learning, a place to present an issue, sometimes brilliant sometimes not, to a critical but benevolent audience. They are intended to make progress on such issues with the help of the other participants, their knowledge, their different views, and their critique. This,

however, is possible only by discussion, not by 3 minutes of question and answer.

Therefore RC51, within the more or less generous limits of the overall session organization, has always insisted on enough time for discussion. In the Zaragoza conference 2015 there were 20 minutes for a presentation and 20 minutes for discussion.. In other conferences or the World Congresses we had sometimes less time, sometimes more, but alsways the discussion was considered as important as the presentation itself.

In the Zaragoza conference, like in other conferences, the time limits for presentation and for discussion were not always observed strictly. This is part of our flexibility and results, last not least, from the fact that "only complexity can reduce complexity". In other words, complex issues cannot be presented in a few simple words. Moreover, not much can be discussed, if the issue at hand is not well understood in the first place,


7

because it could not be explained sufficiently for lack of time.

Also in the Zaragoza conference some speakers needed most of the time to present, a few would have needed even a lot more. Nevertheless, a lot of discussion took place. It was striking, however, that not everybody participated in these discussions. One reason may have been a language barrier for participants who were very familiar with English, the official conference language. Another reason may have been the divide between those who had been to a number previous conferences already, thus being familiar with the culture of discussion of RC51, and new participants who were not. But it is precisely the fresh and perhaps different views of the latter which are of great interest in our discussions of Sociocybernetics. Therefore it would be very good to develop some ideas and tools to overcome these barriers. Especially the new participants are also of importance for the future of RC51. Therefore they should be encouraged and be actively included into the stream of the RC51 conversation and exchange on Sociocybernetics and its culture of discussion.

Part of this culture of discussion has been the obligation of the participants, expressed in the respective Calls for Papers, to attend the entire conference, and also the offer of a "Conference Hotel", where all or most of the participants could stay. There discussion could go on and did go on very often from the breakfast table to the last glass of beer or wine after midnight.

This setup, staying together in the same hotel, attending the entire conference, and enough time for discussion, including breaks, meals, and excursions, which offer additional possibilities to talk to each other, often led to very productive exchanges. Lines of thought and argument sometimes went through many different presentations, even the entire conference from the first to the last session connecting the different papers and session into a holistic view.


8

“ANTICIPATION NEXT STEPS”: A SOCIOCYBERNETIC APPROACH TO “NEXT STEPS”

DR. JOSÉ A. AMOZURRUTIA

CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIONES INTERDISCIPLINARES EN CIENCIAS Y HUMANIDADES

UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO

Complexity in social processes today implies a great challenge thinking of Future Worlds. One main reason is because our understanding of social phenomenon is necessary multifactorial and multidimensional. Our accelerated and often blind social dynamics do not let us make better reflections on what is happening or worse, do not promote second order reflexivity to our research groups. But in any case, it will never be enough to think creatively about our next step in our communities, homes, universities, offices and institution dealing contingences. Some decades ago “next step” was imagined by means of forecast through projection analysis, time series and several techniques on Strategic Management for enterprises in the span of some years. Challenges in our new century include foresight on possible conflicts and social transformations to be turned to Scenario constructions through Prospective Analysis. Nowadays we only believe on the real “next step”, which means the anticipation we may construct to make the best decision for the next moment, although in some cases may be hours, days, weeks or months. The focus is now on enriching a solid present generated by a network of reliable past sequences and faced to possible next steps. We have to pay attention to the increasingly dense cluster of facts, actions, communications and activities promoting contingencies today. An intelligent organization strategy should be developed to construct rich and consistent multidimensional genealogies that illuminate the present and let better construction of anticipation steps. Such construction should be immersed in a constructivist epistemology.

More information at:

http://www.projectanticipation.or

g/index.php?option=com_content

&view=category&layout=blog&id=

18&Itemid=435

http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=18&Itemid=435







9

One of the latest reflections on anticipation has been organized by UNESCO as a project in Anticipatory Systems chaired by Roberto Poli1. Main purpose is “to both develop and promote the Discipline of Anticipation, thereby bringing a critical idea to life” within a strategy consisting of knowledge development and communication of the Discipline of Anticipation itself. Central issues are related to understanding and classifying anticipation, including biological, psychological and social types of anticipation, the theory of anticipatory systems and its relation with Complexity, Futures Literacy, Reframing, or the structure of imagination. Special attention is devoted to Resilience and Anticipatory Capability Profiles, Methods, Ethical and Philosophical aspects2. Principal differences between anticipation and Forecast and Foresight are, Forecast is predictive and point-based, evaluated through closed system with fixed structure. It is past-grounded. Foresight is also predictive within paths, sets of points (scenarios) and is evaluated through semi closed system analysis. It is Future-grounded. Both are deterministic. Anticipation is Non-predictive evaluated through open systems based on functions and it is present-grounded. As we can appreciate, System Thinking is essential to this approach. It is considered as a tool to model possibilities in agent reflexivity in order to orient him for a better decisions, -always derived from the actors-, for future development. It is based on information acting in present. Anticipation should be understand

1 http://www.projectanticipation.org/ 2 This information and the next paragraph is derived from http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=466

as a strategy to propose “plausible futures and to make decisions and take actions that bend the trajectory of the future to come closer to their preferred future” 3. As said, attention in those models should be centered on the present and on its genealogy. Necessary is oriented to construct computer models of knowledge and understanding of the system capacities and expectations on the environment perturbations. It is focused on a non-trivial system construction that emulates or simulate actor’s behavior in social phenomena. But system conception imply something that may be considered as utopian but I believe it should be regarded as an approximation to an ideal intelligence transmitted and constructed in a computer tool. Such system implies to be in resonance and analog to actors knowledge. As non-trivial programing it will have self-organizing strategies derived from actor’s intelligence. Those strategies imply a series of meta-languages oriented to construct transformations between a social and epistemological thinking for a clear-cut understanding of social phenomena in point. From these languages it is possible to model through a mathematical and system thinking, and use a computer tool for simulation conditions. Model approximation implies permanent feedback to get consistency back again with the sociological thinking related to social present moment where we are anticipating our own decisions. The programed model should be oriented to take its own decisions –always perfectible- and based on its

3 This criteria is in line with those in http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28:conflict-theory-and-anticipation&catid=23&Itemid=535

http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=466

http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=466

http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28:conflict-theory-and-anticipation&catid=23&Itemid=535




10

own codes and in resonance with the actors / researchers and self-organizing approach. By these means it may be possible to construct anticipation models emulating anticipation possibilities oriented to next steps. With all of these requirements, what can we do from a Sociocybernetic perspective to increase reflexivity on the present, and to orient its methodology and system thinking to a next step in our projects? We already know from Maturana and Varela that problem modelation may be based on non-trivial system configurations i.e. the cell. It is one of the best approximation to conceive and construct levels of autonomy and auto-organization. We also know from von Foerster (1996) a non-trivial systemic perspective that enrich our system-problem conception looking for, finding and in the best case constructing different degrees of self-organization. In line with this authors, we have a second order Luhmannian (1998) social perspective that concentrate in anticipation as part of the communication selection process and its relation to expectatives. With these means we may challenge double contingency, considered as a case of future next steps. Anticipation is understood by Luhmann as "an expanding opportunities by generated complexity”4. Its contribution as a "bridging role" is associated by him with expectations, which in turn may be considered as "reference condensations of meaning that orient communication". They also stabilize the possibilities of double contingency between ego and alter and generate a horizon of

4 In Spanish “ampliación de las oportunidades de complejidad generada” en (Luhmann, 1998: 144).

possibilities. (Luhmann, 1998: 107-108). If specific selections in communication processes are associated with the condensation of opportunities, both anticipations and expectations eventually contribute reducing uncertainty, and they are akin to ego and alter ability to a promote a better choose in decision-making. So anticipation for Luhmann may be defined as the ability to generate selections and to choose the best one in a double contingency process. By second order reflexivity in Luhmanian System Theory, it is possible to deal “next steps” as expectations, or as a reflective expectancy and consequently generate an anticipating anticipation, thereby enhancing the reflectivity of contingences. This is in line with Loet Leydersdorff anticipation papers. He has proposed several models to deal with anticipation and expectations5. In a different perspective Walter Buckley deals with System contingences from the environment although he does not mention anticipation. System behavior by means of its adaptive attributes requires basic selective process organized by a dynamic conditional probability matrix from which all system guidelines may be derived. This matrix is composed of subroutines oriented to define conditional probabilities related to environment and system interactions and activities. (Buckley, 1993: 80). Buckley`s Social conception as an Adaptive System includes five basic criteria which includes forms of prospective anticipation: 1) a permanent generation of variety of system information and meanings, 2) the maintenance

5 Leydersdorff, L. Anticipation and the Non-linear Dynamics of Meaning-Processing in Social Systems. (2006), and Hyper-incursion and the Globalization of the Knowledge-Based Economy. and (2009)


11

of tensions oriented by the “normal impulses to action” 3) a permanent operation of an integral system network linked to system organization and system feed-backs with the environment, 4) a permanent learning subsystem oriented to essential selections for decision making, and 5) the existence of effective mechanisms to preserve “graceful, kind, beautiful and accurate” meanings and information from inside and outside system limits that may be part of a sociocultural frame for the next move in the adaptive system process.(Buckley, 1993: 300-301) Several Sociocybernetic papers are related not only the particularities of anticipation but its relation with the multidimensional facts in Future Worlds. That is the case of Bernard Scott with his paper on “The Role of Sociocybernetics in Understanding World Futures”6. He takes the central concept of “gobernance” as the art of steersmanship form cybernetics to face the challenge of managing all the variety that makes up “possible world futures”. Again, variety as central challenge, and derived from Ashby remembers Buckley`s first criteria for Social conception as an Adaptive System. Scott proposes an holistic overview of some global problems from a systemic perspective. But the methodology here is central to face complexity. Geyer (1995) and Hornung (2006) and Garcia (2006) had propose several strategies to deal with heuristic approaches, All of them face complexity by means of procedures based on successive approximations to find the best port of arrival.

6 Presented at the VIII International Conference of Sociocybernetics, Complex Systems, Interdisciplinarity and World Futures in México City, june, 2008.

Other Epistemology Constructivisms may be also foster anticipation in Social Sciences and in Sociocybernetics. That is the case of Jean Piaget Genetic Epistemology, in line with von Foerster Constructivism. Anticipation is part of a functional knowledge process continuity. It is an epistemological operation merged in assimilations, abstractions and generalization functions. At the same time it is essential in Piaget`s system thinking epistemology, a dynamic equilibrium conception associated with regulations and compensations functions, both equivalent to feed and forward-back processes as in first and second cybernetics. Within this epistemology constructivism, it is possible to integrate a genetic structure development of the problem of interest within a dense and strong cognitive operations associated with the next step, with the possible actions the system may know from its own axiology interwoven in different levels of knowledge. All of these possibilities are potentialities in our Sociocybernetic perspective. We invite new and old members to broaden and open new fields of study on the Discipline of Anticipation. A group of us 7 as part of first steps will participate in the “First International Conference on Anticipation” which will take place in November 2015, Trento, Italy8. We invite all Sociocyberneticians to get involved in these issues and promote interchange of ideas and reflections in future meetings.

7 Barrón Juan, Almager Patricia, Marcuello Chaime and the author. 8http://www.projectanticipation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71:first-international-conference-on-anticipation-registration-is-open-2&catid=25:events&Itemid=537


12

References

Buckley, W. (1993). La sociología y la teoría moderna de los sistemas. Argentina. Amorrortu.

García, R. (2006) Sistemas Complejos. España. Gedisa.

Geyer, F. (1995) “The Challenge of Sociocybernetics”. Kybernetes. Vol 24. Num.6.

Hornung, B. (2006). “El paradigma sociocibèrnetico. Conceptos para la investigación de sistemas sociales complejos”. En Sociocibernética, lineamientos de un paradigma. Compilado por Marcuello Servós CH. Zaragoza, España. Institución ´Fernando el Católico´. Leydersdorff, L. (2006). “Anticipation and the Non-linear Dynamics of Meaning-Processing in Social Systems”. Paper to be presented at the World Congress of Sociology, Durban, July 2006, --------------------- (2009) Hyper-incursion and the Globalization of the Knowledge-Based Economy. In American Institute of Physics Proceedings. In http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.3634.pdf Luhmann, N (1998). Sistemas Sociales. México. Universidad Iberoamericana y Anthropos. Scott, B. (2011). “The Role of Sociocybernetics in Understanding World Futures” en Explorations in Second-Order Cybernetics. Vienna. Edition Echoraum.

Von Foerster, H. (1966). “From Stimulus to Symbol: The Economy of Biological Computation”. Compilado por W. Buckley. (170-183). USA

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.3634.pdf


13

CALL OF PAPERS 3RD ISA FORUM OF SOCIOLOGY AND 14TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF

SOCIOCYBERNETICS (VIENA, AUSTRIA)

Availabled at: http://www.isa-sociology.org/forum-2016/

THE FUTURES WE WANT:

Global Sociology and the Struggles

for a Better World

WebForum:

http://futureswewant.net

The WebForum is an experimental space for intellectual debate on the broadly conceived theme “The Futures We Want: Global Sociology and the Struggles for a Better World” and other matters of interest to the ISA’s Research Committees, Working Groups, Thematic Groups. It will feature cutting-edge contributions on forward-oriented sociology, on the pertinent trends, risks, and opportunities of our time, on scenarios of probable, possible, preventable, or preferable futures. It is a virtual sphere for sharing thoughts on empirical, theoretical, and normative research across geographic, linguistic, and disciplinary boundaries.

The Third ISA Forum will be convened in Vienna, Austria, 10-14 July 2016 on the theme “The Futures We Want: Global Sociology and the Struggles for a Better World.” This theme encourages a forward-orientation in empirical, theoretical, and normative research to tackle the problems and opportunities that often cut across borders.

Protests around the globe have challenged inequality, oppression, and ecological destruction, and have insisted on the possibility of another, better world. Intensifying uncertainties demand innovations in methods and theories. Tomorrow no longer appears as pre-determined by inevitable trends but as a rather contingent outcome of complex, typically multi-scalar dynamics that vary in their intensity of contentiousness. Social actors aspire, desire, envision, expect, fear, imagine, plan, project, reject, sustain, and wage war over futures. What can sociology contribute to these broader debates? How do assumptions and aspirations about the future influence daily routines and long-term collective lives? How are risks identified, avoided, mitigated, transferred, or shared? What closes

http://www.isa-sociology.org/forum-2016/

http://futureswewant.net/


14

and opens the horizons of social imaginaries? How are different forces positioned to shape futures? How can the making of futures be democratized? What can be learned by comparing struggles in different countries and settings? How do emancipatory movements and everyday practices at the grassroots overcome discipline, exploitation, and misrecognition? What visions for alternative futures are imaginable, desirable, and achievable? What are viable roadmaps for social transformation?

This general theme provides a platform for dialog among ISA’s many participating Research Committees (RCs), Working Groups (WGs), and Thematic Groups (TGs). It calls for research on the full range of sociological topics from the tiny worlds of micro situations to the broad macro dynamics affecting the entire planet. It encourages inquiries into the multiplicity of possibilities, projects, and visions. It welcomes diverse approaches, including comparative and interdisciplinary collaborations.

Markus S. Schulz ISA Vice-President for Research and Forum President

http://www.isa-sociology.org/forum-2016/


15

rc51 newsletter issue 26 · 2015 rc51 newsletter issue 30 (summer issue) july 2015 ......

Documents