Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 7 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognition | Maturana | I 67 Def Cognitive Area/Maturana: entire interaction area of the body - can be extended indefinitely when new forms of interaction are created, it is enlarged with instruments. >Actions, >Domains/Maturana. I 78 Described things lie exclusively in the cognitive area - i.e. it is not part of the area that is to describe - (level) >Description levels. I 81 Cognition/Maturana: generation of a closed interaction area, not comprehension of an independent outside world. >Outer world, >Exterior/interior. Conclusion: Conclusions are necessary function results from the self-referential circular organization. - They are history-independent, because time itself is only part of the cognitive area of the ((s) second) observer. >Observation/Maturana, >Circularity, >Self-reference, >Time. I 146 Cognition/Maturana: Isolation of an area and call for appropriate behavior - only criterion: this appropriate behavior - it must be explained when cognition must be explained. >Explanation/Maturana. I 200 Cognition/Maturana: condition of realization (of the structural coupling) - not unveiling a reality, representation or description of "something". >Structural coupling, >Reality, >Representation. I 202 Cognitive Area/Maturana: with humans: language - humans exist in the range of objects that produce themselves through language actions - objects: do not exist outside language >Language, >Objects, >Domains/Maturana. |
Maturana I Umberto Maturana Biologie der Realität Frankfurt 2000 |
| Communication | Maturana | I 132 Communication/Maturana: trivially every interaction is a communication: Whenever ontogenetic structural coupling is achieved. >Structural coupling. But the production itself is something new and therefore uncommunicative. - In communication no information (novelty) is transferred. >Information, >Communication/Luhmann. This is so because this interaction is not instructive. ((s) Instructive/(s): purely unilateral: the instructed system takes over the organization of the instructing system (i.e. no interaction, but action).) |
Maturana I Umberto Maturana Biologie der Realität Frankfurt 2000 |
| Grammar | Maturana | I 128f Syntax/Grammar/Maturana: is only contingent surface structure, depending on the history of consensual coupling. >Surface structure, >Structural coupling. "Universal grammar" (Chomsky)/Maturana: a universal grammar can only lie in the universality of the process of coupling of recursive structures. - It must be structural (not consensual). >Recursion. I 130 Texture/Deep structure: are features of the description. - For the observer there may be ambiguity, for the organism not. >Description/Maturana, >Deep structure. |
Maturana I Umberto Maturana Biologie der Realität Frankfurt 2000 |
| Language | Luhmann | AU Cas 6 Language/Luhmann: language excludes much to include little. Through this it may get complex itself. - Most sounds are not eligible. - Relatively few simple characters in complex linkage. >Form/Luhmann, >Order/Luhmann, >Structure/Luhmann. --- AU Cass 12 Language/structural coupling/psychological/social systems/Luhmann: language is here the mechanism of structural coupling. >Structural coupling. Language: twice: a) mentally b) communicative 1. Also, foreign languages, are easily distinguishable from meaningless noise. Language draws attention to itself - and not to the meaning! 2. Language fixes meaning. - (> Storage, transport). Because language is structural coupling, it is not a system. >System/Luhmann, >Communication/Luhmann. Language does not have an own operational way. >Operation/Luhmann. So no linguistic operation which would not be communication or non-linguistic thinking. - language itself is not communication. - One needs a few participants and an understanding. --- AU Cass 12 Language/Luhmann: that it also has aspects of action (e.g. trigger opposition), is a secondary phenomenon. Operation: The appropriate language operation is communication or comprehending sense. |
AU I N. Luhmann Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Lu I N. Luhmann Die Kunst der Gesellschaft Frankfurt 1997 |
| Language | Maturana | I 56 Language/Maturana: orientation behavior - not denotative. - Otherwise its evolution is not comprehensible. - It would otherwise presuppose denotation. >Language evolution, >Denotation, >Behavior. Language/Maturana: is connotative: Orientation in the cognitive domain - no reference to entities. >Reference, >Operation/Maturana. I 58 No transmitting information. - There is nothing transferred from one organism to another. Instead: influencing an orientation. >Information, >Communication. I 91 Instead: preparation of a reference frame. >Reference systems. I 59 "Message": it is still up to the listener how he orientates himself - in orientation behavior no distinction semantics/syntax possible. I 126 Language/Maturana: must arise as a result from anything else! The fundamental process is the coupling of ontogenetic structures, which leads to the development of a consensual area. >Structural coupling. I 198 Language/coverage/cover/Maturana: with action one makes distinction - with that the act turns into a consensual sign. - So the distinction is covered. >Operation/Maturana. E.g. Object/Subject: arises as a consensual coordination of actions - it covers the action and makes it invisible. - Objects cover actions. - Objects are not given before language. >Objects, >Ontology. I 199 Language: no abstraction but physically. Transmission/symbolization/meaning/denotation: these are always secondary for the observer. >Observation, >Symbols, >Signs, >Meaning, >Denotation. I 255 Language/Maturana: outside language we cannot distinguish anything. - Not even ourselves. - Language presupposes neurophysiology, is therefore no neurophysiological phenomenon itself. Words: = distinctions. >Words, >Word meaning. I 261 Language does not operate with symbols - (these refer to something independent). Signs/sounds/gestures: do not constitute words by themselves - and strings of signs do not constitute language action. Language: coordination of actions. I 282 Object in brackets: considers language as a biological phenomenon. - Changes of structural dynamics are observable. >Objectivity/Maturana. |
Maturana I Umberto Maturana Biologie der Realität Frankfurt 2000 |
| Reality | Maturana | I 11/12 Reality/Maturana: there is no reality given independently from the experience. >Objectivity/Maturana. I 133 Reality/object/Maturana: every object is an object with properties that determine the distinctions in a space which is formed by these properties. >Properties/Maturana. Reality: an area which is determined by the operation of the observer. >Observation, >Operation/Maturana. I 134 Reality/Maturana: 1. How is it possible that humans speak as closed autopoietic systems about objects? - Because we produce them the in first place - 2. If language is behavior in a consensual area, how is it possible that individually experienced events can be predicted. >"How-come"-questions. In any case predictions are realized as actual experience, that means as actual states of the organism. >Prediction. I 202 Reality/objects/items/Maturana: outside language there are no objects- >Objects, >World/thinking, >Ontology, >Objectivity/Maturana. Objectivity arises in language as a dealing with objects. Object: operational relation in the process of language action. Language action: operations in the field of structural coupling - the body changes. >Language behavior, >Structural coupling. I 224 E.g. Big Bang: it also is an explanation of the life practise of the observer - it is always linked to the ontology of the oberver - in this alone its reality consists. |
Maturana I Umberto Maturana Biologie der Realität Frankfurt 2000 |
| Subjects | Luhmann | AU Cass 3 Subject/object/Luhmann: the distinction subject/object is unnecessary if it is considered that the observer must always be assumed within a system. >Subject/Object-Problem. Autologically: what applies to my property, applies to myself. AU Cass 7 Subject/Luhmann: VsTradition: the tradition had a wrong idea of continuity. Instead: continuity of self-reference. >Self-reference/Luhmann. New: System theory: Social systems are also subjects. >Systems theory. AU Cass 12 Subject/Luhmann: the subject is too complex. In two subjects, the coordination in a theory is too difficult. "We can leave the subject away." Instead: structural coupling. >Structural coupling. Difference rather than unity. Communication/Luhmann: runs only on consciousness, but not as consciousness. >Communication/Luhmann. |
AU I N. Luhmann Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Lu I N. Luhmann Die Kunst der Gesellschaft Frankfurt 1997 |
| |||
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author Vs Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chomsky, N. | Luhmann Vs Chomsky, N. | AU Kass 5 Self-organization/Luhmann: a system can only operate with self-assembled structures. No import of structures! Strange: E.g. language learning: it is almost incomprehensible how fast children learn languages. LuhmannVsChomsky: its deep structures were never discovered. Instead: modern communication research: rather in the communication itself the language is learned through use, through assumption of understanding the habit to develop asigning sounds. This does not contradict the thesis of self-organization. Otherwise, one would think that the learner is trained in a specific sequence, instead of starting to speak by himself. E.g. dyslexia: the tendency to make mistakes, is extremely variable from person to person. This makes switching to self-organization unavoidable. That does not mean that an external observer might not notice that these are the same words as they appear in the dictionary. But that cannot be explained by structural import, but by structural coupling (s.u.). |
AU I N. Luhmann Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Lu I N. Luhmann Die Kunst der Gesellschaft Frankfurt 1997 |
| Evolution Theory | Luhmann Vs Evolution Theory | AU Cass 14 Theory of Evolution / system theory/ST / Luhmann: e. th. takes the chance to explain the totality, which ST can not. Selection / Luhmann: is not provided in the system, but arises from the context. Therefore, conceptually weak concept - becaus e.th. uses statistics instead of causality. Explanation / theory / Luhmann: other theories explain the background noise ("order from noise") as a matter for a transformation into order within the system. LuhmannVs: here is not said exactly how this is done. This is the idea that information is a native product. But how the transformation happens is not explained. Therefore we need Structural coupling. (Cass.6) Double contingency: > theory of evolution: Parallel: somehow there is a split between variation and selection and thus structural changes are encouraged, evolution suggests itself to the establishment of order. And that can not be explained from the primordial soup or "initial conditions" (also not from language or social order) alone. (No "initial conditions." This is double contingency, the invention of a reference problem for rational analysis. |
N. Luhmann GLU C. Baraldi, G.Corsi. E. Esposito GLU: Glossar zu Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme, Frankfurt 1997 II Walter Reese-Schäfer Luhmann zur Einführung, Junius,Hamburg 1992 Diew ZEIT 10/96 Zur Ästhetik Luhmanns AU Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Autobahn-Universität ISBN 3-927809-29-2 |
| Maturana, H. | Luhmann Vs Maturana, H. | Kass. 5 Component/"component"/Maturana/LuhmannVsMaturana: strange English: covers too much and leaves open whether the operations or the structures are meant. This may be sufficient for biology, because it does not start out so strongly from events and attributes elemental character to the chemical states and state character to the elements. Even if with a short period of time. Kass. 5 Event/System Theory/Luhmann: in the investigation of consciousness and communication the concept of event imposes itself! (Non-resolvable events). A sentence is said on a certain occasion and not again. Perception is only there in a certain moment. No "components" are necessary. Kass. 6 Structural Coupling/Maturana/Luhmann: I will vary his term a little. Maturana's concept is not precise enough with regard to the causal relationship S/U. System/Maturana: assumes that one can make two statements about a system: 1. it has an autopoietic organization. LuhmannVsMaturana: the concept of organization is unusable for us! It should be enough to say: autopoietic reproduction with great scope. 2. specific structures, depending on the type of creature (mammals, fish, etc.). Kass. 7 Observation/Maturana: life must function biologically. LuhmannVsMaturana: but in biological terms it is more difficult to see which limitations constitute the selection. There are obvious possibilities for expanding complexity. Parallel to sociology: self-fullfilling prophecies: are given into society qua communication and the society that knows how to forecast itself reacts to it. |
N. Luhmann GLU C. Baraldi, G.Corsi. E. Esposito GLU: Glossar zu Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme, Frankfurt 1997 II Walter Reese-Schäfer Luhmann zur Einführung, Junius,Hamburg 1992 Diew ZEIT 10/96 Zur Ästhetik Luhmanns AU Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Autobahn-Universität ISBN 3-927809-29-2 |
| Saussure, F. de | Luhmann Vs Saussure, F. de | AU Cass 12 Language/Luhmann: Language is structural coupling. That is their task, their function. This means: language is not a system! Language Theory/Tradition/Luhmann: traditional theories: Saussure: language is a system! Luhmann: but his concept of system is not related to operation! Rather on structures, differences etc. LuhmannVsSaussure: in his distinction between spoken word and language it remains empirically unclear what the basal operation actually is. Unless one refers to communication. But that would force us to distinguish more strongly between mental and social systems than is usual in linguistics. Language/Luhmann: 1. It is not a system. 2. Language does not have its own mode of operation. So no linguistic operation that is not communication or non-linguistic thinking. ((s) A genuinely linguistic operation would therefore have to be non-linguistic itself.) Luhmann: this has to do with the deep storage of the concept of the operation and with the precision with which one empirically asks what is to be excluded. Saussure/Luhmann: the sign means the meaning of the object. Saussure/Luhmann: or the sign means what the speaker thought. LuhmannVsSaussure: and thus his theory loses its uniqueness! Then the sign no longer denotes the object, but the inner state of the speaker. Double reference to subject and object of the sign. |
N. Luhmann GLU C. Baraldi, G.Corsi. E. Esposito GLU: Glossar zu Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme, Frankfurt 1997 II Walter Reese-Schäfer Luhmann zur Einführung, Junius,Hamburg 1992 Diew ZEIT 10/96 Zur Ästhetik Luhmanns AU Introduction to Systems Theory, Lectures Universität Bielefeld 1991/1992 German Edition: Einführung in die Systemtheorie Heidelberg 1992 Autobahn-Universität ISBN 3-927809-29-2 |
| |||