Information Social Systems

8/12/2019 Information Social Systems

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/information-social-systems 1/11

Information in Social Systems

Christian Fuchs ([email protected])

Wolfgang Hofkirchner ([email protected]),Vienna ni!ersity of "echnology, Institute of #esign an$ "echnology %ssessment

%&stract

'erging Semiotics an$ a theory of e!olutionary systems (the latter &eing a synthesis of n$ r$er

Cy&ernetics an$ conce*ts of e!olution), a nifie$ "heory of Information ("I) seems feasi&le. Such a

theory can i$entify on the one han$ common as*ects in the ty*es of systems consi$ere$ ($issi*ati!e,

auto*oietic an$ social ones). n the other han$ it can $eal with as*ects of information that are s*ecial toeach of these system+ty*es. In social systems in$i!i$ual !alues, norms, conclusions, rules, i$eas,

e*eriences an$ &elie!es can &e seen as in$i!i$ual information. In the *rocess of constitution an$

$ifferentiation of in$i!i$ual information the signs $ata, knowle$ge an$ in$i!i$ual wis$om can &e

i$entifie$. n the &asis of signals $ata is gathere$ (*ercei!ing). "his $ata is the starting *oint for gainingknowle$ge (inter*reting) which is necessary for ac-uiring wis$om (e!aluation). "he semiotic tria$ of

syntactic, semantic an$ *ragmatic as*ects of signs can &e ma**e$ to these three le!els of in$i!i$ual

information. orms, !alues, rules an$ laws that are constitute$ in the course of social relationshi*s are seen

as social information. Social co+o*eration is consi$ere$ as a social relationshi* in which social interactions

of the in!ol!e$ in$i!i$uals ena&le all of them to &enefit from the situation. ew -ualities of an o&ser!e$social system can emerge &y social co+o*eration. Such -ualities are constitute$ in a collecti!e *rocess &y all

concerne$ in$i!i$uals an$ are emergent -ualities of social systems. Social com*etition can &ee seen as a

social relationshi* in which the social interactions as well as the relationshi*s of *ower an$ $ominationena&le some in$i!i$uals or social su&+systems to take a$!antage of others. ew -ualities of an o&ser!e$

social system can emerge &y social com*etition. /ut these -ualities are not constitute$ collecti!ely &y all

concerne$ in$i!i$uals, they are constitute$ &y su&systems of the rele!ant system that ha!e more *ower than

other su&systems, $ominate others or can make use of a$!antages that $eri!e from higher *ositions ineisting social hierarchies. Social information can ha!e a co+o*erati!e or a com*etiti!e character. If social

information is esta&lishe$ &y interrelate$ references of all in$i!i$uals who are concerne$ &y its a**lication

an$ if each in!ol!e$ in$i!i$ual has the same *ossi&ilities an$ means of influencing the outcoming

information structures in his0her own sense an$ *ur*ose, the resulting macrosco*ic structure is a form ofco+o*erati!e social information. "his ty*e of information is collecti!ely esta&lishe$ &y co+o*eration of the

in!ol!e$ an$ concerne$ actors as an emergent -uality of a social system in a *rocess of self+organisation.We call this form of social information inclusi!e social information. Here self+organisation $enotes that the

in$i!i$uals concerne$ &y the emerging structures $etermine an$ $esign the occurrence, form, course an$result of this *rocess all &y themsel!es. If social information is not constitute$ in *rocesses of co+o*eration

&y all concerne$ in$i!i$uals, &ut &y a hierarchic su&system of the rele!ant social system that has more

*ower than others, $ominates others or can make use of a$!antages that $eri!e from higher *ositions in

eisting social hierarchies, the resulting structures are ty*es of -ualities that result from social com*etition +we s*eak of eclusi!e social information. 1clusi!e social information is a new, emergent -uality of a

social system. It is constitute$ &y social com*etition an$ reflects relationshi*s of $omination an$ the

asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower in the rele!ant social system. % &asis for a wise society + which coul$

tackle the glo&al *ro&lems + woul$ &e the collecti!e formation of social information &y social co+o*erationan$ the a&ility an$ *ossi&ility of in$i!i$uals to choose an$ $ifferentiate their in$i!i$ual information in a

wise an$ self+$etermine$ manner.

2eywor$s

social information, self+organisation, social systems, emergence, e!olutionary systems

Christian Fuchs 3 Wolfgang Hofkirchner

Information in Social Systems



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

C"1"S

4. %n 1!olutionary n$erstan$ing of Information an$ the Feasi&ility of a nifie$ "heory of Information. Self+rganisation an$ 1mergence

5. Signs in #issi*ati!e an$ %uto*oietic Systems

6. In$i!i$ual Information

7. Semiotic %s*ects of In$i!i$ual Information8. Social Information

9. Social Information an$ %s*ects of :ower0#omination

;. "he <elationshi* of In$i!i$ual an$ Social Information

=. Co*ing with >lo&al :ro&lems in a Wise Society+ <eferences

4. %n 1!olutionary n$erstan$ing of Information an$ the Feasi&ility of a nifie$ "heory of Information

%n e!olutionary un$erstan$ing of systems theory shows that the com*leity of systems has increase$

$uring the course of e!olution. We consi$er $issi*ati!e, auto*oietic, an$ social systems as the im*ortantemerging le!els of organisation that ha!e &een o&ser!e$ thus far in e!olution. Social systems are more

com*le than auto*oietic ones, auto*oietic ones more com*le than $issi*ati!e ones. %lrea$y the

com*leity of the latter can?t &e $escri&e$ &y using a mechanistic form of causality that tries to re$uce each

effect to a single cause. In fact, in the theory of self+organising systems we ha!e to $eal withmulti$imensional forms of causality a single effect can ha!e many causes an$ a single cause many effects.

/ecause of the eistence of $ifferent le!els of com*leity in $ifferent ty*es of system, there can &e no

sim*le general $efinition of information that is a**lica&le to all forms of systems. "he "rilemma of

Ca*urro (see Ca*urro, Fleissner, Hofkirchner 4==9A Fleissner, Hofkirchner 4==7, Hofkirchner 4==;&, *.9f) shows the following.

Information can?t mean the same in all sciences &ecause, if this were the case, there woul$ &e no -ualitati!e

$ifferences &etween the se*arate scientific $isci*lines, e.g. chemical structures woul$ ha!e to &e $escri&e$with the same conce*ts as human &eings.

"here can?t &e a similar meaning to information in the $ifferent sciences solely &ecause this woul$ im*ly

the eistence of a single outstan$ing $isci*line as a stan$ar$ of com*arison. If this were for eam*le the

social sciences, information+*rocesses woul$ ha!e to &e $escri&e$ in analogy to human communication insocial relationshi*s. We woul$ for eam*le ha!e to say that the microsco*ic *arts of a $issi*ati!e system,

which shows the emergence of macrosco*ic structures communicate in or$er to esta&lish collecti!e

structures. /ut this woul$ mean an anthro*omor*histic false inference conce*ts from social science can

ne!er &e $irectly a**lie$ to the natural sciences without first generalising an$ secon$ly s*ecialising them."his also a**lies to the re!erse, which can result in naturalistic false inferences. History has shown that

such inferences are !ery $angerous.

Information can?t ha!e a $ifferent meaning in e!ery scientific $isci*line &ecause this woul$ make theinter$isci*linary character of science im*ossi&le. Communication &etween $ifferent $isci*lines woul$n?t &e *ossi&le.

"herefore we argue in fa!our of a $ialectical an$ e!olutionary un$erstan$ing of information. Such a

conce*t of information woul$ ha!e as*ects that a**ly to all ty*es of systems an$ in all scientific

$isci*lines. /ut at the same time information woul$ ha!e a meaning *eculiar to any of these ty*es ofsystems an$ any of the sciences. "his woul$ &e a unifie$ conce*t of information which reflects the $ialectic

relationshi* of $ifference an$ similarity an$ coul$ &e the essence of a nifie$ "heory of Information ("I).

. Self+rganisation an$ 1mergence



/y merging semiotics an$ a theory of e!olutionary systems (the latter &eing a synthesis of n$ r$er

Cy&ernetics an$ conce*ts of e!olution as well as &eing relate$ to the relationshi* of information an$

emergence), a "I seems feasi&le. % "I coul$ make use of the inter$isci*linary character of the theory ofself+organisation.

Since the sities the notion of self+organisation has &een a**lie$ in !arious $isci*lines. In *hysics an$

chemistry :rigogine (emergence of macrosco*ic structures in $issi*ati!e systems that ha!e mo!e$ far away

from thermal e-uili&rium, see icolis, :rigogine 4=;=) an$ Haken (Synergetics or$er out of chaos, *rinci*le of sla!ing, see Haken 4=9;, 4=;5) ha!e to &e mentione$. 1igen (see 1igen, Schuster 4=9=)

$escri&e$ the emergence of li!ing matter in a hy*ercycle of autocatalytic reactions. 'aturana an$ Varela

('aturana, Varela 4=;6) ha!e *ut forwar$ their i$ea of li!ing systems as auto*oietic ones, which can

re*ro$uce an$ maintain themsel!es, an$ ha!e lai$ the groun$work for <a$ical Constructi!ism ine*istemology &y $escri&ing the &rain as structurally cou*le$ to its en!ironment. Buhmann (see Buhmann

4=;6) trie$ to a**ly auto*oiesis to society &y suggesting that social systems are self+re*ro$ucing ones(4).

"o$ay the theory of self+organisation has $iffuse$ into nearly all scientific $isci*lines. "a&le 4 shows the

relationshi* of the ol$ an$ the new, as well as the whole an$ its *arts in $ifferent metho$ologies (seeHofkirchner 4==;a). <e$uctionism fails to *ercei!e e!olution &ecause it tries in !ain to $e$uce the new

from the ol$. "he latter is seen as a sufficient con$ition from which the new sim*ly results. It likewise

*ro*oses to $e$uce the whole from its *arts. Sim*le anti+re$uctionist monistic !iews *ostulate that the

antece$ents are $e$uci&le from an a *osteriori an$ the micro+states from the macro+state. "he new is

*roecte$ onto the ol$ an$ the whole onto its *arts. In ta&le 4 we refer to this !iew as holism. #ualistic *ositions *ostulate an un&ri$gea&le $i!i$e &etween the eistence of the ol$ an$ the new. "he new an$ the

whole are seen as in$e*en$ent from the ol$ an$ the *arts. %ll these metho$ologies can?t $eal with the

emergence of -ualities *ertaining to the whole from the inter*lay of its *arts. 1mergentism, on the otherhan$, regar$s the ol$ as well as the *arts as a con$ition that is necessary, though not sufficient, for the

emergence of the new as well as the whole. 1mergent *ro*erties an$ -ualities like the new an$ the whole

are not $e$uci&le from un$erlying le!els or *rece$ing e!ents. 1mergentism also *uts forwar$ the i$ea that

the new an$ the whole, ha!ing emerge$, ha!e a $ominating influence &ack on the *ro*erties or entitiesfrom which they arose in the form of $ownwar$ causation. "he macrosco*ic le!el $etermines the

microsco*ic one. /ut ne!er fully, a certain $egree of autonomy is always maintaine$.

old/parts new/whole

reductionism sufficient con$ition resulting *ro*erties0 entities

holism resulting *ro*erties0 entities sufficient con$ition

dualism in$e*en$ent *ro*erties0 entities in$e*en$ent *ro*erties0 entities

emergentism necessary, &ut not sufficient con$ition emerging0 $ominating *ro*erties0 entities

"a&le 4 "y*es of metho$ologies an$ the logical relations &etween ol$ an$ new, *arts an$ the whole,res*ecti!ely, reflecting e!olution an$ systems (see Hofkirchner 4==;a)

"he notion of emergence is *ut forwar$ &y the theory of self+organisation &ecause the latter $eals with the

emergence of macrosco*ic structures from interacting microsco*ic entities. %n eam*le for the emergenceof or$er from noise in self+organising systems is *ro!i$e$ &y the /Dnar$ con!ection+cells. In a s*ecial

li-ui$ a macrosco*ic *attern emerges su$$enly from reci*rocal actions of li-ui$+*articles when a threshol$

in tem*erature+$ifference has &een crosse$. % small fluctuation (a single *article lea!es its layer) is

intensifie$, the *articles lea!e their stationary *ositions an$ start mo!ingA the system is $ri!en far &eyon$its thermal e-uili&rium. "he *articles or$er themsel!es, $ifferent concentric *atterns emerge. ne of these

ensla!es the others, it or$ers the system, an$ its form $etermines the macrosco*ic *attern. Such *rocesses

of emergence characterise self+organisation in $issi*ati!e systems as the s*ontaneous a**earance of or$er

on a macrosco*ic le!el."he roots of 1mergentism go &ack to the *sychologists Conway Bloy$ 'organ an$ Samuell %lean$er in

the 4=Eies. "heir :hiloso*hy of 1mergence concentrate$ on consciousness as a *henomenon that su$$enly

emerge$ $uring the course of e!olution an$ that can?t &e re$uce$ to the organic structure of li!ing

organisms. For 'organ an$ %lean$er 1mergentism seeme$ somehow mystical, they intro$uce$ s*iritualforces (known as isus) as the $ri!ing forces of emergence (see 'organ 4=5, %lean$er 4=E). "hey



lower le!el of information in social systems has an unsta&le character. When we come to higher le!els

( which we encounter in the social information that is *ro$uce$ &y social relationshi*s) the com*leity as

well as the sta&ility of the information increases.

"he generation an$ $ifferentiation of in$i!i$ual information can &e $escri&e$ as follows (see figure 4 aswell as Hofkirchner 4===a).

Fig. 4. "he *rocesses of generation an$ $ifferentiation of in$i!i$ual information (see Hofkirchner 4===a)

Cognition is always connecte$ to the outsi$e worl$, a su&ect relates itself to e!ents an$ states of its

en!ironment. "he informational ha**ening can &e $escri&e$ as layere$A le!els of higher an$ lower -uality

can &e $istinguishe$. % transformation of information from lower to higher le!els takes *lace. "he

generation of in$i!i$ual information starts with the rece*tion of signals from the en!ironment. "he u*$ateof the signals starts with a *articular state of e*erience of the cogniti!e system. <ecei!ing a**lies to the

u*take of signals which come from the *ercei!a&le en!ironment. Concei!ing is $e!ote$ to the registration

an$ &ringing together of the signals to a !iew of some as*ects of the en!ironment. :erce*tion unites

conce*tion an$ rece*tion it?s an unceasing mo!ement, an oscillation &etween rece*tion an$ conce*tion. %nact of *erce*tion in!ol!es the rece*tion of signals an$ the conce*tion of im*ressions, i.e. a new whole that

is calle$ $ata. :erce*tion is a *rocess that reflects an$ *otentially changes the current cogniti!e structure.

"he emerging structure is the starting *oint for the net *erce*tion. "he whole can ac-uire a new emerging

-uality which the *re!ious im*ressions $i$ not ha!e. So, on the first le!el signals are turne$ intoim*ressions0$ata &y *erce*tion, an act that in!ol!es rece*tion an$ conce*tion.

n the net le!el, the $ata (im*ressions) is inter*rete$, i.e. meaning is gi!en to the $ata. So knowle$ge is

forme$. "he *rocess of inter*retation in!ol!es an inter*lay of *roection an$ introection. It starts with a

certain state of inter*retation0knowle$ge, which is the &asis for the emergence of new knowle$ge.:roection means that first the system is *roecte$ onto reality, i.e. the current state of knowle$ge is a**lie$

to the $ata. Introection means that the $ata can &e inter*rete$ in such a way that the structure of knowle$ge

changes + new knowle$ge emerges. "he system has introecte$ reality into its structure. ew areas ofreality, new e*eriences ha!e &een &rought into the system. ust as on the first le!el with rece*tion an$

conce*tion, there are two o**osing *rocesses *roection an$ introection. "hey are the motor of the en$lessmo!ement of cognition.

Here the -uestion arises, whether knowle$ge is forme$ relati!ely autonomously from the en!ironment sothat $ata as *ercei!e$ signals from the outsi$e can only *ertur&ate &ut ne!er $etermine changes in the

cogniti!e knowle$ge+structure or whether knowle$ge as a re*resentation corres*on$s to the en!ironment of

the cogniti!e system. It can &e sai$ that the en!ironment ne!er $etermines cognition com*letely, &ut

knowle$ge is also not forme$ com*letely autonomously nor without regar$ to the en!ironment. %rguing$ialectically we can say that reflection an$ constructi!ism &oth re-uire an$ contra$ict each other. "he

formation of knowle$ge as the inter*retation of $ata in!ol!es *roection as a moment of construction as



well as introection as a moment of reflection. 2nowle$ge as the result of inter*rete$ $ata can &e seen as

the le!el which in!ol!es e*eriences an$ facts.

n the thir$ le!el, knowle$ge is e!aluate$ an$ sense is ma$e of it. In$i!i$ual information such as !alues,

norms, rules, o*inions, i$eas, an$ &eliefs are create$ &y the fact that the su&ect *uts its knowle$ge into thecontet of its goals. "his action is seen as an e!aluation which in!ol!es $escri*tion an$ *rescri*tion. "he

*rocess starts with the current state of in$i!i$ual information in a *articular situation where an in$i!i$ual

must act in or$er to sol!e a *ro&lem. #escri*tion means that on the &asis of the current in$i!i$ual

information structure the in$i!i$ual is looking for solutions. "he situation an$ the solutions refer to theknowle$ge on the lower le!el which re*resents facts. In the *rescri*ti!e *hase a $ecision is ma$e on the

im*lementation of a solution. % solution consi$ere$ goo$, nice, an$ fair is selecte$. n this high le!el the

*rocess of cognition cumulates to in$i!i$ual wis$omA it is in$i!i$ual information that allows an in$i!i$ual

to create situations that he0she e*eriences as goo$, *leasant, nice, an$ fair. "he eistence of in$i!i$ualwis$om $oesn?t necessarily mean that the $ecisions taken &y in$i!i$uals are socially wise ones.

Sol!ing *ro&lems &y e!aluating knowle$ge an$ acting on the &asis of e*erience, facts (knowle$ge) an$

the current in$i!i$ual information in or$er to select a goo$ solution to a *ro&lem can lea$ to new in$i!i$ual

information. "his is neither a necessity nor an im*ossi&ility. It?s *ossi&le that we act an$ try to fin$solutions without enhancing an$ changing our in$i!i$ual !alues an$ norms. In fact, this is the case with

most of our actions. n$er these circumstances in$i!i$ual information remains unchange$. In other

situations it might &e $ifferentA new in$i!i$ual !alues, norms, rules, o*inions, or &eliefs emerge on the &asis

of new e*erienceA signals from the en!ironment may &e *ercei!e$ in a $ifferent way, $ata may &e

inter*rete$ in a $ifferent way, an$ knowle$ge may &e e!aluate$ in a $ifferent way."he signals on the lowest le!el can refer to tri!ial o&ects in our $aily life such as a flower, &ut the o&ect of

reference can also &e social information, which is *ro$uce$ &y social relationshi*s. "his esta&lishes a

relationshi* &etween in$i!i$ual an$ social information.When a sign is consi$ere$ the *ro$uct of an information *rocess, $ata, knowle$ge, an$ wis$om can &e seen

as the three ty*es of interrelate$ signs that a**ear in the *rocess of formation an$ $ifferentiation of

in$i!i$ual information.

7. Semiotic %s*ects of In$i!i$ual Information

% sign is the result of an information *rocess. %n information *rocess occurs whene!er a system organises

itself, i.e. no!elty emerges in the structure, state, or &eha!iour of the system. When the new system,structure, state, or &eha!iour relates to an ol$ one, a relation among signs (ol$ ones an$ new ones) is

esta&lishe$. "he new sign is not re$uci&le to the ol$ ones, &ut it is ne!ertheless $e*en$ent on them &ecausethey *ro!i$e the range of *ossi&ilities from which one *ossi&ility is chosen. We can refer to this as the

syntactic relation of signs.When a relationshi* &etween a system an$ the en!ironment of the system is esta&lishe$, the signs of the

system also relate to the outsi$e worl$. In such a case the sign re*resents something outsi$e the system, so

that the sign gains significance. "his is the semantic relation of a sign.

If a relation &etween a sign an$ the system?s aims is esta&lishe$, we can s*eak of the *ragmatic relation ofthe sign.

"he sign relations are enca*sulate$ the sign+sign+relation is the innermost one (syntactic as*ect), it is

em&e$$e$ in the sign+sign+o&ect+relation (semantic as*ect), which is *art of the sign+sign+o&ect+su&ect+

relation (*ragmatic as*ect).<elating the semiotic $imensions to the *rocesses of the generation an$ $ifferentiation of in$i!i$ual

information, it can say that on the first le!el new $ata (Jim*ressions) emerges on the &asis of $ata known

through the *erce*tion of signals from outsi$e the system. So a relationshi* &etween the ol$ $ata an$ thenew one is esta&lishe$. Hence this is the syntactic as*ect of the generation an$ $ifferentiation of in$i!i$ualinformation.

n the secon$ le!el the *erce*tions are inter*rete$, the state of the system changes an$ another sign + new

knowle$ge + emerges. "his sign refers to the o&ect of cognition + the en!ironment of the inter*reting

in$i!i$ual. /ecause of the esta&lishment of a sign+sign+o&ect+relation, we fin$ the semantic as*ect on thisle!el. KB4L

n the thir$ le!el, where $ecisions are ma$e on the &asis of alrea$y eisting in$i!i$ual wis$om an$ of

knowle$ge, new in$i!i$ual information can emerge. % relationshi* &etween the actions, $ecisions, an$ *ro&lems of the su&ect of cognition is esta&lishe$. Here we ha!e a sign+sign+o&ect+su&ect+relation, so we



can s*eak of the *ragmatic as*ect of the generation an$ $ifferentiation of in$i!i$ual information on the

thir$ le!el.

8. Social Information

"he wor$ social $enotes that this kin$ of information is *ro$uce$ in the course of social relationshi*s

&etween se!eral in$i!i$uals. %ccor$ing to 'a We&er a social relationshi* is esta&lishe$ when there is

mutual referencing &etween two actors. Social acting orientates itself on meaningful actions of $ifferentactors. Social actions are a necessary con$ition for a social relationshi*, &ut not a sufficient one, &ecause

social acting $oesn?t re-uire a relationshi* &etween actors an actor can refer to the actions of another

without the latter referring to those of the former.

We regar$ social norms, laws, !alues, an$ rules (the latter $o not nee$ to &e co$ifie$, they can also &eesta&lishe$ in the form of tra$itions or ha&its), which are *ro$uce$ $uring the course of social relationshi*s

of se!eral in$i!i$uals, as social information. "hese in$i!i$uals must share a common construction of

reality, which *ro!i$es the &asis for their social actions an$ interactions. "hey are elements of a social

system. Social information emerges as a macrosco*ic structure from the interaction of these in$i!i$ualswithin the social system. "he interactions are me$iate$ &y acts of communication, the in$i!i$uals act in

such a way that associations an$ actions of other in$i!i$uals are triggere$. "he in$i!i$uals co+or$inate their

actions in such a manner that they ointly *ro$uce a social information structure.

Social co+o*eration can &e seen as a social relationshi* in which the mutual references of the in!ol!e$

in$i!i$uals (these are social interactions) ena&le all of them to &enefit from the situation. /y co+o*eratingin$i!i$uals can reach goals they woul$ not &e a&le to reach alone. ew -ualities can emerge in an o&ser!e$

social system through social co+o*eration. "he elements0in$i!i$uals in this system are conscious of these

structures, a circumstance which must &e attri&ute$ to the social whole connecting the in$i!i$uals ratherthan to single elements. Such -ualities are *ro$uce$ in a collecti!e *rocess &y all concerne$ in$i!i$uals an$

are emergent -ualities of social systems.

Social com*etition can &e seen as a social relationshi* in which the social interactions as well as the

relationshi*s of *ower an$ $omination ena&le some in$i!i$uals or social su&+systems to take a$!antage ofothers. "he first &enefit at the e*ense of the latter, who ha!e to $eal with the $isa$!antages arising the

situation. ew -ualities of an o&ser!e$ social system can emerge as a result of social com*etition. /ut

these -ualities are not *ro$uce$ collecti!ely &y all concerne$ in$i!i$uals, they are *ro$uce$ &y su&systems

of the rele!ant system that ha!e more *ower than others, $ominate others, or can make use of a$!antagesthat $eri!e from higher *ositions in eisting social hierarchies. "hese -ualities reflect relations of

$omination in social systems.Social information can ha!e a co+o*erati!e or a com*etiti!e character. "his $e*en$s on the way it is

generate$. If social information is generate$ un$er the *remise that e!ery in$i!i$ual in!ol!e$ in itsa**lication has the same o**ortunity an$ means of influencing the resulting information structures in

his0her own interest, then the resulting macrosco*ic structure is a form of co+o*erati!e social information.

"his ty*e of information is a collecti!e *ro$uct of the co+o*erating actors concerne$, it is an emergent

-uality of the social system in the *rocess of self+organisation. We call this form of social informationinclusi!e social information. Here self+organisation characterises that the in$i!i$uals in!ol!e$ in the

emerging structures $etermine the occurrence, form, course, an$ result of this *rocess on their own . "hey

esta&lish macrosco*ic structures &y microsco*ic interrelations.

If social information is not generate$ in *rocesses of co+o*eration &y all in$i!i$uals concerne$ &ut rather &y a su&system of the rele!ant social system, when this su&system has more *ower than the other

su&systems, when it $ominates the others, or when it can make use of a$!antages that $eri!e from its

higher *osition in the eisting social hierarchy, then the resulting structures e!i$ence -ualities that are the *ro$uct of social com*etition + we call this eclusi!e social information.1clusi!e social information is a new, emergent -uality of a social system. It is &ase$ on social com*etition

an$ reflects relationshi*s of $omination an$ the asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower in the social system

concerne$. We can?t say that eclusi!e social information is *ro$uce$ in a *rocess of social self+

organisation &ecause not all the in$i!i$uals concerne$ are a&le to *artici*ate in this *rocess an$ to influenceit on an e-ual &asis using e-ually $istri&ute$ resources an$ means(5).

% hierarchy is ma$e u* of a se-uence su&ect to *riorities. In$i!i$uals locate$ on higher le!els of a

hierarchy ha!e more *ower than in$i!i$uals on lower le!els. Hierarchies in society are characterise$ &y theasymmetric $istri&ution of *ower. Such an une-ual $istri&ution is normally safeguar$e$ &y coerci!e means.



"his is the s*ecific character of relationshi*s of $omination. Social information is interrelate$ with

-uestions of *ower an$ $omination.

9. Social Information an$ %s*ects of :ower0#omination

"he 1nglish sociologist %nthony >i$$ens regar$s *ower as the a&ility to influence actions of other *ersons.

:ower is $is*laye$ in the resources which can &e use$ &y actors in social interactions.

We regar$ *ower as the a!aila&ility of the means to influence *rocesses an$ $ecisions in one?s owninterest . In &oth a**roaches *ower is un$erstoo$ as something which is *resent in all social relationshi*s, it

can &e $istri&ute$ symmetrically as well as asymmetrically. :ower is not something that is necessarily

eercise$ o!er someone, it can not &e a&olishe$ &ut re$istri&ute$.

'a We&er sees *ower as any chance to im*ose one?s own will in a social relationshi* e!en againstresistance (see We&er 4=9). %n$ he *ercei!es $omination as the chance to recruit loyal followers.

%gainst resistance *oints towar$s an un$erstan$ing of *ower as a relationshi* of coercion, which

em*loys $isci*line in or$er to su**ress the will of others. Such an a**roach neglects the *ossi&ility of a

symmetric $istri&ution of *ower.#omination is the a!aila&ility of the means of coercion in or$er to influence others, i.e. of *rocesses an$

$ecisions in one?s own interest an$ to one?s own *ur*ose. It is a $is*lay of the asymmetric $istri&ution of

*ower an$ it can?t &e $istri&ute$ symmetrically. #omination is always eercise$ o!er someone. :ower is

always relate$ to the $e*en$ence of in$i!i$uals. It can only &e o&ser!e$ in social relationshi*s. %

symmetric $istri&ution of *ower im*lies that all the actors in!ol!e$ in a social relationshi* + since they all$e*en$ on each other + ha!e the means to influence the *rocesses an$ $ecisions in this relationshi* to the

same $egree in their own interest an$ to their own *ur*ose. <elationshi*s that are forme$ &y com*etition

are an e*ression of the asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower. "hey *lay a maor role in our society.'ore *owerful in$i!i$uals normally ha!e more knowle$ge than less *owerful ones an$ they *lay a

$ominant role in the *rocess of the generation an$ $ifferentiation of social information. 'ono*olies of

information are mono*olies of asymmetrically $istri&ute$ *ower an$ of $omination.

"he $istri&ution of *ower in our society is also maintaine$ &y the *ri!ilege$ access to an$ the control ofknowle$ge an$ social information &y the ruling classes an$ the eclusion of others from this access an$

from the chance of *artici*ating in the generation of social information.

In our western society, which is *olitically forme$ &y the mo$el of re*resentati!e $emocracy an$

economically &y Ca*italism, the asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower in &oth areas (as well as in others suchas *ri!acy) *re!ails. "his creates !arious relationshi*s &etween more influential an$ less influential classes.

In the current form of our society, com*etition $ominates co+o*eration an$ eclusi!e social information isfar more im*ortant than the inclusi!e kin$.

;. "he <elationshi* of In$i!i$ual an$ Social Information

%s alrea$y mentione$, signals as the starting *oint in the *rocess of generation an$ $ifferentiation of

in$i!i$ual information $o not solely refer to o&ects of our en!ironment, they also refer to socialinformation. "his is the way to esta&lish a relationshi* &etween in$i!i$ual an$ social information.

If cognition were solely $etermine$ &y reflection, the eclusi!e social information we fin$ in our society

woul$ almost certainly &e *ercei!e$ &y e!eryone as in$i!i$ual information. /ut in fact har$ly anyone

agrees with all laws an$ *olitical $ecisions. 1!eryone has a $ynamically changing structure of in$i!i$ualinformation. /ut in$i!i$ual information often reflects the $ominant con$itions, norms, rules, ha&its, an$

!alues of society. "his reflection is esta&lishe$ in *rocesses of socialisation.

In$i!i$uals are confronte$ with mani*ulation an$ $isinformation in *olitics, the me$ia, the economy,i$eologies an$ in *ersonal relations. /ecause of the eisting asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower, theeconomically *owerful classes control the channels which *ro!i$e information.

onetheless the esta&lishment of an$ the access to alternati!e channels of information, which *ro!i$e

un$erre*resente$ information, is *ossi&le if in$i!i$uals e*erience alternati!e forms of socialisation. /ut

these in$i!i$uals are confronte$ with the asymmetric $istri&ution of *ower in society. %lternati!e channelsan$ alternati!e socialisation can trigger the generation of in$i!i$ual information that $oes not reflect the

$ominating eclusi!e social information.

So the e*istemological as*ect of information in social systems can &e *ercei!e$ as the $ialecticalrelationshi* &etween reflection an$ constructi!ism. /oth are as*ects of cognition. In the society we li!e in,



the reflection of social con$itions in our in$i!i$ual structure of cognition $ominates the make+u* of the

in$i!i$ual self. /ut such a $omination can ne!er ha!e a fully $etermining character.

"hus far we ha!e not accom*lishe$ getting ri$ of the $i!erse mani*ulations in our society that trigger the

$omination of social com*etition an$ eclusi!e social information in or$er to &ecome self+$etermining,autonomous, an$ altruistic in$i!i$uals that can choose an$ $ifferentiate their in$i!i$ual an$ social

information on their own.

% self+organise$ society woul$ &e one in which all in$i!i$uals that are touche$ &y a *ro&lem ha!e the same

*ower to $etermine the occurrence, form, course, an$ results of the generation an$ $ifferentiation of socialinformation.

% symmetric $istri&ution of *ower in terms of resources an$ access to information, co+o*eration, inclusi!e

social information an$ soli$arity instea$ of com*etition, eclusi!e social information an$ egoism, as well

as a form of socialisation that ena&les in$i!i$uals to esta&lish a form of com*ati&ility an$ satisfaction oftheir own an$ collecti!e social interests, woul$ &e re-uire$ .

Com*ati&ility of in$i!i$ual an$ social interests an$ information means that each in$i!i$ual enoys a a

maimum of free$om without curtailing the free$om of others or collecti!e social interests. "he free

$e!elo*ment of the in$i!i$ual is a necessary con$ition for the free $e!elo*ment of e!eryone ust ase!eryone?s free$om is a *rere-uisite for the free$om of the in$i!i$ual.

In$i!i$ual an$ collecti!e interests can &e com*ati&le without interfering negati!ely, egoism is not a

natural *attern of &eha!iour that is gi!en from &irth or enco$e$ in the genes, rather it originates in a

*rocess of socialisation in a system $ominate$ &y eclusi!e social information, asymmetric $istri&ution of

*ower an$ com*etition. In$i!i$ual information an$ social information can &oth &e characterise$ &yfree$om &ecause social information emerges as a -uality of social co+o*eration in the *rocess of self+

organisation of in$i!i$ual information. onetheless in$i!i$ual information woul$ still change $ynamically

$ue to new social e*eriences.

=. Co*ing with >lo&al :ro&lems in a Wise Society

>lo&al *ro&lems are not s*ecific to the Eth century, they ha!e &een eisting o!er a long time in !ariousguises such as e*i$emics (*estilences, etc.) or wars. "he new -uality of the social *ro&lems of our time is

that the continue$ eistence of mankin$ is &ecoming e!er more $ou&tful. "he une-ual $istri&ution of

resources (wealth, foo$, water, energy, means of *ro$uction, information, *ro$ucts, etc.), the ra*i$ly

wi$ening ga* &etween the rich an$ the *oor, the $ifferences in social stan$ar$s an$ stan$ar$s of$e!elo*ment, the ecological crisis an$ wars (inclu$ing the *ossi&ility of nuclear $estruction, which is still a

!ery real $anger although the Col$ War is o!er) can &e consi$ere$ to &e the essential glo&al *ro&lems. "hecurrently $ominating neo+li&eral form of *olitics is accom*anie$ &y a growing intensification of these

*ro&lems.We &elie!e that in or$er to sol!e these glo&al *ro&lems society must &ecome a wise one. Social wis$om

woul$ &e the a&ility of mankin$ to o!ercome the ine-ualities, threats, une-ual $istri&utions, crisis, an$ ga*s

that are *ose$ &y the glo&al *ro&lems. Currently the in$i!i$ual wis$om of the maority of humans $oes not

reflect social wis$om.% necessary con$ition for esta&lishing a wise society that is ca*a&le of sol!ing the glo&al *ro&lems is the

o!ercoming of the $omination of eclusi!e social information in society. % $e!elo*ment towar$s inclusi!e

social information, co+o*eration an$ soli$arity, as well as altruism instea$ of eclusi!e social information,

com*etition, an$ egoism coul$ &e the &asis for sol!ing glo&al *ro&lems an$ it coul$ *ro!i$e the &asis for asociety that relies rather on co+o*eration than on com*etition an$ the *assing of res*onsi&ility in social

relationshi*s to su*eriors.

<eferences

%lean$er, Samuell 4=E. S*ace, "ime an$ #eity, Bon$on

Ca*urro, <., Fleissner, :., Hofkirchner, W. 4==9. Is a nifie$ "heory of Information Feasi&le % "rialogue,

Worl$ Futures Vol. 6= (5+6) 3 7E (4+6) * 45+56

#urkheim, 1mile, 4=;6. #ie <egeln $er soGiologischen 'etho$e, Frankfurt0'ain



1igen, 'anfre$, Schuster, :eter, 4=9=. "he Hy*ercycle, S*ringer, /erlin0Hei$el&erg0ew Mork

Fleissner, :eter, Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, 4==7. In+formatio re!isite$. Wi$er $en $inglichenInformations&egriff, Informatik Forum 5, * 48+454

Haken, Hermann, 4=9;. Synergetics, S*ringer, /erlin0Hei$el&erg, n$ e$ition

Haken, Hermann, 4=;5. %$!ance$ Synergetics, S*ringer, /erlin0Hei$el&erg, n$ e$ition 4=;9

Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, 4==;a. 1mergence an$ the Bogic of 1*lanation + %n %rgument for the nity of

Science. In %cta :olytechnica Scan$ina!ica, 'athematics, Com*uting an$ 'anagement in 1ngineeringSeries =4 (4==;), * 5+5E

Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, 4==;&. Information un$ Sel&storganisation Nwei Seiten einer 'e$aille. in FenGl,

., Hofkirchner, W., Stockinger, >. (1$.) 4==;, Information un$ Sel&storganisation %nnOherung an eine!ereinheitlichte "heorie $er Information. Stu$ien+Verlag, Inns&ruck0Wien, * 8=+4E

Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, 4===a. Cogniti!e Sciences in the :ers*ecti!e of a nifie$ "heory of Information,

htt*00igw.tuwien.ac.at0'enschen0Hofi0<eferencesPnifie$"heory0==66.htm

Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, 4===&. "owar$s a nifie$ "heory of Information + "he 'erging of Secon$+r$er

Cy&ernetics an$ Semiotics into a Single an$ Com*rehensi!e Information Science. In 47e CongrQs

International $e Cy&ernDti-ue, amur 4==;, amur 4===, * 497+4;E

Buhmann, iklas, 4=;6. SoGiale Systeme, Suhrkam*, Frankfurt0'ain

'aturana, Hum&erto <., Varela, Francisco ., 4=;6. #er /aum $er 1rkenntnis + #ie &iologischen WurGeln$es menschlichen 1rkennens, ScherG, /ern+'Rnchen+Wien, 5r$ e$ition 4=;9

'organ, C.B., 4=5. 1mergent 1!olution, ew Mork

icolis, >rDgoire, :rigogine, Ilya, 4=;=. 1*loring Com*leity, Freeman, ew Mork

We&er, 'a, 4=9. Wirtschaft un$ >esellschaft, "R&ingen

(4) His *ro*agation of communications instea$ of actors as the elements of social systems lea$s to the

neglect of social *ro&lems an$ social change.

() %nother one is 'ar He $i$ not use the term emergence (neither $i$ #urkheim), &ut #ialectics an$emergence are closely relate$. %ccor$ing to #ialectics, a notion in the form of a thesis is negate$ in the

form of an antithesis. "hesis an$ antithesis contra$ict each other, &ut they also re-uire each other. "he

negation of the negation $enotes the emergence of a synthesis from the thesis an$ antithesis. Hegel

characterises this with the >erman wor$ %ufhe&ung (su&lation), which has three $ifferent meaningseliminating0in!ali$ating0$issol!ing0&reaking u* something (4), kee*ing or *reser!ing something () an$

lifting something u* (5). %ufhe&ung also characterises the change from -uantity to -uality, -ualitati!e lea*s

eist in #ialectics. 'ar use$ the $ialectical metho$ology of Hegel for analysing ca*italism. In $oing so he &ase$ his analysis on commo$ities, echange an$ use+!alues. He wante$ to fin$ out which laws an$ $ri!ingforces steer social actions an$ relationshi*s, how la&our, science, an$ technology as forces of *ro$ucti!ity

$e!elo* socio+economic contra$ictions. 1mergentism an$ #ialectics are closely relate$. 1mergence shows

$ialectical as*ects &ecause ol$ system -ualities are *reser!e$ () in the form of new ones an$ the system is

raise$ to a new le!el0state (5) &y the emergence of new -ualities. We can?t say that new system -ualitieseliminate ol$ ones (4), &ut a whole0a system at a macrosco*ic le!el must not necessarily ha!e

*ro*erties0-ualities of microsco*ic *arts. We can therefore say that microsco*ic -ualities are eliminate$ (4)

at a macrosco*ic le!el, if microsco*ic *ro*erties can?t &e foun$ at the macrosco*ic le!el, whichcharacterises the whole. 1mergence means a -ualitati!e lea*, a s*ontaneous o!erturn of -ualities, it



$e*en$s on control *arameters which reach a critical threshol$ in the self+organising system. n the other

han$ #ialectics *ut forwar$ as*ects of 1mergentism &ecause it $eals with the o!erturn of -ualities. %

synthesis emerges from a thesis an$ an antithesis, it features new -ualities.

(5) Consi$ering $issi*ati!e systems, self+organisation can &e regar$e$ as the s*ontaneous emergence of *atterns from the interactions of the system?s elements if a certain threshol$ of rele!ant *arameters is

crosse$. We argue in fa!our of emergent e!olution which can e*lain new -ualities of systems that emerge

$uring the course of e!olution an$ can?t &e re$uce$ to lower le!els of organisation0systems. Hence social

systems are more com*le than $issi*ati!e an$ auto*oietic ones an$ self+organisation can?t ha!e eactly thesame meaning as in less com*le systems. #uring the course of e!olution of systems the com*leity of

systems increases an$ new -ualities of self+organisation emerge. "hese -ualities ha!e some similarities

with the ol$ meanings in less com*le systems as well as new as*ects. Hence on lower organisational

le!els we ha!e a &roa$er meaning of self+organisation. n u**er le!els this meaning is getting more an$more s*ecific &ecause com*leity increases. "herefore we argue in fa!our of an un$erstan$ing of social

self+organisation that not only consi$ers relationshi*s of elements, &ut also looks at the -ualities of these

relationshi*s. So class relationshi*s as well as relationshi*s of *ower an$ $omination ha!e to &e

consi$ere$.Self+organisation in social systems $enotes that new -ualities emerge from social interactions of in$i!i$uals

$uring the course of a social relationshi* in a social system an$ that the in$i!i$uals concerne$ &y the

emerging structures $etermine the occurrence, form, course, an$ result of this *rocess of generation or

$ifferentiation on their own. "hey esta&lish macrosco*ic structures &y microsco*ic interrelations. With such

an un$erstan$ing of self+organisation eclusi!e social information can not &e seen as &eing constitute$ or$ifferentiate$ &y self+organisation.

KB4L'ir fOllt auf, $a eine sign+sign+o&ect+/eGiehung auch schon auf 1&ene 4 eistiert, $a auch $ort schon

$ie /eGiehung Gur mwelt hergestellt wir$. Wir$ $amit alles unlogisch 1ine sign+sign+/eGiehung wir$ auf e$em Be!el hergestellt, $a $ie alten Neichen (e nach$em #aten, Wissen o$er Weisheit) $ie /asis fRr neue

sin$.

Information Social Systems

Documents

Transcript of Information Social Systems