General Systems Theory

Emergence of a pantheon -- cognitive or otherwise
Pantheons as patterns of cognitive N-foldness
Pantheon dynamics in a globalized semi-secular civilization?
Mathematical theology enabling the quest for a meta-pattern?
Complex equations forming "pantheons" of mathematical experience?
Prime number and curvature implications for global governance?
Polyhedra suggestive of arrays of requisite variety of pantheons in 3D
Configuring the 64 subjects of mathematics as a 64-edged drilled truncated cube
Exploring potential dynamics within a pantheon?
Engendering and navigating pantheons -- "angelic" and "demonic"?
Pantheon as a psychosocial "O-ring" -- speculatively understood?

This little·book attempts an ambitious task: to give a bird's eye view of cognitive sciences today. Thus, this essay is like a compact, reasoned tour of an as yet ill-defined multidisciplinary field. Alongside human history of nature there is corresponding history of ideas about human self-knowledge …. Like mirrors to each other, self and nature move in time like partners in a dance. The natural history of self-knowledge in the west remains to be done …. Human mind is the prime source and closest example of cognition and knowledge. From this background, the modern phase of cognitive science represents a remarkable mutation in this parallel history of mind and nature. For the first time science fully recognizes the investigation about knowledge itself, in all its levels, as legitimate.

Pioneering creativity researcher Frank Barron developed a complex, systemic, ecological vision of creativity. In this book chapter from Barron's Festschrift, I explore the implications of Barron's vision, and connect it to recent developments in the systems sciences.

An edited version of the study is available in;

Das 'Prinzip Störung' in den Geistes und Sozialwissenschaftebn
Hrsg. von Carsten Gansel und Norman Ächtler
Studien und Texte zur Sozialgeschichte der Literatur
Hrsg. von Norbert Bachleitner, Christian Begemann, Walter Erhart und Gangolf
Hübner, Band 122
De Griyter. Berlin 2013, S. 15-29

Le recours contemporain à la notion de "complexité" renvoie fréquemment à des démarches ayant tendance à unifier sa définition. En langue anglaise, sa réduction à une forme singulière (complexity theory ou complexity science) s'avère ainsi susceptible de masquer la variété des théories permettant de rendre compte des implications inhérentes au recours à cette notion. Cet article, en prenant en considération à la fois les traditions de recherche latines et anglosaxonnes, associées à la notion de complexité, suggère une approche plus nuancée, évitant la simplification de cette notion à certaines des conceptions dominantes qui y sont associées. Partant d'une approche étymologique, cet article propose d'envisager de façon chronologique l'émergence de trois générations de théories de la complexité; ce faisant, certains de leurs enracinements épistémologiques et socio-culturels sont introduits. D'un point de vue épistémologique, la réflexion proposée met en évidence certaines des interprétations hétérogènes sous-jacentes à la définition de ce qui est perçu comme complexe. Suivant une perspective anthropologique, ce texte évoque également la portée à la fois émancipatrice et asservissante susceptible d'être associée à l'idée de complexité. Sur la base des ambiguitiés mises en évidence, cet article suggère finalement de concevoir les contributions renvoyant aux théories contemporaines de la complexité, au même titre que la remise en question de leur légitimité épistémologique et éthique, à partir des boucles et des dynamiques dont elles sont constitutives. Ce faisant, les chercheurs et les praticiens en Sciences de l'éducation devraient considérer leurs pratiques en tant que processus
d'apprentissage dont la complexité renvoie autant aux transformations qu'ils étudient ou provoquent, qu'aux transformations inhérentes aux systèmes de représentations
auxquels ils ont recours pour les conceptualiser.

Von Bertalanffy's General System Theory represents in a streamlined way most of his career, the key ideas he developed, the most important applications, and developments in a variety of fields. We as editors believe that the book, the man, and their influence deserve attention and renewed praise. Not only because of their historical value, past contributions to the formation of systems theory, complexity theory, and other fields but also because von Bertalanffy's theory of open systems can still contribute to a myriad of disciplines and, importantly, to discussions crossing disciplinary lines, from climate change to mental health. Indeed, the twisted and often obscured genealogies of systems theories and the disciplines borrowing from them suggest all too easily that the theory of open systems is passé, without much relevance. The contributors to this special issue wholeheartedly disagree and believe General System Theory has been systematically underrated and misunderstood.

The purpose here is to see if the paper, Universal Resilience Patterns in Complex Networks (Gao, Barzel, and Barabási 2016), can allow " one to think about complexity differently along a path to perhaps suggest modeling applications for real system[s] (simplified models of them not actual systems) in the future. " The paper is analyzed using the intrinsic nature of complexity—quantity and diversity of components and relations, together resulting in complexity of pattern-of-organization of structure and processes. The analysis is further developed by way of knowledge drawn from general systems, for example factor-development. At issue is whether or not there is an adequate match between the model or formulation presented in the paper and the real-world complex systems to which it is intended to apply.

Something has meaning when it has the property of "information about" some part of the world with respect to an end or ends of some intentional system or agent.  Intentional systems are end-directed systems, but not all end-directed systems are intentional.  Not all end-directed systems require information about or meaning to determine their actions towards their ends. We need not invoke intenionality or meaning, for example, to explain the flow of a river down a slope, or the flow of heat down a temperature gradient from a hotter to a cooler region because these processes are explicable in terms of local physical potentials and laws.  MORE...

Accepting that increased climate variability will require that farmers make significant changes to their farm systems, we can see that maintaining flexibility is an important coping strategy. Using general systems theory, we offer a conceptual model for describing the tactical and strategic flexibility of farm systems to reveal the sensitivity of farm systems to variable critical inputs. The model is used to classify farm systems as rigid, robust, or elastic on the basis of two factors, the capacity of the farmer to reduce reliance on critical inputs by altering the following: (i) the use of critical inputs and (ii) farm output. The different production emphasis for the different types of systems has implications for how these farmers are able to respond to increased variability and on public policies that may support viable farm businesses in the face of increased variability.

Creativity is a universal activity, essential in an evolutionary perspective, to adaptation and sustainability. This first part of a three part article on the sociology of creativity has three purposes: (1) to develop the argument that key factors in creative activity are socially based and developed; hence, sociology can contribute significantly to understanding and explaining human creativity; (2) to present a sociological systems approach which enables us to link in a systematic and coherent way the disparate social factors and mechanisms that are involved in creative activity and to describe and explain creativity; and (3) to illustrate a sociological systems theory's conceptualization of multiple interrelated institutional, cultural, and interaction factors and their role in creativity and innovative development in diverse empirical instances. The article introduces and applies a model stressing the social embeddedness of innovative agents and entrepreneurs, either as individuals or groups, as they manipulate symbols, rules, technologies, and materials that are socially derived and developed. Their motivation for doing what they do derives in part from their social roles and positions, in part in response to the incentives and opportunities – many socially constructed – shaping their interaction situations and domains. Their capabilities including their social powers derive from the culturally and institutional frameworks in which they are embedded. In carrying out their actions, agents mobilize resources including technologies through the institutions and networks in which they participate. Following this theoretical part, Parts II and III focus on the concrete conditions and mechanisms characteristic of the " context of innovation " and the " context of receptivity and institutionalization " , respectively.

A cura di Maurizio Pirro e Luca Zeno bi MIMESIS Il quadrifoglio tedesco Volume pubblicato con il contributo dell'Università degli Studi dell'Aquila (Dipartimento di Scienze Umane) e dell'Università degli Studi di Bari "Aldo Moro" (Dipartimento di Lettere Lingue Arti Italianistica e Culture Comparate). Il quadrifoglio tedesco n. 23 http://www.mimesisedizioni .it!Il-quadrifog Zio-tedesco .html Per proposte editoriali e culturali inerenti alla collana contattare: [email protected] MIMESIS EDIZIONI (Milano-Udine) www.mimesisedizioni .i t [email protected] Isbn:9788857525174

-- Abstract: The basis of Schemas Theory in the structure of the Western Worldview, Kinds of Being, the Divided Line, Semiotics and the Circulation of Projection. Companion for a complementary paper published by Springer Systems Science Handbook.

-- Keywords: Schemas, General Schemas Theory, Systems Engineering, Systems Theory, Synergistic Engineering, Philosophy of Science, Plato, Kant, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze

-- Original Paper https://www.academia.edu/34831626/General_Schemas_Theory basically rewritten for publication by Springer as the first paper in this pair. The rewritten paper became too complex and so I pulled out the excess material and present it here as the second paper of the pair.

-- Companion paper:
Palmer K.D. (2021) General Schemas Theory. A New Basis for Systems Engineering Practice. In: Metcalf G.S., Kijima K., Deguchi H. (eds) Handbook of Systems Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0370-8_73-1
https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-981-13-0370-8_73-1

It is not possible to speak of a single systems approach. There are rather of a number of systems approaches, each loosely drawing on different aspects of a family composed mainly of, general system theory, cybernetics, information theory, chaos theory, and complexity theory. Systems approaches have been used in most of the social sciences, particularly sociology and management, but their use has extended into the arts and humanities.Creativity researchers have used systems approaches drawing on very different sources and in very different ways. The main focus has been to highlight creativity as a phenomenon that occurs in the context of multiple systems, and therefore involves a network of interactions.

Axis Mundi (http://www.axismundi.biz/)  ha rappresentato per anni un punto di riferimento sapienziale di rara profondità.
Gli invisibili autori, completato il ciclo di sviluppo, hanno silenziosamente chiuso il sito. Accettando solamente, rare volte, contributi esterni.

Proseguendo con i contributi, proseguiamo sul tema dell’Olismo con:
Von Bertalanffy e la Teoria Generale dei Sistemi

Il lettore assiduo potrà verificare il Significato della monumentale quanto complessa Opera di AXIS MUNDI: “Operazione” tesa a proporre, suscitare “operatività”.
Ogni ordine tradizionale che mantenga la continuità della trasmissione assume tale compito operativo come base fondante, se non addirittura di prerequisito per iniziare la Via.
È una proposta di meditazione finalizzata all’operatività concreta, da sperimentare direttamente.

This thesis consists of a series of extensive projects which aim to explore a new designer role for fashion. It is a role that experiments with how fashion can be reverse engineered, hacked, tuned and shared among many participants as a form of social activism. This ...

Esta investigación es una propuesta sistémica, para la formalización de los siguientes fenómenos del lenguaje: el
proceso de adquisición de significado o semiosis, los sistemas de signos, sus representaciones en la historia
mesoamericana y la modelación de fenómenos simbólicos, a través de la teoría de las redes complejas. Los
fenómenos que se examinan son: (1) la operación de las clases léxicas y funcionales del lenguaje a través de sus
representaciones simbólicas arqueológicas, como una propiedad de los sistemas conscientes; (2) la elaboración de
una metodología sistémica, para identificar el significado de representaciones simbólicas no descifradas, por medio
de patrones de emergencia. La primera parte del trabajo (Capítulos 1-3) expone un contexto histórico, antropológico,
semiótico y sistémico en el cuál se justifica la pertinencia de la investigación, como parte de la ingeniería de
sistemas. La segunda parte del trabajo (Capítulos 4-5) expone la metodología sistémica utilizada para investigar los
patrones emergentes en las representaciones sígnicas mesoamericanas, y finalmente, la validación de la
metodología, modelando un fenómeno simbólico del ritual mesoamericano actual.

The book makes a critical comparison of fundamental trends in modern epistemology with the epistemological concerns of critical theory of the Frankfurt School. It comprises five chapters, which refer to phenomenology, structuralism and poststructuralism, modernism and postmodernism, systems’ theory and critical realism.
It follows the course of development of modern epistemology, considering basic conceptions such as dialectics, theory and practice in science, and the potential for a political epistemology based on the arguments of critical theory. It can certainly be used as a textbook because each chapter tallies with a major trend in modern epistemology, and provides a concrete analysis of the comparison it draws with the work of leading figures of the Frankfurt School such as Horkheimer, Adorno and Habermas.
The present volume addresses the reader of political theory, epistemology, social theory and it also raises key questions on methodology in science and research. Therefore, it can prove beneficial for students, researchers and academics that deal with issues of theory, practice, and method in science. The contents of the volume were meticulously constructed in order to be of practical use both for undergraduate and postgraduate students, and each chapter includes basic graphs  that condense the basic argument for each thematic circle on modern epistemology and methodology.
The book contains unpublished critique and information provided to the writer in recent interviews she conducted with Jürgen Habermas (providing analysis on systems theory), William Outhwaite and Stefan Müller-Doohm (both the latter clarified issues and contributed valuable information on critical realism and the Frankfurt School, respectively).

This paper assumes that Hans Jonas' biological philosophy, although developed several decades ago, is still relevant to the contemporary reflection upon the meaning of life. Moreover, his thinking reaches beyond the sphere of philosophy, and has relevance for biological and scientific research.

Ludwig von Bertalanffy was one of the first masterminds and advocates of a "general system theory". Trained in philosophy and in history of arts, he also concerned himself with biology. His early works in those fields, most of the time unknown to the non-German speaking audience, are essential in order to understand the genesis and the meanings of his "general system theory", which we prefer to describe as a "general systemology". We here examine them and provide a comprehensive insight into the diverse roots of the concepts that led Bertalanffy to his later achievements. This paper is thereby devoted to the scientific, philosophical and ideological sources of his "theory", as well as to the motivations and logic which governed its genesis. Our study concentrates particularly on the following points: the context of "general crisis" in which he developed his intellectual schemes; his "perspectivist" philosophy of knowledge; his elaboration of an "organismic" theoretical biology; his non-reductionist approach to the problem of mathematization of biology and his theory of organic growth; and his sketch of a general theory of "open systems" as nucleus and way of legitimising a "general systemology".

.....the double bind as constituting an entirely new, non-material, principle of evolution, major conceptual revisions may need to be made in our general understanding of evolution as contained within the “modern evolutionary synthesis”.

KEYWORDS:
behavior, communication, context, contradiction, deutero-learning, double bind, epistemology, evolution, incompleteness theorum, kinesics, learning, logical type theory, metacommunication, metamessages, metatheory, mystification, paradox, relationships, schismogenesis, schizophrenia,  scientific elegance, symmathesy, teleology, temporality, transcontextual, transdisciplinary, trauma

Aix-Marseille Université Laboratoire d'Archéologie Méditerranéenne Préhistorique Europe/Afrique (UMR 7269) Maison Méditerranéenne des Sciences de l'Homme 5, rue du Château de l'Horloge BP 647, 13094 Aix-en-Provence (France) 3 4 REMERCIEMENTS RINGRAZIAMENTI 5 LES PIERRES DRESSÉES DE L'AIRE CORSO-SARDE. ETUDE SYSTÉMIQUE DES TERRITOIRES. LE PIETRE FITTE DELL'AREA CORSO-SARDA. STUDIO SISTEMICO DEI TERRITORI. 6 9

Teori sistem umum sebagai disiplin ilmu dasar baru merupakan sebuah bidang logis-matematis yang memiliki pokok bahasan pada perumusan dan pengambilan kesimpulan prinsip-prinsip yang berlaku untuk sistem secara umum. Teori sistem umum berlaku untuk semua ilmu yang terkait dengan sistem. Sebagai contoh, peran teori sistem umum seperti teori probabilitas, yang dengan sendirinya merupakan doktrin matematika formal namun bisa diterapkan sangat berbeda pada bidang termodinamika, eksperimen biologis dan medis, genetika, statistik asuransi jiwa, dll. Pentingnya teori sistem umum dapat dicirikan dengan cara yang berbeda. Sejauh ini, ilmu pasti yang berupa sistem hipotetis-deduktif matematis, hampir identik dengan fisika teoritis karena merupakan satu-satunya hukum ilmiah sistematis yang telah diakui secara universal dan tanpa batasan hukum fisika dan kimia. Meskipun demikian, dasar-dasar sistem hukum yaitu hipotetis-deduktif juga terdapat pada bidang lain seperti ekonomi nasional, demografi, dan bidang biologi tertentu. Contohnya, rujukan yang sering digunakan untuk bidang biologi ataupun ekonomi yaitu 'equilibria'. Terminologi ini sesungguhnya masih tetap tidak jelas mengenai makna dari konsep 'keseimbangan'. Jika diterapkan di luar bidang besaran fisik, maka konsepsi semacam ini tetap tidak lebih dari sekedar metafora yang kabur dan menimbulkan berbagai persepsi. Beberapa upaya untuk menyatukan hukum-hukum di bidang non-fisik telah mendapat pengakuan universal. Namun hukum-hukum tersebut tetap tidak memiliki konsistensi sistem fisika dan mengandung ketidakjelasan latarbelakang metodologi. Sebagai konsekuensi dari perkembangan ilmu fisika yang dominan, untuk menyatakan hukum yang pasti pada bidang apapun dan menjadikannya sains yang tepat harus direduksi menjadi fisika dan kimia. Ini tentu saja merupakan prinsip metodologis dari apa yang disebut pandangan mekanistik. Terlepas dari pertanyaan apakah prinsip mekanistik dibenarkan, fakta tersebut tidak berlaku di bidang sains yang luas. Sebagai contoh, proses yang terjadi pada organisme hidup dapat diisolasi dan digambarkan dalam istilah dan hukum fisika-kimia. Hal ini telah dilakukan melalui biofisikan dan biokimia modern. Tatapi ketika sampai pada suatu titik vital, ditemukan bahwa pada dasarnya biofisikan dan biokimia modern adalah persoalan organisasi, ketertiban, dan keteraturan yang diakibatkan oleh interaksi sejumlah besar fenomena fisis-kimiawi yang sangat rumit. Untuk memahami secara rinci, organisasi fisis-kimiawi dari sel yang paling sederhana sekalipun jauh diluar kapasitas biologi. Kesimpulannya adalah tidak mungkin untuk menyatakan hukum yang tepat untuk fenomena biologis dasar, seperti metabolisme, pertumbuhan, morfogenesis, perilaku, dan lain-lain, karena hal-hal tersebut terlalu rumit untuk memungkinkan pemahaman menyeluruh dan analisis terhadap semua proses yang terlibat. Hal ini pada kenyataannya merupakan pendapat umum dalam biologi saat ini. Hal yang sama pun berlaku, bahkan lebih untuk fenomena sosiologis karena kompleksitas mereka yang lebih tinggi dan ketidakmungkinan menyelesaikannya menjadi peristiwa fisis-kimiawi.

Quantum field theory applied to the electromagnetic field describes all physical phenomena involving electrons and photons , and is called quantum electrodynamics, abbreviated QED.  Stuart, Takahashi, and Umezawa (1978; 1979) propose a mechanism of human memory and consciousness consistent with quantum field theory which they have called quantum brain dynamics (QBD).  They go on to describe a theory in which the polarization of water molecules plays an exceptional part, and on the macro level produces a single resonant water "macromolecule" in bodies of living, water based creatures. Within this polarized, non-local H2O quantum field is embedded an electromagnetic field in the form of a plasma  field.

This theoretical paper discusses the application of general systems theory to supply chains and the management of supply chains. Applying general systems theory to supply chains and their management allows them to be abstracted from their real world complexity. The abstraction process uses the view of general systems theory developed by Yourdon E. [1989. Modern Structured Analysis, Yourdon Press, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ] in his seminal work on the fundamental characteristics of information systems. In particular, Yourdon's (1989) four general systems theory based principles for information systems are applied to supply chains and their management. Through a theoretical discussion informed by relevant research literature it is considered that a more fundamental view of supply chains has been developed. That is, the application of the four general systems theory principles developed to supply chains is supported and this application provides deeper insights into how supply chains operate. This in turn should allow better supply chain management processes to be developed. Crown

The monograph presents the scientific results of a study devoted to the system-structural analysis of semiotic modeling of reality on metaphysically neutral structural foundations. The book is addressed to everyone interested in metaphysics, logic, methodology, and philosophy of science.

This paper explains the magnetic effect of the electric current from the observed effects of the accelerating electrons, causing naturally the experienced changes of the electric field potential along the electric wire. The accelerating electrons explain not only the Maxwell Equations and theSpecial Relativity, but the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation, the wave particle duality and the electron’s spin also, building the bridge between the Classical and Quantum Theories. The changing acceleration of the electrons explains the created negative electric field of the magnetic induction, the electromagnetic inertia, the changing relativistic mass and the Gravitational Force, giving a Unified Theory of the physical forces. Taking into account the Planck Distribution Law of the electromagnetic oscillators also, we can explain the electron/proton mass rate and the Weak and Strong Interactions.

Architecture is historically regarded as the art and science of space-making: to build a structure is to unfold it throughout space, so it can accommodate human related affairs and functions. However architecture, giving shape to space, also modifies place. Like any other material entity from quark to cosmos, architecture, before being space-interacting, is necessarily place-based. A long philosophical tradition spanning from Aristotle to Heidegger, offers place ontological primacy over space; nevertheless, the majority of architects mainly focus on space, leaving a deepened insight into questions of place to the attention of geographers, sociologists, anthropologists, philosophers, environmental psychologists, landscape architects or ecologists. Only current ecological trends are making architects slightly more sensitive about questions of place. In order to appreciate differences and understand the consequences between space-related and place-related approaches to architecture, I maintain that architects should develop a global systemic perspective, conceiving the physical reality as a whole of interacting physico-chemical, biological, social and symbolic systems. If a systemic perspective is adopted, architecture, which is often considered an autonomous symbolic system, will have to acknowledge its interdependence towards the physico-chemical, biological and social environment conceived of as encompassing whole. Consequently, a paradigm shift from space to place is inescapable for architecture, since space is an abstract concept, which mainly carries self-referent symbolic values, while place is a more pragmatic concept, which also carries physico-chemical, biological and social values. Focusing earlier on place rather than on space, architecture could be more integrated within physical reality, hence would be more responsive to environmental, social and economic dynamics. In order to accommodate this change, a systemic definition of place -place as system -is given. An introductory enquiry into concepts of place and space is also given, in addition to ontological and epistemological considerations.

Gustav Fechner, the German experimental psychologist, coined the term psychophysics in 1860, publishing the first mathematical equation to model human consciousness.  Fechner assumed that any future approaches to consciousness would include mathematical and physical underpinnings. In 1995, the cognitive scientist and philosopher David Chalmers coined the phrase "the hard problem" as being that of connecting consciousness with some physical substrate.  According to Chalmers, "The really hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. Most existing theories of consciousness either deny the phenomenon, explain something else, or elevate the problem to an eternal mystery."  As Chalmers points out, unfortunately, the modern scientific community has not yet produced a model of consciousness supported by mathematics and physics, thus no progress in Fecher's "psychophysics." 
However there is growing interest among the scientific community in string theory, the only branch of mathematical geometry that has successfully explained recent discoveries in high energy particle physics. The mathematical proof of string theory requires the existence of a ten dimensional universe.  But in trying to map consciousness, science continues to limit its data search within time and the three spatial dimensions, ignoring six of string theory's ten dimensions  Perhaps because mainstream science tacitly limits itself to four of the ten dimensions, progress has come to a dead end. Accordingly, the most widely accepted theory among neurophysiologists is that consciousness is somehow a "byproduct" of the electrical sparking of neurons, an accidental epiphenomenon of the activities of nerve-filled wet meat.
This paper considers data beyond the four dimensional constraints of the scientific establishment. It is my contention that many recorded accounts of philosophers, mystics, and shamans can and should be considered as data. My thesis is that these accounts express experience and observation within one or more of the additional dimensions predicted by string theory. Any advance in understanding consciousness must take into account not only the language and domains of mathematics, particle physics, and neurobiology, but also the experiential domains of philosophers and mystics. It is in regarding data from these multiple domains of inquiry that a new model of consciousness will emerge. In this paper I hypothesize a psychophysics of consciousness, woven of strands from mathematics, mysticism, and physics, as well as contemplative participatory practice, to address and solve "the hard problem."

Based on biological insights, Ludwig von Bertalanffy coined general systems theory (GST) and later expanded his perspective, exploring what GST could mean for other disciplines and other types of systems. We make a case for the relevance , or rather, the importance, of GST for coming to a new understanding of the resilience of social-ecological systems and the possible forms of adaptive gov-ernance that might increase such resilience. After analyzing the conceptual structure of the resilience paradigm and of GST, we identify concepts in resilience thinking where GST provides new confirmation or modifies the perspective: complexity, evolution, self-organization, and adaptation. We discuss post-Bertalanffy developments in the interdisciplinary and twinned fields of systems theory and complexity studies that can provide bridging concepts between GST and resilience thinking. In conclusion, we emphasize the need for both cognitive and institutional resilience to foster adaptive governance. We highlight the management of couplings between systems and the switching between forms of understanding and forms of organization, where self-organization and more centralized forms of steering can alternate and combine.

My main objective in this paper is to analyse the concept of self-referentiality as it is developed in the autopoietic systems theory. Autopoietic theory considers this kind of self-relation as a minimal form of life. Apart from the conceptualization of this self-referential closed system, I want to track this concept in history of philosophy, not from Spinozian monism or Husserlian phenomenology, as it is usually referred philosophically, but to German idealism, from its beginning in Kant, in his regulative concept of teleological Organism, to Hegelian speculative philosophy where autopoietic structure refers to the Notional deployment as the Idea within his philosophical System.
In his Science of Logic (from notional derivation of categories), Notion’s dynamic is the living organization of the Idea, which Philosophy of Nature is an exemplar of it (from self-organization of the matter and physical processes to finally, Life, in the form of living organism).
My Thesis is that the Hegelian philosophical system is the first systematic inquiry which deals with the logic of autopoiesis. In his Science of Logic, he starts with Being, Nothing and Becoming which is nothing but autopoietic relation of Being itself, as being Thought, up to the Notion, as the explicit materiality of thought (or, ideal self-relation of externality of nature).
Although we have to keep in mind of the opposition between modern scientific discourse and Hegelian speculative philosophy, the concept of Autopoiesis nevertheless gives us opportunity to analyse the identity within difference between the two. The concepts of operational closure and the autonomy of the living organization are the two key concepts in dynamic systems theory and enactive approach in cognitive science which are empirically (and, epistemologically) plausible in reference to Hegelian ‘onto-logic’ of positing the presuppositions.
However, there is a paradox we have to keep in mind in operational closure. As Luhmann noted, operational closure is a condition for openness of the system; such systems are viewed as teleological in a functionalist state since they are directed toward this state. Such a minimum of self-relating is an elementary form of life through which the limit between Inside and Outside can emerge (Hegel even terms the organism as the “unity of inner and outer”). Autopoiesis is a logical bootstrap, a loop: a network produces entities that create a boundary. A self-distinguishing entity exists when the bootstrap is completed. This entity has produced its own boundary. It bootstraps itself out of a soup of chemistry and physics. This ontological paradox is the unity-in-difference of matter and life, reality and ideality, nature and thinking. This, and none other is the old metaphysical question of  how can we account for a whole that is larger than the mere sum of its parts.
In Hegelian view of the Notion, it is also not (pre-)given but created – it posits itself by itself – it posits its own presuppositions.  Autpoietic theory renews circular causation in efforts on conceptualizing operational closure as a mechanism capable of explaining the phenomenon of self-production.
Our goal is to emphasize, that our interpretation of Hegelian Notion and its relating to externality of Nature as its self-relating, i.e. notional determination, isn’t the usual one, because it also takes into account the concept of negativity (lack, division, split etc.).
Hegel approaches life as a specific type of unity: in distinction from an entity that is opposed to or separated from its concept and in opposition to an object unrelated to itself, life is the name of a unity of concept and reality and, more specifically of subject and object or, to put it in the utmost general terms: a unity of soul and body. It seems that the living consists in the attaining and sustaining of such a unity and in realizing the “concept in its existence.”

Usual management theories focus on phenomenological aspects of organisations and management. Systems theory offers a different approach, which can be used to analyze social systems, uncover their internal logic and structure, and to understand their interactions with other social systems. This paper shows how to apply the systems approach to management. This analysis reveals that the management is a sub-system of the organisation, which deals with memories of the organisation, and organizes as an information sub-system and possibly as an identity sub-system of the organisation.
We discuss how the systems theory interpretation helps in understanding some management related issues: the growth of management, charismatic leadership, and the trade-off between complexity and standardisation.

Systems and complexity theories are transversal approaches that provide a new way of thinking as a response to the traditional reductionist approach that emerged with modernity. Complexity and transdisciplinarity are particularly relevant in an increasingly diverse, networked, uncertain, and fast-changing world. Examples are drawn from personal experience in academia, cross-cultural experiences, and the arts.

In this heavily annotated article the provocative thesis is submitted that there is something fundamentally wrong with Western Sinology, or 'Chinakunde', or 'Zhongguoxue' (as distinct from 'Hanxue', which is a kind of old-fashioned philology). 'China experts' either pretend to be knowledgeable about everything related to China, in which case they cannot be taken seriously, or - eventually - admit not to be scientific all-rounders with respect to the country, in which case they cannot be called 'China experts'. The author, who graduated in Sinology from Leyden University and in economics from Erasmus University Rotterdam, not only believes that the study of China has to be taken to a higher level (a belief he expects few tenured professors of Chinese Studies/History will share); he also explains how this long overdue task can be accomplished. Sinologists should take the complexity turn. They should treat China as a 'Ganzheit' (not: 'Gesamtheit'), as a territory-bound, history-moulded and culture-soaked totality of identifiable yet interdependent (f)actors, as a whole intimately interconnected with its numerous parts, as a hypercomplex system of complex, adaptive and non-linear systems of political, military, legal, economic, financial, social, medical, educational, artistic or other nature. Firmly distancing itself from multidisciplinary research (which in practice is a matter of juxta- rather than composition), the new study of China requires a well-thought-out, balanced division of labour. Close collaboration with ICT-driven, China-oriented experts in the natural, social and human sciences willing to co-operate with each other is a sine qua non for comprehending the country that seems to be moving to the centre stage of world politics. The study of China should be mile-wide and mile-deep. The heyday of Sinology is yet to come!
An earlier version of this highly critical but undeniably constructive paper was rejected out of hand by the editors of leading 'Chinese/Asian Studies' journals. The author claims to have reason to suspect them (and other so-called China experts) of being 'bought by China'!

Bertalanffy's so-called "general system theory" (GST) and cybernetics were and are often confused: this calls for clarification. In this article, Bertalanffy's conceptions and ideas are compared with those developed in cybernetics in order to investigate the differences and convergences. Bertalanffy was concerned with first order cybernetics. Nonetheless, his perspectivist epistemology is also relevant with regard to developments in second order cybernetics, and the latter is therefore also considered to some extent. W. Ross Ashby's important role as mediator between GST and cybernetics is analysed. The respective basic epistemological approaches, scientific approaches and inherent world views are discussed. We underline the complementarity of cybernetic and "organismic" trends in systems research within the unitary hermeneutical framework of "general systemology".