Expert vs. influencer: Philosophy presented under conditions of second-order observation

Human Affairs ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 470-478
Author(s):  
Hans-Georg Moeller ◽  
Rory O’neill ◽  
Chiang Hio Fai
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Critical Philosophy ◽  
Social Contingency ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wide Range

Abstract Philosophy is presented in a wide range of forms, none of which can be convincingly claimed to be the “genuine” one. Historically speaking, there is not one “proper” way of doing philosophy, evidencing what may be called the social contingency of philosophy. This paper aims to provide a “critical” philosophy of today, in the Kantian sense of a philosophy that reflects on the conditions of its possibility, and thereby acknowledges the limitations they impose. Conceptually, our approach is grounded in Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory, in which “functional differentiation” and “second-order observation” are two crucial characteristics of modern society. The paper discusses how presentations of philosophy align themselves with the second-order observation mechanisms of the specific social systems in which they are “hosted.” This paper deals in particular with two such systems: academics and social (or mass) media. These forms of presenting philosophy produce two different kinds of philosophy presenters: the expert and the influencer.

Systems Theory and Journalism

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armin Scholl ◽  
Maja Malik
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
Macro Level ◽  
Niklas Luhmann ◽  
External Observer

Observing, describing, and analyzing journalism as part of society requires theories on a macro level. Unlike normative theories, which criticize journalism with respect to its achievements and failures within society, systems theory operates with the concept of function in a non-normative sense. Based on the groundwork of Talcott Parsons’ theory of social systems, Niklas Luhmann developed systems theory further and radicalized it by strictly avoiding any kind of structural conservatism. His approach is built on the assumption that social systems operate autonomously on the basis of the functional differentiation to their environment. Macro-level systems, i.e., societal systems, fulfill unique functions for and within society. Functional autonomy and singularity make a modern society highly efficient but force each system to rely on the functional performances of all other societal systems. Hence, societal systems are structurally coupled and interdependent. Epistemologically, systems do not exist as ontological units but are strictly observer-related, be the observer the system itself or an external observer, such as the scientific community is. In journalism research, Luhmann’s systems theory has been applied to journalism as a societal system. Several competing approaches with different perspectives on the system observed (journalism, the mass media, or the public sphere) have been developed with respect to identifying the basic characteristics on which the system operates. Despite their differences they have this in common: journalism is not considered the sum of individual journalists and their (individual) way of working, instead, the systems-theoretical perspective is holistic. However, compared to theories of professionalism, which is also a holistic concept, systems theory neither identifies journalism with the profession of journalism, nor commits it to professional journalism. Instead, the structure of journalism is flexible, i.e., functionally equivalent, as long as its function is fulfilled. This function can be specified: journalism provides society periodically with current, independent, factual, and relevant information. Empirically, systems theory helps defining the population of journalists by deducing it from its function. Unlike mere empirical approaches, which arbitrarily draw samples from an unknown population, it is possible to clearly draw distinctions between journalism and other forms of public communication, such as public relations, advertising, propaganda, or lay communication. Still, it is challenging to operationalize such an abstract theory, as it is not specially made for hypothesis-driven research.

Sincerity, authenticity and profilicity: Notes on the problem, a vocabulary and a history of identity

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 575-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Georg Moeller ◽  
Paul J. D’Ambrosio
Keyword(s):  
Identity Formation ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
Second Order ◽  
The Self ◽  
Niklas Luhmann ◽  
Basic Vocabulary ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Mind

This essay attempts to provide a preliminary outline of a theory of identity. The first section addresses what the sociologist Niklas Luhmann has called ‘the problem of identity’, or, in other words, the mind–society (rather than the mind–body) problem: In how far can the internal (psychological) self and the external (social) persona be integrated into a unit? The second section of the essay briefly defines a basic vocabulary of a theory of identity. ‘Identity’ is understood as the existentially necessary formation of a coherence between the ‘self’ (the ‘I’ as it is experienced in thoughts and feelings), its body and its social ‘persona’ (the individual person with its social attributes). Three different major paradigms of identity formation are distinguished from one another: a sincere identity is constructed through a firm commitment of the self to its social roles; an authentic identity is constructed through the creation of a social persona on the basis of one’s unique and original self; a ‘profilic’ identity, as we call it, is shaped by successfully presenting a personal profile under conditions of second-order observation as they prevail, for instance, in the social media, but also in other contemporary social systems. In the third section of the essay, we present a sketch of the historical sequence of these three paradigms of identity. Although these paradigms are not mutually exclusive and can coexist, it seems that sincerity flourished in pre-modern society, while authenticity came to prominence along with the functional differentiation of modern society and is now, along with the increased significance of second-order observation, gradually overshadowed by the influence of profilicity.

A Group Awaiting Death: The Social Systems Perspective on a Naturally Occurring Group Situation

1983 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Starker ◽  
Joan E. Starker
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Task Structure ◽  
Systems Perspective ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
The Social ◽  
Group Situation ◽  
Imminent Death

The decline and imminent death of an individual in a hospital's intensive care unit led to the creation of a transient group composed of family and friends. The dynamics of this tragic group are explored using the concepts provided by Social Systems theory. Ambiguity of the task structure and its inherent frustrations, fluidity of leadership and power, and failure of a utopian defense are all discussed as contributors to subsequent dissension and splitting. The social systems perspective provides a useful tool for understanding this naturally occurring group situation.

Determinants of family meetings in private family businesses

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akif Cicek ◽  
Rüveyda Kelleci ◽  
Pieter Vandekerkhof
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
Family Firms ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Governance Mechanisms ◽  
Social Systems Theory ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Family Governance ◽  
Family Meetings ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Family

PurposeFamily governance mechanisms serve to govern and strengthen relations between the family and the business, as well as the relationships between the members of the business family itself. However, despite agreement on the importance of adopting family governance structures, explicit research on the determinants of family governance mechanisms is currently missing. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to uncover the determinants of family meetings. In order to do so, the social systems theory is used to unravel several determining factors of this crucial form of family governance mechanisms in private family firms.Design/methodology/approachThe authors perform a qualitative study by conducting semi-structured interviews in eight Belgian private family firms in order to discover the antecedents of the implementation of family meetings. The authors use a pattern-matching technique as an analytical strategy.FindingsThe findings of the study highlight the importance of “soft,” relational, qualitative issues as antecedents of family meetings as opposed to previous research on family governance, which predominantly focused on “hard,” quantitative measures (e.g. family ownership). The findings of the study also provide novel insights into the origins of the family component (i.e. family meetings) of family business governance.Originality/valueWhile the current literature has only focused on describing the different types of family governance and their positive consequences for the family firm, the authors take a step back to explain why family meetings, as a form of family governance, are adopted in the first place. Second, the authors demonstrate the instrumentality of the social systems theory in understanding the family's needs that necessitate the implementation of family governance mechanisms.

Moral communication and legal uncertainty in small and medium enterprises

Kybernetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Winczorek
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
Theoretical Issue ◽  
Sociology Of Law ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Moral Communication ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

PurposeThe links between moral communication and legal communication have long been studied in sociology of law. Little has yet been said about moral communication invoking when communication in the legal system is impossible, ineffective or uncertain. The paper fills this gap to demonstrate that systems theory-based sociology of law can effectively recognise the role of moral communication in such situations.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents an empirical study of moral communication in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). It focused on situations when SMEs' interactions with function systems, particularly the legal system, result in irremovable legal uncertainty. The data depict strategies of managing such uncertainty and were obtained in a paths-to-justice survey of 7,292 owners and managers of SMEs and 101 in-depth interviews. The findings are interpreted using the author's concept of “uncertainty translation”, rooted in Luhmann's systems theory. It suggests that business organisations such as SMEs deal with the ubiquitous uncertainty in their operations by translating it into a convenient type.FindingsThe study distinguishes between formative and absorbing moral communication and finds that both types play a role in steering the uncertainty translation mechanism in SMEs. Six scenarios of invoking moral communication are identified in SMEs dealing with legal uncertainty. In such scenarios, moral communication facilitates the translation of business uncertainty “away from law”. Under some circumstances, this, in turn, leads to latent systematic results, reflexively affecting the legal system, the economic system and the SMEs.Research limitations/implicationsIn its core argument, the study is based on qualitative material. While it identifies empirical scenarios of invoking moral communication, it does not report the prevalence of these scenarios due to methodological limitations.Originality/valueThe study results pose questions related to the staple theoretical issue in post-Luhmannian social systems theory: functional differentiation. If moral communication–a type of communication not linked to any social system–can produce far-reaching, systematic results that affect function systems, then the functional differentiation thesis should be less pronounced than Luhmann typically stressed. This said, the paper argues that the contradiction between the findings and Luhmannian theory of morality is only apparent and may be reconciled.

An allergy of society: on the question of how a societal “lockdown” becomes possible

Kybernetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörg Räwel
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Social Action ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Functional Differentiation ◽  
Moral Authority ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Moral Communication ◽  
The Social ◽  
Individual Differentiation

Purpose Given the form of functional differentiation of modern society, a far-reaching coordination of functional systems as a dissolution of their heterarchical relationship to each other, as was apparently possible in the social “lockdown” during the corona pandemic, should have been extremely unlikely. The purpose of this study is to explain how this was nevertheless achieved. Design/methodology/approach From the perspective of systems theory, social action in principle does not present itself as a problem but as a solution to (latent) social problems. In the sociological analysis presented here, it is therefore precisely a matter of uncovering or pointing out those (changed) social structures in which a social “lockdown” appears as a solution. Findings The paper explains that with the emergence of social media through applications such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok, a new force is establishing itself at the level of society as a system. It is one that is characterized by being highly vulnerable to moral communication. A susceptibility to morality manifests, on the one hand, through an individual differentiation of society made possible by social media – for example, in the emerging Chinese social credit system – and, on the other hand, through the specific communicative structures of the social media themselves. It is argued that social media, in the form of a moral authority with a lasting effect on society as a whole, make a significant contribution to realizing the social “lockdown.” Originality/value The originality of the paper results from the fact that the emergence of a new social phenomenon (“lockdown”) is explained.

Social Systems on the Cross

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marinos Diamantides ◽  
Anton Schütz
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
The Other ◽  
Social Darwinism ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Individual Identity ◽  
Human Consciousness ◽  
The One

While early 20th century Social Darwinism has been discredited, post-WW2 theories have re-emphasized Darwin's notion of the environment. On this basis, and substituting social systems for natural species, society has been analyzed as a system-in-evolution, a machinery that, reflexively or self-referentially, produces itself at every moment anew. Modern society, according to social systems theory, continuously makes itself, thanks to countless simultaneous communications taking place at once. There are two equally disquieting lessons here. On the one hand, modern law, understood as the communicative system that applies the distinction lawful/unlawful to everything that gets in its way, is placed within an environment constituted by other communicative social systems (the economy, politics, religion, art etc) and the conditions created by those. On the other hand, social systems at large are separated from the realm of human consciousness, i.e. of collective or individual identity (the ‘psychic systems’). While ‘social' and ‘psychic’ systems never meet, they rely on absolute indifference with respect to their other side, as only this indifference enables especially social systems to assure their (superior) fact-creating potential. Our own project consists in spelling out the implications of this scissile sense of ‘meaning’, at once understood as a shorthand for what is actually happening (fragmented communications) and as consciousness-as-identity (imaginary unity).

Integrating instrumental and normative stakeholder theories: a systems theory approach

2019 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladislav Valentinov ◽  
Anna Hajdu
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
Stakeholder Theory ◽  
Institutional Economics ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Function System ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Content Type ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Economic Function

Purpose The stakeholder theory encompasses instrumental and normative varieties whose mutual relationship remains unclear and exhibits a classic tension between rational self-interest and moral motivation. The purpose of this paper is to develop a strategy for navigating this tension. Design/methodology/approach Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory is concerned with the limited ability of social systems to codify, and be receptive to, the complexity of the environment. Drawing on this theory, the paper juxtaposes the codification problems of two types of social systems: the for-profit firm and the economic function system. Findings This juxtaposition allows to identify four firm behavior patterns, two of which can be aligned with instrumental and normative stakeholder theories. If the codification capacity of the economic function system is assumed to be sufficient, the codification problems of the for-profit firm are shown to specify the range of applicability of the instrumental stakeholder theory. Dropping the above assumption is shown to specify the range of applicability of the normative stakeholder theory. Originality/value The argument offers a fresh way of understanding the institutional economics foundations of the stakeholder theory. Given that the systems-theoretic idea of codification reflects the functioning of the real-world institutions, the argument shows that both instrumental and normative stakeholder theories reflect the institutional texture of the modern society in distinct but equally legitimate ways.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document