Function, Meaning, Complexity: The Epistemological Premisses of Niklas Luhmann's 'Sociological Enlightenment'

Zolo, Danilo

doi:10.1177/004839318601600109

Cited by 24 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…En contraposición a las confusiones entre los continuadores de la obra luhmanniana, las críticas a la teoría y sus conceptos centrales han sido consistentes y diáfanos a través del tiempo (Zolo 1986;Wagner 1997;Viskovatoff 1999;Gibert y Correa 2001;Wan 2011;Tada 2020). Una muestra destacada de ello es el trabajo de Padgett y Powell, donde se critica que el concepto de autopoiesis de Maturana se reduce a su definición, pues "nada se dice en relación a la dinámica de cómo un sistema llega a ser tal" (2012,56), un sesgo típico del programa científico cibernético.…”

Section: Lo Que Proponemos Como Sugerencias úTiles Son Las Siguientesunclassified

Fundamentos de la explicación en ciencias sociales: revisitando el constructivismo de Niklas Luhmann (20 años después)

Galassi

Venables

2021

RHV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, it is argued that one of the foundations of NiklasLuhmann’s theory of social systems, namely that it has no ontology, would prevent the elaboration of explanations in sociology. Because the theory has a formal-logical foundation, which does not presuppose ontology, there are insurmountable obstacles to achieving this objective. For this reason, it is valid to wonder about the merit of a theory that, after 20 years, insists on not aligning itself with ontological premises in a robust way and suggests, therefore, a refusal to integrate sociology within the set of factual sciences. However, we think that the richness of Luhmann’s work allows a dialogue with the mainstream of contemporary theoretical practice. Three rules about what “should not be done” are revalidated from this analysis to philosophically base a theory in sociology and a key suggestion to overcome the problem of explanation in Luhmann’s sociology: social science seeks and directs its activity towards discovery and the use of substantive, real distinctions that also enrich the factual content of statements about social reality.

show abstract

Section: Lo Que Proponemos Como Sugerencias úTiles Son Las Siguientesunclassified

Fundamentos de la explicación en ciencias sociales: revisitando el constructivismo de Niklas Luhmann (20 años después)

Galassi

Venables

2021

RHV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first step is the quest for 'The nature of sociological knowledge', which seems to be unknown even to authors of articles of the same name (Zolo, 1986;Vanderstraeten, 2002), who conclude that:…”

Section: -The Nature Of Anglophone Sociological Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Between these two extremes, some significant typical reaction patterns to the theory can be identified (Walby, 2007: 457): 2. Rejection of it on the grounds that it gives up humanistic, enlightenment, and emancipatory values, which should be maintained (Zolo, 1986;Wagner, 1994;Wagner, 1997) or because it abstracts from individuals to an absurd degree (Habermas, 1985;Miller, 1994); 3. Use of the theory as a 'toolbox, out of which one can take individual concepts and theorems depending on one's immediate goals, without having to worry about the rest of the theory' (Izuzquiza, 1990); 4.…”

Section: -The Nature Of Anglophone Sociological Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Les Deux Angleterres et le Continent. Anglophone sociology as the guardian of Old European semantics

Roth

2013

J. sociocybern.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite its influence in Central European sociology, N. Luhmann’s Social Systems theory remains a marginal branch of international sociology. In this paper, the theory questions the reasons for its own marginality in general and for its marginality in the Anglophone centers of sociology in particular, with the latter still being a surprise against the background of the theory’s cybernetic roots in the US. The theory arrives at the conclusion that, while Europe, or ‘the continent’, is still perceived as old compared with the Anglophone new world(s), it still is Anglophone sociology that preserves ‘Old European’ semantics. Sociology in continental ‘Old Europe’, however, seems to have a chance of slowly being acquainted with a new, post-enlightenment mindset focused on semantics and communication rather than on humans and action.

show abstract

“…Although radical, Luhmann's work has several inconsistencies that need to be considered. Zolo (1986Zolo ( , 1990, cites several problems with the theory, the most serious stemming from his arguments regarding the shortcomings of Maturana and Varela's original work. Zolo notes that`he [Luhmann] embeds autopoiesis into his general theory without having dealt with its shortcomings' (Zolo,1990).…”

Section: The Sociological Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Are organizations autopoietic? A call for new debate

Kay

2001

Syst. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Function, Meaning, Complexity: The Epistemological Premisses of Niklas Luhmann's 'Sociological Enlightenment'

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Fundamentos de la explicación en ciencias sociales: revisitando el constructivismo de Niklas Luhmann (20 años después)

Fundamentos de la explicación en ciencias sociales: revisitando el constructivismo de Niklas Luhmann (20 años después)

Les Deux Angleterres et le Continent. Anglophone sociology as the guardian of Old European semantics

Are organizations autopoietic? A call for new debate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About