In 1984, Niklas Luhmann published Soziale Systeme in which he applies the idea of autopoiesis (= self-production) to social systems. Abstracted from its biological connotations, the concept of autopoiesis leads to a sharp distinction between different kinds of autopoietic organization, i.e. between life, consciousness and communication. According to Luhmann, the relationship between social systems and human beings cannot be adequately analysed except by taking into account that they are environments for one another. If this theoretical background is accepted, the concepts and theory of socialization need to be revised. Luhmann takes issues with classical notions such as internalization, inculcation, or ‘socialization to the grounds of consensus’ (Talcott Parsons). After a historical overview of social systems research and general systems theory, it is indicated how communications trigger further communications and realize the autopoiesis of social systems. In the second part of the article, the distinction between social systems and psychic systems is used to discuss issues crucial to socialization theory. Both a revision of the concept of socialization, and lines for an empirical research programme are proposed in accordance with Luhmann’s theory of social systems.

Key words: niklas luhmann, autopoiesis, social systems, communication, socialization, education

This article first sketches the transition from first-order to second-order cybernetics. Next it presents an analysis of George Spencer Brown’s Laws of Form. Against this background, Niklas Luhmann’s constructivism is afterwards analyzed in more detail. It is thereby shown how second-order observations “work” within modern society. Relevance: This article presents an analysis of the constructivist position developed by Niklas Luhmann in his late writings.

In this paper, I argue that John Dewey’s analysis of the transaction of organism and environment can be read as an account of the construction processes that lie beneath all human activity. Dewey’s work anticipates, if it does not explicitly articulate, much of what is important and interesting about constructivist epistemology and constructivist pedagogy. The paper is devoted to a reconstruction of the formulation of this transactional constructivism, and to an analysis of its consequences for a constructivist understanding of communication and education. Relevance: The paper is devoted to a reconstruction of the formulation of John Dewey’s transactional constructivism.

This article analyzes the ego/alter ego constellation of social interaction. Every social interaction constitutes a situation with double contingency, which is recognized as such by both sides: both know that both know that one could also act differently. The circularity of the relationship brings about indeterminacy; self-commitment would presuppose that others commit themselves and vice versa. How is this infinity problem solved? How can we account for the possibility of social interaction, and social order? Both Talcott Parsons and Niklas Luhmann have devoted considerable attention to the theorem of double contingency. Here, I analyze their theoretical formulations on this topic.

Key words: double contingency, expectations, social interaction, social systems theory, time.

Organizations are able to motivate and coordinate human activities in special ways. In modern society, organizations are present in almost every social subsystem. From the end of the eighteenth century onward, education also predominantly takes place in school organizations. In this article, the consequences of this organizational framing of education are examined. How are schools able to organize processes of education, although education depends so much upon face-to-face interaction? How is education itself affected by the fact that it takes place in an organized context? This article deals with these questions, while making use of a systems-theoretical framework that highlights the autopoietic autonomy of educational organizations in modern society.

Key words: systems theory, autopoiesis, organization, education, Niklas Luhmann

To describe the basic characteristics of modern society, two levels should be distinguished, viz. the structural and the cultural level. According to the late Talcott Parsons, the dominant value pattern of modern society is the cultural pattern of instrumental activism. What is valued in modern society is not passive adjustment to the exigencies of the environment, but increasing the freedom of action within the environment, and ultimately control over the environment. It is no longer adaptation to the environment, but adaptation of the environment to social needs. On the structural level, new patterns of societal differentiation have emerged. According to Niklas Luhmann, the pattern which characterizes modern society is one of functional differentiation. Functional subsystems impose their particular perspective on the world. The environment is perceived through different lenses (e.g., through a political, legal, economic, educational, or scientific lens). These different perceptions are incommensurable. As a consequence, society cannot control its overall impact on the environment. Its structural and cultural characteristics limit its sensitivity vis-à-vis the environment. Relevance: This paper provides an overview of Niklas Luhmann’s analysis of the autopoietic autonomy of the societal system.

Excerpt: The introduction of compulsory schooling – in Western Europe during the long 19th century, reaching from Prussia (1764) to Belgium (1914) – has strengthened the role of organized education. How has this fact, viz. that education now takes place in an organized setting, influenced the nature of educational interaction? I want to tackle this complex question with the help of a systems-theoretical framework, inspired by the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann. Departing from Luhmann’s writings on organizational theory, as well as from some of his shorter articles on education, this chapter focuses on the analysis of educational interaction in organized social systems.

The rise of scientific specializations and disciplines depends on the formation of specialized scientific communities. The establishment of specialized scholarly journals facilitates the formation of such communities. Publications, especially articles in specialized journals, have become institutionalized as the “ultimate” form of scientific communication. Specialized journals fulfill a key role in the scientific disciplines. This paper provides an analysis of these communication practices within the discipline of sociology, and sketches how these communication practices influence scientific research.

This paper analyzes the causes and motives for the transition to a communication-based theory of social systems in the late work of Niklas Luhmann. In the first part of this paper, I present a brief sketch of advances in the field of cybernetics and systems research. I give special attention to some basic concepts introduced by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela: autopoiesis, organizational closure and enaction. In the second part, I discuss how these ideas may contribute to a ‘conceptual revolution’ in the social and behavioral sciences. In the late work of Niklas Luhmann, attempts to incorporate the idea of autopoiesis in his own social theory resulted in the preference for a communication-based, instead of an action-based, theory of social systems. Moreover, given the current transition to the information age or the knowledge society, it can also be argued that structural changes in society nowadays favor the rise of a communication-based theory of social systems.

Key words: Niklas Luhmann, Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela, autopoiesis, enaction, communication