In Robert Trappl’s opening remarks on the first day of this conference he raised the issue of the usefulness of the theories that we debate with each other at these conferences every two years. Stafford Beer in his address made a similar point when he suggested that we confront the way things are. I follow their lead by suggesting that we really know quite a lot about how to solve social problems and how to make social organizations more effective. But for some reason we are not using the knowledge we have. Why we do not make better use of our current knowledge is the issue that I would like to explore. My method of exploring will be to investigate the history of ideas in the field of cybernetics and general systems theory.

In the last two decades an intellectual movement associated with the term “second order cybernetics” has taken shape within the systems theory and cybernetics community. The ideas associated with this movement promise to have an important impact on the philosophy of science. However, the ideas have spread slowly. This paper reviews the strategies that have so far been employed in attempts to win acceptance for second order cybernetics. Four strategies are discussed: develop the new point of view; develop applications of the new ideas to show their usefulness; reconstruct the philosophy of science incorporating the new ideas; and contrast the philosophical origins of cybernetics with that of the dominant scientific world view.

Key words: Second-order cybernetics, epistemology, knowledge, constructivism, scientific revolution.

Cybernetics in the United States has evolved through three identifiable periods. In the first period of the 1950s and 1960s there was a primary concern with designing control systems and with building machines to emulate human reasoning. In the second period of the 1970s and 1980s the focus of attention was on the biology of cognition and constructivist philosophy. In recent years increasing attention has been given to social systems. Whereas the work on the biology of cognition required that attention be shifted from what was observed to the observer, the recent interest in social systems requires an emphasis on multiple observers and their beliefs. The third period of social cybernetics or the cybernetics of conceptual systems is illustrated by considering constructivist cybernetics as a conceptual system created to promote the evolution of certain social systems in a preferred direction.

In recent years the field of cybernetics has been described as consisting of two bodies of work created in two time periods: first order cybernetics from the late 1940s until about 1975, and second order cybernetics from the mid 1970s to the present. Each period lasted about 25 years. What comes next? I shall describe here what I think comes next and how the new point of view emerged, at least in my own thinking. Relevance: Second order cybernetics was in part an effort to reform science itself by adding attention to the observer. What comes after second order cybernetics is related to the evolution of science and the evolution of constructivism.

From time to time, a small group of people makes an effort to transform society by promoting a set of ideas. Examples include any revolutionary or liberation movement, a new theory within the social sciences, or a new political or social program. This paper argues that in order for an intellectual movement to be successful, both the ideas and the tactics used to promote it must be suited to the society in which the movement occurs. Ideas that are rapidly and widely adopted in one society may have little impact in another society. To be accepted a new message must fit the local culture. Furthermore, the way that ideas are presented and advocated may be quite different in different societies. The intent of this paper is to add a consideration to the philosophy of science. At least in the social sciences theories should fit not only the phenomenon described but also the way the receiving society changes itself. Relevance: Second order cybernetics and constructivism are quite similar. The article describes second order cybernetics as an intellectual movement that has struggled for acceptance. The basic ideas of this intellectual movement are compared with the movement for communitarianism advocated by Amitai Etzioni.

Heinz von Foerster was the founder and director of the Biological Computer Laboratory (BCL) at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. BCL existed from 1957 to 1976. In 1976 Heinz retired and moved to California. One revealing story about Heinz and the Biological Computer Laboratory concerns the Mansfield Amendment, which led to the closing of BCL. I was a graduate student at the University of Illinois from the late 1960s until 1975.

George Soros’s reflexivity theory is quite compatible with second order cybernetics. Indeed his work shows how to apply ideas in second order cybernetics to economics, finance, and political science. This paper briefly reviews three theories of reflexivity in cybernetics. It provides an introduction to Soros’s version of reflexivity theory and reviews applications in economics and finance. Soros’s approach to economics is based on different assumptions about information and about human behavior. His approach to finance is more holistic than most current work in finance. He does not emphasize mathematical models but rather sees finance as a human player game with himself as a participant. The paper concludes that Soros’s work is a very important contribution to and expansion of contemporary social science.

Key words: equilibrium theory, reflexivity theory, causal influence diagrams

Key events in the history of cybernetics and the American Society for Cybernetics are discussed, among them the origin of cybernetics in the Macy Foundation conferences in the late 1940s and early 1950s; different interpretations of cybernetics by several professional societies; reasons why the U. S. government did or did not support cybernetics in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s; early experiments in cyberspace in the 1970s; conversations with Soviet scientists in the 1980s; the development of “second order” cybernetics; and increased interest in cybernetics in Europe and the United States in the 2000s, due at least in part to improved understanding of the assumptions underlying the cybernetics movement. The history of cybernetics in the United States is viewed from the perspective of the American Society for Cybernetics (ASC) and several questions are addressed as to its future.