I was just gently nudged by Daniel on facebook, this time kindly my contribution in the form of a set of building afford to (formulated although Daniel unequal elegant), but I could throw in "society of society" does not look: Here again, instead of - as I think this is somewhat in the blog concept right - a lecture by Alois Hahn (probably hope that everyone knows and - now - Emeritus Professor and former Trier - always - had an open admirer of Niklas Luhmann) as part of the lecture series "Strangers and poor" (or just my incomplete records of this paper), which I attend a few weeks, the opportunity and the honor. I hope this first record is labyrinthine as a building or house widely enough;). I write the corresponding my notes just in such a way as I understand it, since I am this topic is not really in it and this entry also only the selection of a selection of a selection ... must remain. Who has more knowledge of the subject or even present at the lecture was, I should like to improve.
As shown in the title, it was about the changing Luhmanschen terms of inclusion and exclusion, or between center and periphery, where one was the key questions of whether, in a communication-based society (-stheorie) at all possibilities of exclusion are.
The introductory remarks on the terminology I reel just before time. Important was in any case with the conversion of segmented society in high culture, the distinction center / periphery became important. Whether it involved was participation / exile, city / province, or the problem of control of the periphery by the patrimonial center. [Weber, Tenbruck, Wallenstein and now as Bourdieu fall victim to the fast forward] In systems theory perspective on modern societies, the question arises, where center and periphery are doing here and what could mean "exclusion" in this context. been understood in contrast to an "early" Luhmann, at the center and periphery as well as spatial distinctions are (at least as I understand it I), were there for the "later" organizations or "institutions" that form the center. Example: The church as a center of religion. Or the courts as centers of the right (probably the only case for which Luhmann himself his thoughts about the center and periphery, actually formulated, other works remain in the geographical meaning). Or hospitals as centers of medical subsystem. It is of course that must be aligned in the organizations / centers, not all communications to the orientational difference of the subsystem - nor that all focused on the guiding difference communication also takes place in the center. Centers monopolize the relevant communication is not, each hand-washing reproduced after all the medical system. But Only centers determine the self-reproduction or Selbstthematisation of the subsystem. operations in the guiding difference are in the center and periphery. But only those operations centers take the form of jobs and careers, etc.. Professionalism is possible in the periphery, in the center but necessary. Only in the center is determined as the guiding difference individual events of the "world" can be assigned. An interesting paradox was tap (or was it already Luhmann?) In the application of the issue on the policy. Although it is the State (sapparat) as Centre, as important, though, is communicating what is happening in the periphery - including the state's only "servants". Before I come again to above mentioned questions, here is an amusing quote by Alois Hahn, with whom he defended the system theory for People who complained about their lack of transferability to the Middle Ages: "With a pair of scissors you can play any organ, but that is no objection against a pair of scissors. With an organ can not be snowing, but that is no objection to an organ. "
There remains the question of whether one is possible in subsystems and communications company constructed exclusion, and how exactly one has to imagine. After all I can leave the Church or be excommunicated from it, but I can still continue my communication to (!) - what's it - Align immanence and transcendence, pray, for example. I can be banned from hospitals, but forbid me not to just wash my hands or anything to eat, what I find on the sidewalk. Even in the dramatic case of the killing - probably a very sharp form of - exclusion I can no longer communicate, but it is difficult to prevent others to target their communications to me. Exclusion in the control theory, exclusion of communication - to opinions or suggestions?
0 comments:
Post a Comment