theorieblog.de | complexity by method: Niklas Luhmann's timeliness in the financial crisis
The diagnosis of any changes, the therapy remains the same. Whether mad cow disease tangled 2010 or swine flu, donations scandal or expenses mess, Subprime Mortgage or Sovereign Debt Crisis - runs in business or politics something horribly wrong, you will hear the same Remedurrhetorik always "greater transparency" and "stringent regulation"! And generally, it follows the same always measure: tangled 2010 formal methods with additional baffles. Would Niklas Luhmann be music to his ears still alive, which would have response patterns. Although he does not associated the measure precisely the hope of more appropriate decisions, which fills its present trumpeters the jaws, but he saw them as well late confirmation for his old assertion that it is the function of a process for creating legitimacy.
Luhmann's legitimacy by procedure appeared in 1969. Sociologist ventured with the booklet an invasion in the philosophy of law, and that was not the only provocation with which he made in the legal profession for irritation. Particularly hard to swallow was his claim for them, the legitimacy of process bears no relation to the appropriateness of decisions. According to Luhmann, there was in the process on the "how" of the conclusion, not the "what" tangled 2010 of the state Come-on. It is to interpret an "illusion," method "as a means to the end of the truth", and this illusion was historically "caused typical tangled 2010 of the Enlightenment underestimation of the problem of complexity." Luhmann took so unlike him his most prominent critics, Jürgen Habermas imputed, a antitechnokratischen tangled 2010 point a: method does not increase the rationality, they reduce complexity. At least at first glance, this statement today much to recommend it.
The call for greater tangled 2010 transparency and stricter regulation has little, but much to do with knowledge with confidence. It is supported tangled 2010 by the expectation that formal methods could prevent personal failure or at least reduce. Thus, Luhmann's development thesis seems to be coming true, in modern society, bump-personal trust to its limits and will be replaced by trust in the system. Procedures are in Luhmann's understanding of processes for production and projection of system trust. The functional performance is to sketch out the way to a decision, without prejudging the decision itself. They channel behavior, eliminate alternatives, absorb uncertainty - in Luhmann's standard formula precisely: they reduce complexity.
Here, with the standard formula, Luhmann actuality, however, starts to crumble. It is precisely where greater transparency tangled 2010 and stricter regulation be prescribed or exacerbated formal procedures in the name, complexity is not reduced, but increased. To understand how this is possible, you have to read Luhmann's book against the grain, and to this, offers his distinction of procedures and Ritual.
According to Luhmann, the method decisions tangled 2010 legitimized by its open-endedness, which is reduced step by step in the procedural process. The ritual, however, is closed from the beginning, decided to be the desired output. There is nothing in him to decide, rather decisions are subsequently celebrated tangled 2010 or evoked previously. Luhmann does distinguish from a functional tangled 2010 perspective and thus includes the possibility that something that comes as a formal method, functionally equivalent to a ritual. The possibility becomes a reality as soon as a process is a decision, but does not manufacture.
In legitimation by procedure Luhmann cites two significant tangled 2010 examples: political elections "with a fixed unit list" and "show trials". Significantly, the examples are because in 1969 it was clear, as he had to understand it: the problem of ritualization of procedures was located on the other side of the Iron Curtain. tangled 2010 From today's perspective, a more uncomfortable conclusion arises: It is in the middle of Luhmann's western modernization story. His theory of operation has an ironic Vanishing Point, which is probably lost on him. The stronger the legitimating power of process is, the more shifted their function from production to presentation of decisions - to the point that even informal decisions made need to get a formal dress. In other words, to one-sided or too much faith in process promoted the transformation of processes in rituals.
From Luhmann's functionalist point of view you could now say: If this scenario actually occur, the trust in proceedings by itself would fall back to a more effectual measure. You could even ar
The diagnosis of any changes, the therapy remains the same. Whether mad cow disease tangled 2010 or swine flu, donations scandal or expenses mess, Subprime Mortgage or Sovereign Debt Crisis - runs in business or politics something horribly wrong, you will hear the same Remedurrhetorik always "greater transparency" and "stringent regulation"! And generally, it follows the same always measure: tangled 2010 formal methods with additional baffles. Would Niklas Luhmann be music to his ears still alive, which would have response patterns. Although he does not associated the measure precisely the hope of more appropriate decisions, which fills its present trumpeters the jaws, but he saw them as well late confirmation for his old assertion that it is the function of a process for creating legitimacy.
Luhmann's legitimacy by procedure appeared in 1969. Sociologist ventured with the booklet an invasion in the philosophy of law, and that was not the only provocation with which he made in the legal profession for irritation. Particularly hard to swallow was his claim for them, the legitimacy of process bears no relation to the appropriateness of decisions. According to Luhmann, there was in the process on the "how" of the conclusion, not the "what" tangled 2010 of the state Come-on. It is to interpret an "illusion," method "as a means to the end of the truth", and this illusion was historically "caused typical tangled 2010 of the Enlightenment underestimation of the problem of complexity." Luhmann took so unlike him his most prominent critics, Jürgen Habermas imputed, a antitechnokratischen tangled 2010 point a: method does not increase the rationality, they reduce complexity. At least at first glance, this statement today much to recommend it.
The call for greater tangled 2010 transparency and stricter regulation has little, but much to do with knowledge with confidence. It is supported tangled 2010 by the expectation that formal methods could prevent personal failure or at least reduce. Thus, Luhmann's development thesis seems to be coming true, in modern society, bump-personal trust to its limits and will be replaced by trust in the system. Procedures are in Luhmann's understanding of processes for production and projection of system trust. The functional performance is to sketch out the way to a decision, without prejudging the decision itself. They channel behavior, eliminate alternatives, absorb uncertainty - in Luhmann's standard formula precisely: they reduce complexity.
Here, with the standard formula, Luhmann actuality, however, starts to crumble. It is precisely where greater transparency tangled 2010 and stricter regulation be prescribed or exacerbated formal procedures in the name, complexity is not reduced, but increased. To understand how this is possible, you have to read Luhmann's book against the grain, and to this, offers his distinction of procedures and Ritual.
According to Luhmann, the method decisions tangled 2010 legitimized by its open-endedness, which is reduced step by step in the procedural process. The ritual, however, is closed from the beginning, decided to be the desired output. There is nothing in him to decide, rather decisions are subsequently celebrated tangled 2010 or evoked previously. Luhmann does distinguish from a functional tangled 2010 perspective and thus includes the possibility that something that comes as a formal method, functionally equivalent to a ritual. The possibility becomes a reality as soon as a process is a decision, but does not manufacture.
In legitimation by procedure Luhmann cites two significant tangled 2010 examples: political elections "with a fixed unit list" and "show trials". Significantly, the examples are because in 1969 it was clear, as he had to understand it: the problem of ritualization of procedures was located on the other side of the Iron Curtain. tangled 2010 From today's perspective, a more uncomfortable conclusion arises: It is in the middle of Luhmann's western modernization story. His theory of operation has an ironic Vanishing Point, which is probably lost on him. The stronger the legitimating power of process is, the more shifted their function from production to presentation of decisions - to the point that even informal decisions made need to get a formal dress. In other words, to one-sided or too much faith in process promoted the transformation of processes in rituals.
From Luhmann's functionalist point of view you could now say: If this scenario actually occur, the trust in proceedings by itself would fall back to a more effectual measure. You could even ar
No comments:
Post a Comment