Systems theory (Luhmann)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Luhmann's systems theory is a variety of systems theory of the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann , in which the world as fundamentally from autopoietic systems (by him is considered to consist, which are clearly separated from their environment difference called). This had a special influence on sociological systems theory as a sociological theory in which society is described and explained as a “comprehensive social system that includes all other social systems”. It describes how social issues arise under these conditions and how different social systems are differentiated by functional means .

The theory is completely separate from traditional ways of thinking and starting points. Luhmann rejects ontological and transcendental philosophical presuppositions as well as the concept of the subject . The initial thesis “There are systems” / “There are self-referential systems”, which Luhmann believes is not associated with any epistemological doubt, is excluded. Luhmann's theory is in addition among other reasons to be particularly complex because it the self respect be treated as subject and at the same time referring to himself.

The development of the sociological systems theory as the main work of Luhmann in monographs consists in laying the foundations of the terms and distinctions ( Social Systems , 1984), in the subsequent descriptions of different differentiated social systems and finally in the explanation of society as a comprehensive social system ( Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft , 1997).

Basic theoretical decisions

Instead of starting from units (e.g. human individuals) that form individual systems through their relationships and thus ultimately participate in society, Luhmann starts from a very abstract level of events and the formation of differences (see Difference (Luhmann) ). Events ("operations") follow in a specific way and in specific media to previous similar events. These modes of operation - which are closed to other types of operations - create systems, and with these systems their system-specific environments arise. The mode of operation of social and psychological systems is autopoietic , and the operations form closed cycles: the operations of different systems do not interpenetrate, operations of one system cannot directly follow operations of another. This is independent of the fact that acting people and the consequences of actions are observed. The comprehensive social system “society” is differentiated into further social systems (including: economy, law, science, politics, religion, education). Luhmann uses the evolutionary process of functional differentiation of the social system into different social systems as a central component of his sociological theory and in this context refers to historical forms of society and the history of social developments.

The operations through which social systems arise are described as communications that follow through specific media and in specific ways to previous similar communications. The communication operation is described as a unity of information, communication and understanding; Information, communication and understanding are selections for Luhmann. In this sense, the autopoietic operation of communication is not a transference or action, but rather a "processing of selection" or a "synthesis of three selections". The concept of communication manages without the concept of intentionality and linguisticity . Communication as a synthesis of the selections information, communication and understanding cannot be traced back to individual consciousnesses or individuals - even if it is necessary for the continuation of communication to attribute the communication as an action and to describe communication in a simplified manner using the concept of action. Communications - not people, thoughts, or individual actions - are the ultimate elements of social systems.

Consciousnesses are described as psychic systems. The ultimate elements of psychic systems are thoughts. Thoughts follow thoughts in a medium that Luhmann describes as meaning . Consciousnesses, like social systems, are described as systems that process meaning; their limits are limits of meaning. The view of society as a comprehensive social system is evolutionary. Systems and environments - and thus also systems and other systems - arise and develop through simultaneous operation. Time plays an essential role in explaining social processes.

A starting point of the theory is the thesis (positing) of the radical separation of the systems in relation to their operations. At the level of experience and in relation to consciousnesses (as psychic systems), the impossibility of the one (“ego”) being able to experience the thoughts of the other (“age”) as such and identically is named with the establishment of this separation, and that the one consequently cannot connect his thoughts immediately and directly to the thoughts of the other. Related to this is the experience that not everything that is thought is actually said, that is, that not all thoughts enter into communication; and vice versa, the impossibility of fully understanding everything that has been communicated and of processing it further in the form of thoughts. Not all possibilities of understanding that arise through communication are actually realized. In addition, communication is strictly understood as a process that is overarching and cannot be explained through recourse to individual consciousnesses.

The theory itself (and its terms) is also circular: “Society” is not viewed as something that exists and can be described and explained by a theory that is independent of it, but rather as including its own theory. The theory of the comprehensive social system arises in the society which it describes and explains. Luhmann ties in with the social term “old European tradition”, but distinguishes himself primarily through the way of thinking of circularity from the old European tradition, from the classic two-valued logic and the ontological conception of reality. He is concerned with the new description of the key messages of the old European tradition. The delimitation of traditional epistemological and sociological views, the introduction of paradoxes (instead of traditional logic) into the theory and the related examination of literature and the history of traditions occupy a large space in Luhmann's texts. A leading question that arises from this new approach, and which Luhmann frequently addresses when presenting the theory, is the question “whether and how communication can be an operation that leads to the emergence and operative closure of an independent social system with its own, not perceptible (!) but only denotable environment [...] leads to the question of how an autopoiesis of the social is possible ”.

Access to Luhmann's theory

Luhmann's systems theory is a self-referential product, so that an understanding of parts of systems theory almost always requires an understanding of other parts. Accordingly, Luhmann sometimes found it difficult to determine the order of the chapters in his publications. Therefore, a first introduction to systems theory often causes difficulties.

Epistemological requirements

Luhmann agrees with the basic assumptions of the constructivist way of thinking, which were particularly discussed at the time. In it, reality is seen as the result of a construction process that is traced back to one's own conditions of knowledge and not to the conditions of a “reality” independent of knowledge . Knowledge processes are initiated, but they are also then under their own, e.g. B. physical conditions. The distinction as to whether this impetus comes from “inside” or “outside” is made afterwards and, like everything else, is subject to your own conditions. A "reality" independent of the cognitive process, from which all cognition is triggered and to which all cognition is directed, is not used as part of explanations and theories in constructivism. Instead , a special meaning is attached to the concept of the observer who constructs his realities.

Luhmann, however, makes use of an epistemological setting by saying that “there are systems”. This positing can be understood as ontological, that is, as the assertion of a fixed point independent of knowledge, to which Luhmann relates his theory. The assumption that there is no knowledge-independent reality for the observer is based on Luhmann's statement, with which knowledge-independent reality is asserted: "There are systems".

Differentiation from action and from the subject as a central concept

With the everyday idea of ​​acting people who form systems through their relationships, no access to Luhmann's systems theory can be found. Immediately insoluble contradictions between Luhmann's sentences and the generally understood views arise. On the other hand, an approximation can be achieved if Luhmann's texts are not immediately related to everyday observations, but are initially understood as descriptions and explanations of highly abstract events, and if two levels are distinguished: (1) the level of constitution, i.e. the level the emergence and persistence of social systems and (2) the level of observation, i.e. the level of (self) observation and (self) description that occurs through the systems themselves.

  1. Social systems arise and are maintained through communication (as an abstract operation; not as human action);
  2. The self-observation and self-description of the systems happens as the attribution of action .

“To the question of what social systems consist of, we give the double answer: from communications and their attribution as action.” “Communication is the elementary unit of self-constitution [of social systems], action is the elementary unit of self-observation and self-description of social systems. “ Communication as a concept of systems theory describes an abstract operation and not an action in the generally understood sense. Attribution is also an abstract operation. Luhmann thus explains that communication - an overarching operation that synthesizes selections - is nevertheless perceived as action. Systems theory by no means excludes the fact that acting people are observed, but it is explained differently: as the results of the specific operations of systems. That means: "People" and "actions" occur at the level of observation, but the level of constitution (origin) cannot be described and explained for Luhmann with these terms.

The background to this is Luhmann's goal to give up “classic”, “old European” and “subjectivist” traditions of thought and to think society completely differently (and not “classically logical”). For Luhmann, subject and action are not “elementary units” from which social systems are formed (see above). The explanation of this goal takes up a lot of space in Luhmann's texts and is repeated in various ways in many places. “... with the help of the idea that systems with their own operations can produce a description of themselves and observe themselves, the connection between communication, action and reflection can be detached from subject theory (the theory of the subjectivity of consciousness). ““ If you see people as part of the environment of society (instead of as part of society itself), that changes the premises of all questions of tradition, including the premises of classical humanism. This does not mean that humans are assessed as less important compared to tradition. Anyone who suspects that [...] has not grasped the paradigm shift in systems theory. "

Properties of systems

Difference between system and environment instead of difference between part and whole

Common ideas about systems relate to individual parts that are connected to form a whole or that connect themselves to form a whole. According to these ideas (not represented by Luhmann), a society consists of individual people and their relationships. Some of these ideas come from ancient times. Social processes such as emergence or organization were explained with social or divine powers.

For Luhmann, on the other hand, the first criterion is the fact that he asserts that a system is in principle differentiated from its environment. So there is always something that belongs to the system and something that does not belong to it (environment). Other systems also belong to the environment. The entire system theory is based on this difference between system and environment .

Autopoiesis

Another essential prerequisite for the existence of a system is the ability to (re) establish itself, i.e. autopoiesis . The motto in Luhmann's sense is: If it doesn't make itself, it's not a system. Luhmann referred to the concept of the Chilean neurobiologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela . These applied the concept of autopoiesis to organic processes, meaning that systems produce themselves with the help of their own elements. Living things are the original examples of autopoietic systems. For the observer, life happens of its own accord without any external manufacturing process intervening. Luhmann applies this concept not only to biological systems, but also to psychological systems and especially social systems. These also reproduce themselves with the help of their native operations (for a further explanation of these operations: see below)

Closed operations

Luhmann understands operation as the reproduction of an element of an autopoietic system with the help of the elements of the same system. A system arises and sustains itself by connecting operations to one another. When organic processes connect to one another as operations, an organic system is created . When thoughts connect to one another as operations, a psychic system (also: "consciousness system") is created. When communications connect to one another as operations, a social system (also: “communication system”) is created.

A system exists as long as operations allow the next similar operation. Operations must be connectable . How an operation works depends on the previous operation. Therefore these systems are seen as operationally closed. So z. E.g. in the psychic system there is always consciousness within consciousness: consciousness is the mode of operation of psychic systems. Non-system operations such as communications cannot connect to it. Accordingly, the contents of consciousness cannot be connected to organic operations or vice versa. “As little as an organism can live on beyond its skin…” or “an eye can establish nerve contact with what it sees”, just as little can “a psychic system operatively extend its consciousness into the world”. This exclusion even applies to the environment of your own body. However, this does not mean that each of these systems could exist independently of one another. "Self-referential closeness is (...) only in an environment, is only possible under ecological conditions." The task of systems theory is therefore to explain how it is possible that all these system types are connected and in contact despite irreducible closeness.

Biological systems

Biological systems are not the main point of consideration, but are also part of the completion of Luhmann's system theory . This means the body of a living being. Just like social systems, a biological system distinguishes itself from its environment, e.g. B. through the limit of the body. And just like social systems, it operates permanently, namely by living. Reproduction is also a property of the biological system, just like the other two types of system.

Mental Systems

According to Luhmann, a psychic system is understood to be a process of consciousness such as takes place in a human brain , for example . The psychic system also only exists as long as it operates, i.e. carries out a process. When the psychic system stops, it no longer exists. According to Luhmann, a psychological system cannot communicate itself, but it is a prerequisite for this.

Social systems

According to Luhmann, a social system is nothing more than communication . The terms communication and social system are so closely linked that they can practically be used synonymously. Whenever something communicates, it is a social system, and conversely, every social system must communicate (operate) in order to exist. It is expressly not people who communicate, but communication communicates itself. The body of a person (as a biological system) with a consciousness (psychological system) is in many cases a prerequisite for the functioning of a social system, i.e. communication, but a The human being is not the social system itself, which often leads to a lack of understanding of Luhmann's system theory. Accordingly, according to Luhmann's theory, a person cannot communicate, since only social systems can do this. Examples of social systems are e.g. B. society, a family, a conversation or a short encounter, but not the people themselves.

Luhmann once explained what he understands by social systems in the following words:

“A social system comes into being whenever an autopoietic communication context always arises and is demarcated from an environment by restricting suitable communication. Social systems therefore do not consist of people, nor of actions, but of communication. "

Communication as the operation of social systems

The concept of communication at Luhmann is based on the theory of the operational closure of the systems relative to the native operations while informational openness to their environment. The operations of the psychic systems - that would be the thoughts of the consciousnesses - can never leave one's own system. As a result, they cannot enter into communication and become a “part” of the communication process. Only through structural couplings can z. B. Communications are "initiated" indirectly via the environment. This means that neither a “direct transfer” of thoughts is possible (for example into the consciousness of a conversation partner), nor a “direct influence” on the course of the communicative event. The resulting communication concept differs significantly from classical theories such as the sender-receiver model , whereby it sometimes comes to comparable results (e.g. "thought is not said, said is not heard [...]"). It contradicts the intuitive everyday understanding of communication on which many people are based, according to which you (i.e. your consciousness) are "the one" who communicates.

The assumption of operational unity makes it necessary to start out in communication from a completely different type of event from operations of consciousness . Since it can also be recognized and described as a systemic event, it must also be assigned a radical independence and isolation from the processes in consciousness. This thesis becomes clear in Luhmann's statement: “Man cannot communicate; only communication can communicate. "

This distinction between psychological (conscious) and social (communicative) reality can be understood as an attempt to reconcile radical constructivist approaches, as well as the subjectivism of Husserl's phenomenology, with the observation of sociality. Both schools of thought describe the consciousness as closed and subsequently have to explain the way in which closed consciousnesses are in contact with one another. The explanation of sociality is made possible with Luhmann by the concepts of emergence and the elaboration of the communication concept .

Communication media

Luhmann's systems theory seeks explanations for the observation that despite these conditions, which initially make communication very unlikely, communication still takes place. Writing, for example, can be understood as a medium that makes communication more likely. But physical presence and work also help to take place, because here you can practically not avoid the "selection offers" of the communicators ( you cannot not communicate ).

Social events also become more probable because the establishment of communication is based on less complex foundations. According to Luhmann, socially relevant communication typically takes place via so-called symbolically generalized communication media such as power, money, law, love, art or truth. They simplify communication by subjecting it to their respective schematism (e.g. have power / no power, pay / not-pay, right / wrong, love / not-love, etc.). They therefore make communication more likely (and the corresponding social functional systems more successful).

A system-specific code acts as a guide for all system-specific communications and makes them recognizable as belonging to the system. In the economic system, the main distinction between paying and not paying increases the likelihood that a new payment will be made for each payment - this would be an example of connecting one system-specific communication to another. (Communication here is not to be seen as a human act, let alone as a speech act.) This works via the generalized communication medium of money, which links the last payment with the current one. If money were no longer accepted as a communication medium, the economic system in question would have lost its connectivity.

Social and psychological systems as systems that process meaning

Social systems are systems that process meaning. According to Luhmann, “sense” is their actual, irreducible and irreducible form of reality for psychological and social systems. “Not all systems process complexity and self-reference in the form of meaning; but for those who do, there is only this possibility. For them, meaning becomes a world form… ”. Luhmann's concept of meaning is based (with a few essential differences) on the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl.

Sense can be understood as a designation for the way in which social and psychological systems reduce complexity . The boundary of a system to the environment thus marks a complexity gradient between environment and system. In a social system, the reduction of complexity compared to the environment creates a higher order with fewer possibilities ( emergence ). By reducing complexity, social systems mediate between the indefinite world complexity and the complexity-processing capacity of psychic systems.

Types of social systems

Luhmann distinguishes three types of social systems: interactions , organizations and societies.

Functional differentiation

Every social system distinguishes itself from the environment with the help of a two-valued (binary) code and in this way maintains the process of self-reproduction. In business these are: pay / not-pay ; in politics: power / no power ; in religion: immanence / transcendence ; in the legal system: right / wrong ; in the science system: true / false ; in the (mass) media: information / non-information u. a.

criticism

Many contributions to the critical discussion relate to the demarcation of action as a concept in a sociological systems theory. The question arises as to what use is a sociological theory that does not provide concepts for acting people. Luhmann and his advocates, however, see this approach without acting people as the new and advanced thing in the formation of theories about societies.

The connection of (theoretical) explanation and the observed phenomena is another subject of criticism. The critics see in the universal applicability the reason for the uselessness of the new system-theoretical explanations for concrete practical problems. Luhmann and his proponents see the extensive applicability of the new systems theory as a strength. Thus, with the help of this theory, everything can actually be explained that can be described as social.

The systems theory according to Luhmann is also controversial because of its high level of conceptual abstraction. It represents more of a collection of terms than a theoretical structure: “Behind the facade of immense difficulty and a complicated set of mechanisms of artistic terminology there is only a handful of simple sentences: The world is complicated, everything is connected with everything, people can only endure a limited degree of complexity. “There is neither a precise and generally accepted definition of the functionalist system concept, nor are there any explicit hypotheses beyond the solution of the four problem areas according to the AGIL scheme at Parsons .

The fact that the claim of the systems theory consists only in delivering functional-structural descriptions, follows also its self-understanding as not critically oriented theory in the sense of the critical theory. In this context, Luhmann's controversy with Jürgen Habermas is known .

In addition, systems theory is reproached for a hidden teleology : By evaluating the goal orientation of a subsystem to maintain the entire system as a positive function, a hidden evaluation and legitimation of the social status quo occurs. Already Robert K. Merton had spoken of latent (hidden) and manifest (explicit) functions of a system and thus rejected the functional unit of a system.

Since systems each work according to their own laws, Luhmann considers attempts to intervene or control one system in another to be fundamentally problematic: The economy, for example, can only be controlled by politics to a very limited extent, or vice versa. According to Luhmann, the law of autopoiesis places narrow limits on efforts to shape social relationships in a rational, ethical and equitable manner - therefore Luhmann is considered politically conservative compared to Jürgen Habermas or Ulrich Beck, for example .

However, this assessment has been criticized for its part as superficial, since, for example, central terms (neo-) conservative politics such as organism , nation and dominant culture in Luhmann's system theory are treated as observer-dependent constructions, and not as given or even desirable conditions. Karl-Siegbert Rehberg sees Luhmann as a theoretician of de-hierarchization and decentralization . According to Karl Mannheim's distinction between conservative and traditionalist, Luhmann can at best be classified as traditionalist. Luhmann was “not a conservative, not an anti-enlightener, and certainly not reactionary - because the active restoration of the past is perhaps even more ridiculous than the active anticipation of possible futures. But he was a great author of stabilization (through change) after all, ”said Rehberg.

Further development

Luhmann's system theory is mainly received in Germany and Italy. In Germany, the sociology professors and students of Luhmanns Rudolf Stichweh , Peter Fuchs , Dirk Baecker , Elena Esposito , Armin Nassehi , Helmut Willke and André Kieserling are mainly working on the further development of sociological systems theory . In the context of text linguistics , system theory has been further developed by Christina Gansel (2011).

Areas of application

Numerous action sciences such as psychology , psychotherapy , counseling , pedagogy , social work and organizational development refer not only to general systems theory as the basic theory , but also explicitly refer to their orientation towards Luhmann's concept of systems. His definitions and models are used to explain phenomena in social, educational, therapeutic and organizational fields of application. Luhmann's system theory is also used as a theoretical background for the formation of hypotheses and for planning interventions. This reference is often marked with terms such as “systemic”, “systemic-constructivist” or “systemic-solution-oriented”.

Trivia

In 1969, when he was accepted into the newly founded Faculty of Sociology at Bielefeld University, his research project was: “Theory of society; Duration: 30 years; Costs: none. ”28 years after this application was made (1997) he published his work Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft , which can be viewed as a comprehensive theory of society; he died a little later (1998).

See also

literature

Primary literature (selection)

Secondary literature

Introductions

  • Claudio Baraldi, Giancarlo Corsi, Elena Esposito : GLU. Glossary on Niklas Luhmann's theory of social systems. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1999.
  • Frank Becker , Elke Reinhardt-Becker: Systems Theory. An introduction to history and cultural studies. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2001.
  • Margot Berghaus : Luhmann made easy. Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2003.
  • Michael Gerth: Luhmann for beginners. Multimedia introduction to systems theory by Niklas Luhmann. Software, 2005 (online) .
  • Georg Kneer , Armin Nassehi : Niklas Luhmann's theory of social systems. An introduction. 1993, ISBN 3-8252-1751-5 . (4th edition 2004)
  • Detlef Krause: Luhmann Lexicon. Stuttgart 2001.
  • Walter Reese-Schäfer : Niklas Luhmann for an introduction. (= Introduction. Volume 205). 4th edition. Junius, Hamburg 2001, ISBN 3-88506-305-0 .
  • Christian Schuldt: Systems Theory. European Publishing House, Hamburg 2003. (2nd edition 2006)
  • Helmut Willke : Systems Theory. An introduction to the basic problems of social systems theory. 4th, revised. Edition. Stuttgart 1993.

Critical discussion

  • Alex Demirovic (Ed.): Complexity and Emancipation. Critical social theory and the challenge of Niklas Luhmann's systems theory. Munster 2001.
  • Hans-Joachim Giegel, Uwe Schimank (Ed.): Observer of Modernity - Contributions to Niklas Luhmann's "The Society of Society". Frankfurt am Main 2003.
  • Hans Haferkamp , Michael Schmid (ed.): Sense, communication and social differentiation. Contributions to Luhmann's theory of social systems. Frankfurt am Main 1987.
  • Markus Holzinger, Niklas Luhmann's system theory and wars. In: Journal of Sociology. Vol. 43, No. 6, 2014, pp. 458–475.
  • Dirk Martin: Overly complex society. A criticism of Niklas Luhmann's systems theory. Munster 2009.
  • Peter-Ulrich Merz-Benz , Gerhard Wagner (Hrsg.): The logic of the systems. On the criticism of Niklas Luhmann's systems-theoretical sociology. Constance 2000.

Others

  • Dirk Baecker : Why systems? Berlin 2002, ISBN 3-931659-23-2 .
  • Gralf-Peter Calliess , system theory Luhmann / Teubner. In: Sonja Buckel , Ralph Christensen, Andreas Fischer-Lescano : New Theories of Law. Lucius and Lucius, Stuttgart 2006, ISBN 3-8252-2744-8 .
  • Thomas Latka: Topical social system . Heidelberg 2003, ISBN 3-89670-321-8 .
  • Holger Lindemann : Constructivism, systems theory and practical action. An introduction to educational, psychological, social, societal and operational fields of action. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2019.
  • Andreas Göbel: Theory as problem genesis: A problem-historical reconstruction of the sociological systems theory of Niklas Luhmann . Universitätsverlag Konstanz, Konstanz 2000, ISBN 3-87940-702-9 . (Univ. Diss., Essen 1999)
  • Andreas Metzner: Problems of Socio-Ecological Systems Theory - Nature and Society in Luhmann's Sociology . Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1993, ISBN 3-531-12471-4 . (Full text)

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ The Society of Society , 1997, p. 78.
  2. ↑ Social systems can be used as a central point . 1984, Chapter 3: “Double Contingency”, p. 148 ff. Questions and answers p. 165 f.
  3. ↑ See e.g. B. Social Systems. 1984, p. 243 f.
  4. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 30 f.
  5. ^ The Science of Society (1988), The Economy of Society (1988), The Law of Society (1993), The Art of Society (1995), The Politics of Society (2000, posthumous), The Religion of Society (2000, posthumously)
  6. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 242 ff .; Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft , 1997, pp. 60 ff.
  7. ↑ Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft , 1997, pp. 65 ff. The closeness is to be seen independently of material flows or causal effects between systems that an observer can determine.
  8. ^ The Science of Society , 1990, p. 23.
  9. ↑ A list in: Reese-Schäfer, Walter: Niklas Luhmann for an introduction. Junius, Hamburg 1999, p. 176 f.
  10. ^ The Society of Society , 1997, Chapter 2.X, Chapter 4.
  11. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 193 ff. (194; 203); Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft , 1997, p. 194.
  12. ↑ Social Systems, 1984, pp. 208 f.
  13. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 225 ff., P. 241; The Science of Society , 1990, p. 38.
  14. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 95.
  15. ↑ See e.g. E.g. social systems. 1984, p. 175 ff: Time and history take the place of nature or norms and values ​​in systems theory; - "Radical temporalization of the concept of element": 1984, p. 28; "Radical temporalization of the systems": The science of society , 1990, p. 36 f.
  16. ^ Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft , 1990, pp. 23 ff; here p. 31; “'Black box' concept”: social systems. 1984, p. 156 ff; The Science of Society , 1990, p. 17.
  17. ↑ See e.g. B: The science of society. P. 27.
  18. ^ The Society of Society , 1997, p. 79.
  19. ^ The Society of Society , 1997, p. 85.
  20. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 30.
  21. ↑ “The term system always stands (in the parlance of our investigations) for a real situation. By 'system' we never mean a purely analytical system, a mere construction, a mere model ”. Social systems. 1984, p. 599.
  22. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, Chapter 4: "Communication and Action", pp. 191–241 (240, 241)
  23. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 234; see also p. 155.
  24. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 288 f.
  25. ↑ See social systems. 1984, p. 20 f.
  26. ^ Social Systems (1984), p. 79; Claudio Baraldi, Giancarlo Corsi, Elena Esposito: GLU: Glossary on Niklas Luhmann's theory of social systems. (= Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft. 1226). Frankfurt am Main 1999, p. 123
  27. ^ The science of society , Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 271 (Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, 1001)
  28. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 556.
  29. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 25.
  30. ^ Luhmann: Ecological communication. 1st edition. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1986, ISBN 3-531-11775-0 , 1986, p. 269.
  31. ↑ The science of society . Frankfurt am Main 1990, p. 31.
  32. ↑ See, inter alia, Niklas Luhmann: Introductory remarks on a theory of symbolically generalized communication media. In: ders .: essays and speeches. Reclam, Stuttgart 2001, pp. 31-75. In “The Society of Society” Luhmann presents the most elaborate theory of communication media.
  33. ↑ Social Systems. 1984, p. 95.
  34. ^ Social Systems , 1987, p. 16.
  35. ↑ a b Dirk Käsler , quoted in Kunczik / Zipfel, Publizistik - ein Studienbuch, 2005, p. 84.
  36. ^ Karl-Siegbert Rehberg : Conservatism in postmodern times: Niklas Luhmann. In: Gunter Runkel ; Günter Burkart (Ed.): Functional systems of society: Contributions to the system theory of Niklas Luhmann. VS, Wiesbaden 2005, pp. 285-309.
  37. ↑ Gansel, Christina (2011): Textsortenlinguistik. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
  38. ↑ Holger Lindemann: Constructivism, system theory and practical action. An introduction to educational, psychological, social, societal and operational fields of action . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 2019.
  39. ↑ Holger Lindemann, 2019, pp. 249-258; 272-278
  40. ↑ Holger Lindemann: Systemic, solution-oriented conversation in counseling, coaching, supervision and therapy. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2018.
  41. ^ Foreword to his last work: The Society of Society (Luhmann 1998, p. 11; Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 1360).