Can social systems be autopoietic? Bhaskar's and giddens' social theories

Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 403-427

  Mingers, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Autopoiesis; Critical Realism; Self Reference; Social Structure; Society; Structuration

Indexed keywords

EID: 19944396464     PISSN: 00218308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.2004.00256.x     Document Type: Review

References (81)

1. ANGEL, I. (1997). Welcome to the "brave new world", in J. Mingers and Stowell, F. (eds.), Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline?, London, McGraw Hill, pp. 363-384.
2. ARCHER, M. (1990). Human agency and social structure: a critique of Giddens. in J. Clark, Modgil, C. and Modgil, S., (eds.), Anthony Giddens: Consensus and Controversy, Cambridge, CUP, pp. 47-56.
3. ARCHER, M. (1995). Realist Social Theory: the Morphogenetic Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.
4. ARCHER, M. (1996). Social integration and system integration: developing the distinction, Sociology 30(4): 679-699.
5. ARCHER, M. (2000). For structure: its properties and powers: a reply to Anthony King, Sociological Review 48: 464-472.
6. ARCHER, M., BHASKAR, R., COLLIER, A., LAWSON, T. and NORRIE, A. (eds.) (1998). Critical Realism: Essential Readings. London: Routledge.
7. BERGER, P. and LUCKMAN, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality, London: Penguin.
8. BHASKAR, R. (1979). The Possibility of Naturalism, Sussex: Harvester Press.
9. BHASKAR, R. (1986). Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation, London: Verso.
10. BHASKAR, R. (1993). Dialectic: the Pulse of Freedom, London: Verso.
11. BHASKAR, R. (1994). Plato Etc, London: Verso.
12. BHASKAR, R. (1997). On the ontological status of ideas, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 27(2/3): 139-147.
13. BHASKAR, R. (2002). Critical realism and ethnomethodology: debate with Rom Harre, in R. Bhaskar, (ed.) From Science to Emancipation, London, Sage, pp. 96-124.
14. BROWN, C. (1988). A new interdisciplinary impulse and the anthropology of the 1990s, International Social Science Journal 40(2): 211-220.
15. BRYANT, G. (1995). Practical Sociology, Cambridge: Polity Press.
16. BUCKLEY, W. (1967). Sociology and Modern Systems Theory, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
17. BUCKLEY, W. (ed.) (1968). Modern Systems Research for the Behavioural Scientist, Chicago: Aldine.
18. BYRNE, D. (1998). Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences, London: Routledge.
19. COHEN, I. (1989). Structuration Theory: Anthony Giddens and the Constitution of Social Life, London: Macmillan.
20. CRAIB, I. (1992). Anthony Giddens, London: Routledge.
21. EWALD, F. (1987). The law of law. in G. Teubner, (ed.) Autopoiesis and the Law, Berlin, de Gruyter, pp. 36-50.
22. FEATHERSTONE, M., TURNER, B. and HEPWORTH, M. (eds.) (1991). The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.
23. GERGEN, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction, London: Sage.
24. GIDDENS, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory: Action Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis, London: Macmillan.
25. GIDDENS, A. (1981). A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, London: Macmillan Press.
26. GIDDENS, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society, Cambridge: Polity Press.
27. GIDDENS, A. (1987). Social Theory and Modern Sociology, Cambridge: Polity Press.
28. GIDDENS, A. (1989). A reply to my critics, in D. Held and Thompson, J. (eds.), Social Theory of Modern Societies: Anthony Giddens and his Critics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 249-301.
29. GIDDENS, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
30. GIDDENS, A. (1990). Structuration theory and sociological analysis, in J. Clark, Modgil, C. and Modgil, S. (eds.), Anthony Giddens: Consensus and Controversy, London, Falmer Press, pp. 297-315.
31. GIDDENS, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Society, Cambridge: Polity.
32. GROSZ, E. (1994). Volatile Bodies: Towards a Corporeal Feminism, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
33. HABERMAS, J. (1979). Communication and the Evolution of Society, London: Heinemann.
34. HABERMAS, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, London: Heinemann.
35. HABERMAS, J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System: a Critique of Functionalist Reason, Oxford: Polity Press.
36. HARVEY, D.L. (2002). Agency and community: A critical realist paradigm, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 32(2): 163-194.
37. KICKERT, W. (1993). Autopoiesis and the science of public administration: essence, sense and nonsense, Organization Studies 14(2): 261-278.
38. KING, A. (1999). Against structure: A critique of morphogenetic social theory, Sociological Review 47(2): 199-227.
39. KING, A. (1999). The impossibility of naturalism: The antinomies of Bhaskar's realism, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 29(3): 267-290.
40. KING, A. (2000). The accidental derogation of the lay actor: a critique of Giddens's concept of structure, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 30(3): 362-383.
41. LAYDER, D. (1985). Power, structure and agency, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 15(2): 131-149.
42. LAYDER, D. (1987). Key issues in structuration theory: Some critical remarks, Current Perspectives in Social Theory 8: 25-46.
43. LAYDER, D. (1989). The macro/micro distinction, social relations and methodological bracketing: Unresolved issues in structuration theory, Current Perspectives in Social Theory 9: 123-141.
44. LEWIS, P. (2000). Realism, causality and the problem of social structure, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 30(3): 249-268.
45. LUHMANN, N. (1982). The world society as a social system, Int. J. General Systems 8: 131-138.
46. LUHMANN, N. (1989). Ecological Communication, Cambridge: Polity Press.
47. MATURANA, H. (1975). The organization of the living, a theory of the living organization, Int. J. Man Machine Studies 7: 313-332.
48. MATURANA, H. (1987). The biological foundations of self-consciousness and the physical domain of existence, in E. Caianiello, (ed.) Physics of Cognitive Processes, Singapore, World Scientific, pp. 324-379.
49. MATURANA, H. (1988). Reality: the search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument, Irish Journal of Psychology 9: 25-82.
50. MATURANA, H. and VARELA, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living, Dordrecht: Reidel.
51. MATURANA, H. and VARELA, F. (1987). The Tree of Knowledge, Boston: Shambhala.
52. MENDOZA, J. (1997). The duality of structure, in G. Bryant and Jary, D., (eds.), Anthony Giddens: Critical Assessments, London, Routledge, pp. 219-270.
53. MEYNEN, H.T. (1992). The bringing forth of dialogue: Latour versus Maturana. in G. van de Vijver, (ed.) New Perspectives on Cybernetics: Self-organization, Autonomy and Connectionism, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic, pp. 157-174.
54. MINGERS, J. (1992). The problems of social autopoiesis, Int. J. Gen. Sys 21(2): 229-236.
55. MINGERS, J. (1995). Self-Producing Systems: Implications and Applications of Autopoiesis, New York.: Plenum Press.
56. MINGERS, J. (1996). A comparison of Maturana's autopoietic social theory and Giddens' theory of structuration, Systems Research 13(4): 469-482.
57. MINGERS, J. (1997). Systems typologies in the light of autopoiesis: a reconceptualization of Boulding's hierarchy, and a typology of self-referential systems, Systems Research and Behavioural Science 14: 303-313.
58. MINGERS, J. (2001). Embodying information systems: the contribution of phenomenology, Information and Organization (formerly Accounting, Management and Information Technology) 11(2): 103-128.
59. MINGERS, J. (2002). Can social systems be autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann's social theory, Sociological Review 50(2): 278-299.
60. MORGAN, G. (1986). Images of Organisation, Newbury Park: Sage.
61. NEW, C. (1994). Structure, agency and social transformation, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 24(3): 187-205.
62. PORPORA, D. (1989). Four Concepts of Social Structure, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 19(2): 195-211.
63. PORPORA, D. (1998). Four Concepts of Social Structure, in M. Archer, Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., Lawson, T. and Norrie, A., (eds.), Critical Realism: Essential Readings, London, Routledge, pp. 339-355.
64. SEWELL, W. (1992). A theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation, American Journal of Sociology 98(1): 1-29.
65. SHILLING, C. (1993). The Body and Social Theory, London: Sage.
66. STOKES, P. (1990). Socio-cybernetics and the project of scientificisation of sociology, in E. Heylighen, Rosseel, E. and Demeyere, F. (eds.), Self-Steering and Cognition in Complex Systems: Towards a New Cybernetics, London, Gordon and Breech.
67. SUBER, P. (1990). Paradox of Self-Amendment, New York: P. Lang Publishers.
68. SYNNOTT, A. (1993). The Body Social: Symbolism, Self and Society, London: Routledge.
69. TEUBNER, G. (1990). And God laughed . . . indeterminacy, self-reference and paradox in law., European University Institute: Florence.
70. THOMPSON, J. (1989). The theory of structuration, in D. Held and Thompson, J. (eds.), Social Theory of Modern Societies: Anthony Giddens and his Critics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 56-76.
71. TURNER, B. (1984). The Body and Society, Oxford: Blackwell.
72. VARELA, C. (1999). Determinism and the recovery of human agency: the embodying of persons, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 29(4): 385-402.
73. VARELA, C. (2002). The impossibility of which naturalism? A response and a reply, J. for the Theory of Social Behaviour 32(1): 105-111.
74. VARELA, C. and HARRE, R. (1996). Conflicting varieties of realism: Causal powers and the problems of social structure, Journal For the Theory of Social Behaviour 26(3): 313 (14 pages).
75. VARELA, F. (1979). Principles of Biological Autonomy, New York: Elsevier-North Holland.
76. VARELA, F. (1981). Autonomy and autopoiesis. in G. Roth and Schwegler, H. (eds.), Self-Organising Systems - an Interdisciplinary Approach, Frankfurt, Campus Verlag, pp. 14-24.
77. VARELA, F. (1981). Describing the logic of the living. The adequacy and limitations of the idea of autopoiesis. in M. Zeleny, (ed.) Autopoiesis: A Theory of the Living Organization, New York, Elsevier-North Holland, pp. 36-48.
78. VARELA, F., COUTINHO, A., DUPIRE, B. and VAZ, N. (1988). Cognitive networks: immune, neural, and otherwise, in A. Perelson, (ed.) Theoretical Immunology: SFI Series on the Science of Complexity, New Jersey, Addison Wesley, pp. 359-375.
79. VARELA, F., THOMPSON, E. and ROSCH, E. (1991). The Embodied Mind, Cambridge: MIT Press.
80. VELD, R.J., SCHAAP, L., TERMEER, C. and TWIST, M. (1991). Autopoiesis and Configuration Theory: New Approaches to Societal Steering, Dordrecht.: Kluwer.
81. WRIGHT, C. (1999). They shoot dead horses don't they? Locating agency in the agent-structure problematique, European J. of International Relations 5(1): 109-142.