Cognitive implication in contrasting modalities

Having Bought into a Wreck -- What Now? (Part #5)

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

Feedback loops and cybernetic orders: The sense of a learning cycle is fundamental to the articulation of Young. In discussing the sufficiency of the fourfold pattern, Young relates this to the necessity of feedback (in the light of piloting a helicopter):

1. To know the position of a body in space, we need one instantaneous observation...
2. To know its velocity, which is computer from the difference in position of the body and the difference in time between the two observations, we need two such observations
3. To know its acceleration, we need three observations
4. To know that a body... is under control, and to distinguish it from one in which the controls are stuck, we need at least four observations...
5. To know the destination, provided the operator does not change his mind or try to fool us, we need five observations
6. To know the operator has changed his mind or is trying to fool us, we need six observations
   
   Note that the fifth observation is to establish a position... and the sixth a change of position. Thus categories five and six repeat the cycle, the fifth falling into the position category and the sixth into the velocity category... the sufficiency of four categories is demonstrated. (p. 18)

The shift, through learning, from observing to "knowing one knows" suggests exploring the fourfold distinction in terms of different orders of cybernetics, as discussed separately (Cybernetics of cybernetics: complex adaptive systems? 2007; Relevance to change, learning and creativity, 2014):

• first order cybernetics: characterized by simple feedback loops
• second order cybernetics: understood as the cybernetics of cybernetics
• third order cybernetics: in which the observer is understood to be part of a coevolving system
• fourth order cybernetics: as may be variously understood, possibly with how multiple realities are shaped by, and impinge upon, power relationships within society. As proposed, for example, by M. Zangeneh and E. Haydon (The Psycho-Structural Cybernetic Model, Feedback, and Problem Gambling: a new theoretical approach, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1, 2, 2004)

Given her iconic role with respect to the origins of the cybernetic of cybernetics, the most recent reflections of Mary Catherine Bateson, merit consideration:

You guys need to look at what you're doing. What is the cybernetics of cybernetics? ... Stop and look at your own process and understand it..... The tragedy of the cybernetic revolution, which had two phases, the computer science side and the systems theory side, has been the neglect of the systems theory side of it. We chose marketable gadgets in preference to a deeper understanding of the world we live in. (How To Be a Systems Thinker, Edge, 17 April 2018)

The distinction between the "orders" of cybernetics is currently a matter of controversy, most recently addressed by Maurice Yolles and Gerhard Fink (Generic Agency Theory, Cybernetic Orders and New Paradigms, 2014) in the light of their earlier reflections. Russell Clemens (The Cybernetics of Foresight: futures thinking for the 21st Century, Asia-Pacific Foresight Conference, 2012) discusses the merits of relating the approach of cybernetics (including the implications of the icosahedron and enneagram) to the causal layered analysis methodology of Sohail Inayatullah (Causal Layered Analysis: poststructuralism as method, Futures, 30, 1998, pp. 815-829).

There is a case for recognizing that the cybernetic "orders" above could be associated with distinct topological surfaces whether for representation, mapping or symbolic purposes:

• first order cybernetics with the circle (as suggested by the interlocking loops depicted on systems diagrams)
• second order with the sphere (as suggested by integrative global interlocking of great circles around a sphere)
• third order with paradoxical forms (as with the Klein bottle)
• fourth order with yet more complex forms. The relevance of Klein bottle geometry is notably argued by Steven M. Rosen (Topologies of the Flesh: a multidimensional exploration of the lifeworld, 2006; Dreams, Death, Rebirth: a topological odyssey into alchemy's hidden dimensions, 2014).

Observer imbrication: A valuable interpretation of related distinctions is provided in the discussion of Cadell Last (Towards a Big Historical Understanding of the Symbolic-Imaginary, 2017):

• externally observed objects are modelled with an observer's noumenal view and voice that is systematically excluded from the "objective" model of the world to create the effect that the ''true natural world" in-itself is looking and speaking at the subject [eg science]
• observer's noumenal view and voice of externally observed objects is included in the model thus creatively relativizing thc observer's "objective" world model to the subjective locus producing it in order to study its effects in the ideational field structuring the motion of subject-object [eg deconstruction]
• observer of externally observed objects reflectivcly incorporates its own and subjective-multiplicities as a (virtual, cxtimatc) object of analysis structured by an a priori framc of desire that unconsciously filters orientation, intervention, and understanding of subject-object entanglement [eg psychoanalysis]
• observer reflectively incorporates noumenal view and voice modcl(s) structured by a priori frames of desire as capable of overdetcrmining the virtually narrated images of externally observed objects ("the world") through transcendental reflection and creation [eg historical subjectivity]
• observer identifies the virtual ideational field composed of a multiplicity of self-relating and desiring world views and voice models as a universal agency ("semiospherc"') in-itself with asymmetrical and irreversible reflective and creative autonomy structuring the motion of subject-object entanglement [eg history itself]

Dimensional compactification: There is a degree of metaphorical irony to any progression down the rows of Young's table to the extent that this is paralleled by a form of compactification of dimensionality when represented (as argued in fundamental physics). The uppermost row (in "substantive" text form) is typically verbose in encompassing one or more themes( as with this text). The second is more experiential and with greater dimensionality, as with "one image is worth a thousand words" -- or "skimming a text to gain an impression". In characterizing the third row in terms of an idea or conceptualization. however multifaceted, this tends to be even more compact, however held or grasped. The excitement characteristic of the fourth row is even more experientially succinct -- whatever the potential it embodies.

There is a further irony to the progression in relation to what might be termed the "trilemma of compactification":

• greater succinctness potentially facilitates comprehension -- but may preclude it -- whilst increasing the probability of incommunicability
• greater (verbose) articulation potentially enables greater comprehension (especially of any part), but may well increase incomprehension and alienation (and especially from the whole)
• greater emphasis on communicability of the whole may inhibit comprehension of its subtlety and complexity

With respect to compactification, Young's tabular presentation highlights a progression in temporal reciprocation (or inversion) which features in an appropriately titled subsequent study (Nested Time, 2004). Thus the first row, as production capacity, is effectively timeless as a product of 1/T⁰, the second identifies change over time as a product of 1/T¹ (or T^-1), the third identifies rate of change as a product of 1/T² (or T^-2), whilst the fourth is a measure of control as a product of 1/T³ (or T^--3).

A commentary with respect to this recognition by Young features in the work of Paris Arnopoulos (Sociophysics: Cosmos and Chaos in Nature and Culture, 1993):

Since power is the rate of applying force, controlling this rate is of utmost importance. Control has been identified as the capacity to modify the rate of change, ie to speed it up or slow it down. Therefore, power control is a necessary ingredient of any orderly social change. The mathematical definition of power, and its algebraic equivalents show that:

P = W/t = Fv = ma(s/t) = m(s/t²)(s/t) = ms(s/t³) = msc

This last parenthesis (s/t³) has been defined by Young as control (c), and translates as the rate of change of acceleration. It will be recalled that since v=s/t and a=s/t², control becomes the third derivative of velocity....

Since power is directly proportional to the rate of energy conversion or information flow, dynamic systems require a great degree of control. As people become more energetic or informed, they tend to get out of control; so in order to avoid that, dynamic societies must become more regulated. It may therefore be said that the kind of government that a system has depends on the amount of power it disposes. (p. 82)

He develops the argument otherwise as a means of engaging with the Triple Helix thesis, discussed below (Braiding the Triadic Codex and Triple Helix: the sociophysics of nature-culture-nurture and academy-industry-polity, 2000). There he notes:

... this short paper interfaces with the triple helix paradigm by weaving its triadic social focus-locus with the power-wealth-data flows among its state-market-school centers. In this way we can concentrate on the most significant influence-finance-science transactions of the polity-industry-academy triangle.... In doing any job, force performs work: W = Fs =mas= mv2. This means that some work must be done in order to bring about social change. If that change is needed fast then one must exert a lot of power: P = W/t =mav = Fv. By this mathematical transformation, we have arrived at this crucial notion of power politics as well as physics. Social power however, unlike physical power, does not move inanimate objects but human masses to act far and fast.... Informative societies are negentropic because they increase systemic organization and decrease environmental degradation. Accumulating human knowledge also improves social control (C = a/t), since it regulates social change in a more enlightened manner. For that reason the exercise of responsible
social power requires strict political control (P = msC)....

Unusually Arnopoulos presents a synoptic overview in schematic form (p. 84) of the interrelationship between 15 fundamental concepts deriving from a triadic hypothesis (space-time-existence) correlating space curvature, material density and universal time (p. 5). These suggest an interesting relationship to Young's Rosetta stone (especially if 3 are omitted). Otherwise it would take the form of three pentagons, thereby suggestive of arguments in relation to the Chinese understanding of the 5-fold Wu Xing (Cycles of enstoning forming mnemonic pentagrams: Hygiea and Wu Xing, 2012) and to the 15 transformations of Christopher Alexander, as discussed separately (Tentative adaptation of Alexander's 15 transformations to the psychosocial realm, 2010). Of relevance to the triadic hypothesis articulated by Arnopoulos is the subsequnt argument of T.N. Palmer (The Invariant Set Hypothesis: a new geometric framework for the foundations of quantum theory and the role played by gravity, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 2011).

Given the possibiity of a coherent mapping of the 12-fold pattern onto an icosahedron or its dual, it is intriguing that a relation to the 15-fold can be found through different mappings onto the same polyhedra (Geometrical configuration of Alexander's 15 transformations, 2010).

Questioning otherwise: Irrespective of the academic controversy, learning can be suggestively understood as associated with higher orders of questioning -- increasing degrees of self-reflexivity, implication in what is observed, and forms of cognitive embodiment. This is argued by various authors (Henryk Skolimowski, The Participatory Mind: a new theory of knowledge and of the universe, 1995) and discussed separately, notably with respect to constructivism and enaction (Existential Embodiment of Externalities: radical cognitive engagement with environmental categories and disciplines, 2009; David Abram, The Spell of the Sensuous: perception and language in a more-than-human world, 1997; George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Philosophy In The Flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought, 1999).

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Visuals] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]