1. Creating a Science of Purposeful Systems
Stuart A. Umpleby
Department of Management
The George Washington University
Washington, DC 20052

2. A brief history of “purposeful systems”
In the early days of cybernetics, the 1940s to the 1970s, it was common to talk about purposeful systems
Then there was a period of a few decades when purpose was rarely mentioned
Now interest in purpose seems to be increasing

3. Why an increase of interest in purpose?
Beginning in the mid 1970s Heinz von Foerster and others in the American Society for Cybernetics began discussing “second order cybernetics”
This was an effort to pay more attention to cognition, to describe the observer as an essential part of the scientific enterprise
That effort led to interest in second order science, a development not just within cybernetics but within philosophy of science

4. Why a reconsideration of science?
In recent years several authors have been discussing the need to expand our conception of science
Ben Shneiderman, Science 2.0, described changes brought about by the internet
Karl Mueller, three levels of science – science infrastructures, normal science, second order science -- use scientific reports as data, related to meta-research
Studies of science, technology and society -- a science of how scientific knowledge is used in society
A science of how knowledge is used to aid decision-making, similar to action research

5. What trends have supported an interest in purpose?
New technology creates new possibilities for obtaining, integrating, and comparing scientific data
Rapid changes in society, such as automation and robotics, call into question what our purposes are
Behaviorism emphasized observing behavior rather than asking people what their purposes are
Success in achieving our goals, often through technology, has led to more thought about goals

6. Three models used in cybernetics
Regulation
Two basic elements: the regulator and the system regulated
How to amplify management capability
Enables managing nations with hundreds of millions of people
Self-organization
A large number of elements governed by interaction rules
Rules can be changed to obtain a different outcome
Incentive systems, police and courts
A general theory of biology, learning and economic development
Reflexivity
Two levels are involved
Actors both observe and participate
Elements are purposeful systems
Not only a scientific theory but also a theory of the evolution of science

7. The common element of the three models is purpose
In regulation, what is the regulator trying to achieve? What is the goal or purpose?
In self-organization, what is the result that existing interaction rules produce, and what interaction rules are needed to produce the desired results?
Understanding reflexive systems requires understanding not just their behavior but also their purposes

8. Understanding the elements of social systems
In the early days of science the elements of systems were inanimate objects
The key to success in science was the method used – conjectures and refutations
It was assumed that the methods used for social systems would be the same as those used for physical systems
But purposeful systems need to be treated differently from inanimate objects

9. Three Theories of reflexive processes
Vladimir Lefebvre’s theory of reflexive control (1977) created a theory of two systems of ethical cognition
George Soros’s reflexivity theory connected cybernetics to economics and finance
Heinz von Foerster’s second order cybernetics created a reflexive view of science and added a biological perspective to normative and sociological views of philosophy of science

11. Heinz von Foerster

12. From objectivity to participation
The interest in purposeful systems raises the question of how to create verifiable knowledge of purposeful systems.
Statistics reveal the results of purpose better than purposes themselves
The purposes of science are often not understood by non-scientists
A gap is opening up between scientists and the general public

13. There is a need for public acceptance of science
Scientists increasingly tell the general public what they should do
About nutrition and health – diet and exercise
About climate change – reduce use of fossil fuels, conserve energy
About economic development – increase education and improve the rights of women
But does the general public know where these ideas come from? Are they just an alternative, unfamiliar culture?

14. A positive trend connecting science and the public
Service learning is a mode of instruction that is increasing around the world
Students work to help a client – an immigrant family, a small business, a voluntary organization
Students develop confidence in their ability to solve problems
Students describe what they did using concepts from the course, thus connecting textbook knowledge to personal experiences
This is more participatory form of education

15. But rapid changes in science seem to threaten democracy
Science is currently progressing quite rapidly
The new knowledge, to be maximally beneficial, needs to be widely shared (e.g., vaccines)
And people need to feel they are benefitting from the advance of knowledge
If people do not believe they are benefitting as much as others, they will reject elites, including scientists

16. Inequality in the U.S.
It used to be that CEOs in the U.S., Europe and Japan earned about 43 times as much per year as the average worker
In the U.S., CEOs now earn more than 400 times as much as the average worker
A CEO can earn more in a day than the average worker earns in a year
About 90% of the benefits of increased productivity in recent decades has gong to the top 1%

17. The political system is changing
How and why is the political system changing?
Great progress in physical science and engineering is part of the cause
Improvements in social science are part of the solution
Not only scientists but also the general public need to be able to cope with complexity

18. From replication to achieving desired change
Currently there is interest in replication in science. Can research results be reproduced?
A more fundamental change would be to combine science, society and purpose and ask, is our current knowledge producing the purposes we seek?
This would mean a more serious treatment of “action research”

19. Two kinds of social science research
Current social science
Action research
The scientist is outside the system studied
An experiment is of interest to scientists
The purpose of research is to create knowledge by testing falsifiable propositions
The scientist is inside the system studied
An experiment is of interest to subjects and researchers
The purpose of research is to improve the lives of the research subjects

20. Social science vs. action research
A consequence of research is new knowledge in the form of articles and books
Experimental groups and control groups help to ensure objectivity
Knowledge is usually expressed in the form of linear causal relations with a high level of statistical significance
New knowledge can be methods to guide actions by subjects or researchers
Ensuring participation by all relevant stakeholders is important for valid results, meaning results that advance society
One form of knowledge is knowing when a system is stable or unstable and how to change it

21. Conclusion
Science is changing due to new technology, past successes and new goals
An early interest among cyberneticians in purposeful systems is receiving new attention
Adequately dealing with purposeful systems requires changes in science
Doing research on purposeful systems requires replacing an emphasis on objectivity with an emphasis on participation

22. Contact Information
Prof. Stuart Umpleby
Department of Management
School of Business
George Washington University
Washington, DC USA
blogs.gwu.edu/umpleby

23. Presented at a conference of the
World Organization for Systems and Cybernetics
Sapienze University of Rome
Rome, Italy
January 25-27, 2017

25. Two theories of knowledge
Aristotle, realism
The world is primary, ideas are secondary
Our ideas should be a good description of the world
Plato, constructivism
Ideas are primary, because we have immediate access to them
We construct descriptions by interpreting our experiences

26. How the nervous system works
The blind spot
Image on your retina
Move your eyes within your head
Conversations at a party
Listening to a speech
Two kittens
Injured war veterans

27. The meaning of these experiments
The brain does a great deal of work for us that we are not aware of
What we think we see or hear is not always there. Varela on a cat’s brain
We do not see that we do not see
Observations independent of the characteristics of the observer are not physically possible

28. First and second order cybernetics in the 1970s
Observed systems
The purpose of a model
Controlled systems
Interaction among variables in a system
Theories of social systems
Observing systems
The purpose of the modeler
Autonomous sys.
Interaction between observer and observed
Theories of the interaction between ideas and society

30. Three theories of knowledge
World 1 3
Observer
Description 2

31. Expanding not a science but the philosophy of science
Karl Popper identified three “worlds” – the external world, the ideas in the mind of an observer and recorded scientific knowledge
The three sides correspond to three points of view in the history of cybernetics – engineering, biological, and social cybernetics
The triangle suggested a way to unify previously competing theories of knowledge

32. The cybernetics of science
NORMAL SCIENCE
The correspondence Incommensurable
principle definitions
SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION

33. New philosophy of science
New philosophy of science
An Application of the Correspondence Principle
Old philosophy of science
Amount of attention paid to the observer

34. The Correspondence Principle
Proposed by Niels Bohr when developing the quantum theory
Any new theory should reduce to the old theory to which it corresponds for those cases in which the old theory is known to hold
A new dimension is required

35. How cybernetics expands science
The classical approach to science would be the left side of the triangle
Second order cybernetics would be the whole triangle including the scientist reflecting on his or her descriptions and seeking to act in the world
The triangle suggests that second order cybernetics is no longer a competing epistemology but a theory of epistemologies

36. Strategies for advancing social science
For several decades social scientists tried to imitate the physical sciences
Physics was regarded as an example of how to do science
Now the idea is to expand science so the physical sciences become a special case of a larger view of science
The new view includes purposeful systems
Inanimate objects are a special case

37. Current work on Second Order Science

38. Second order science Three levels of science (K. Mueller)
Second order science, meta research (2)
First order science, normal science (1)
Research infrastructure (0)
Expand science by adding two dimensions using the Correspondence Principle
Examine the use of ideas in practice
If not used, why not? (global models)
If used, what were the consequences?

39. From second order cybernetics to second order science
Philosophers of science usually place the scientist outside what is observed
Second order cybernetics claims that descriptions are constructed in the minds of scientists
It places a scientist inside the social system that is observed
These thoughts are bringing about a wide-ranging reconsideration of our conception of science

40. The importance of second order science
Expanding our conception of science opens new lines of investigation for research
Treating physics not as an example for all of science but rather as a special case of a larger conception of science will help the unification of the sciences
New possibilities for research in the social sciences will mean advances in the social sciences at a time when they are needed