3 ms·

Second-order cybernetics happened, and as a result there was a split. Like neighboring comments say, there is control theory and game theory for first-order cyb

Second-order cybernetics happened, and as a result there was a split. Like neighboring comments say, there is control theory and game theory for first-order cybernetics, but second-order cybernetics is extremely philosophical and failed to make an impact aside from broad ideas like the emergence of complex behavior from simple designs. The Constructivist movement has a journal [0] and is still alive, but I'm not sure what impact they are having. [0] https://constructivist.info/ https://constructivist.info/

di4na 7y ago
I would like to point out that second order cybernetics is alive and well in System Thinking, which you will find in Safety-II, Safety-differently, Resilience Engineering, etc etc
metroholografix 7y ago
One could say that second-order cybernetics has never been more relevant. Sometimes you see so far ahead that it takes time for your vision and its implications to fully become apparent. Second-order cybernetics defines not only today's technological substrate (especially obvious in cybersecurity and risk modeling) but also contemporary culture.
someguyorother 7y ago
It feels like elements of that split was always there. You have, on the one hand, very practical engineering cybernetics, what's standard control theory now (PID, optimal linear control, impulse responses and transfer functions, and so on). On the other hand, you have the more general (philosophical, "woolly") part that's filled with comparisons to biology, that deals with society and variety, general patterns, etc. I once gave a friend of mine Medina's "Cybernetic Revolutionaries", and I think he found it hard to get through because of the latter kind of cybernetics, even though he was very familiar with the former kind.
- zozbot234 7y ago
  > On the other hand, you have the more general (philosophical, "woolly") part that's filled with comparisons to biology But see, that "other" part is also really a generalized/philosophical/speculative etc. take on control theory. "Systems theory" in the cybernetics-related sense is basically a name for 'this control theory stuff is so cool/impressive, let's see if we can generalize it beyond its standard engineering domain and draw any uselful conclusions from it.' Of course this kind of interdisciplinarity would be seen as standard nowadays, you wouldn't need to call attention to it by trying to name a new field.

di4na 7y ago

I would like to point out that second order cybernetics is alive and well in System Thinking, which you will find in Safety-II, Safety-differently, Resilience Engineering, etc etc

metroholografix 7y ago

One could say that second-order cybernetics has never been more relevant. Sometimes you see so far ahead that it takes time for your vision and its implications to fully become apparent. Second-order cybernetics defines not only today's technological substrate (especially obvious in cybersecurity and risk modeling) but also contemporary culture.

someguyorother 7y ago

It feels like elements of that split was always there. You have, on the one hand, very practical engineering cybernetics, what's standard control theory now (PID, optimal linear control, impulse responses and transfer functions, and so on). On the other hand, you have the more general (philosophical, "woolly") part that's filled with comparisons to biology, that deals with society and variety, general patterns, etc. I once gave a friend of mine Medina's "Cybernetic Revolutionaries", and I think he found it hard to get through because of the latter kind of cybernetics, even though he was very familiar with the former kind.

zozbot234 7y ago
> On the other hand, you have the more general (philosophical, "woolly") part that's filled with comparisons to biology But see, that "other" part is also really a generalized/philosophical/speculative etc. take on control theory. "Systems theory" in the cybernetics-related sense is basically a name for 'this control theory stuff is so cool/impressive, let's see if we can generalize it beyond its standard engineering domain and draw any uselful conclusions from it.' Of course this kind of interdisciplinarity would be seen as standard nowadays, you wouldn't need to call attention to it by trying to name a new field.