Communication Systems: autopoietic replication

Part of the process of communicative reproduction is the incremental adaptation of a

communication system to the demands of its environment. This process of adaptation , which is not in any way directed or planned by the communication system itself, manifests itself in two forms – symbolic media and in organizational programs. Organizations, which will be discussed in greater detail below, are decision-making centers that provides programmatic content around a given distinction. There is no cap on the number of organizations within a single functional system.

Symbolic media, on the other hands, are typically (but not always) singular within a communication system since they ―utter‖ the original distinction plus any programmatic language in a way makes it likelier that the distinction is selected. (Luhmann 1997a [2012]:

193).⁶⁶ Their purpose, according to Luhmann, is to ―miraculously transform a no likelihood into a yes-likelihood‖ (Luhmann 1997a: 320). Symbolic media take what should be a highly

improbable event – the continuing of communication – and make it possible.

To give one example, one of the most successful media is money. Think about how difficult it would be to purchase something in plain language, let alone attempt to conduct a complicated economic transaction across cultures. Money simplifies the process of allocating thinking of the world in terms of scarce resources (the function of the economic system).

Thinking back to the metaphor presented at the beginning of the chapter, the family engaged in an economic communication when they made their purchase. They wanted to purchase goods from the barista. This is the ―marked‖ state that indicated they wanted to engage in economic communication and not some other form of communication. Handing over the money or card is the ―utterance.‖ By taking the card or cash, the barista indicated his ―acceptance‖ of the

communication. Media function symbolically by fitting two pieces of communication together.

The importance of symbolic media becomes even more pronounced if we imagine that the family were not English speakers. Despite the language barrier, they would have still been able to engage in economic communication by simply handing the barista a portable meaning package!

As the programs built around the original distinction change, it becomes ever more important for that system to produce media that communicate the usefulness of the original distinction. For example, the media ―money‖ communicates the distinction of payment/non-payment regardless of the program that has built up around the distinction. Money has

communicated this distinction through barter, fiat currency, gold-based currency, and electronic

66 In addition to symbolically generalized media, communication relies on what Luhmann calls dissemination media.

This class of media includes the means by which information is conveyed – for example, oral traditions, writing, and now the internet. ―If there are sustained trends in evolution of dissemination media.... they can in brief be identified as the trend from hierarchical to heterarchical organization and the waiving of the spatial integration of societal operations‖ (Luhmann 1997 [2012]: 187).

currency. It manages to keep the original distinction even as the specific content of that distinction changes. Although important to modern systems theory, this dissertation does not deal with this concept overly much in favor of organizations and programs.

Symbolic media are not the only means by which communication systems thrive. Late in his career, Luhmann began to explore the ways communication systems use organizations to further enhance successful communication through their advancement of programs (Luhmann 2000a). Organizations‘ most important function is the development of programs. Programs arise out of the tension between the marked and unmarked state and the content-free status of the distinction.

Programs provide context to the codes and bolster the ―correct‖ value. Although

technically the binary distinction is the ―unity of the difference‖ between the marked and unmake state, the marked state is often taken as the values represents the ―true‖ communication of the system.⁶⁷ It could potentially become what we might think of as a ―moral code,‖ insofar as the other value is deemed illegitimate (Luhmann 1997 [2012]: 221-223). To support this ―morality,‖

systems often develop a ―supplementary semantic of criteria determining the conditions under which positive and negative values are positively attributed‖ (Luhmann 1997 [2012]:303).

Whereas the binary distinction is locked to their communication system as a core feature of their understanding of the world, programs are far more changeable (Luhmann 1997 [2012]:

217). These programs ―attach themselves as a vast apparatus to their respective codes‖ by

describing in detail which content does or does not constitute a given distinction (Luhmann 1997

67The contingency inherent in a negative and positive value allows the function system to better adapt to people‘s selection without losing their autopoietic capacity. Whereas a communication system insists that its functionality is the only necessary functionality (because all they can see is the marked space of their observation), the development of a code with two opposing values provides a failsafe. Even if the one is rejected by people, it is rejected in favor of the other meaning, instead of the functionality of the system itself being rejected (Luhmann 1997b [2013]:90-91).

It should be noted, the negative value is always a last resort option.

[2012]:303). Programs are often the vector through which ―opposing‖ ideas of the positive value can challenge the dominant content of the distinction (Luhmann 1997 [2012]:226-27). Due to their complexity, programs are also quite contingent and typically are the means by which the content of a given communication system changes. That is, it is the vehicle through

communication systems evolve over time and perhaps even give birth to new communication systems. There is no limit to the number of codes in a given system.

For example, the programs within the political system consist of ideologies which each provide information about who should make collective decisions regarding the application of power. Communism, democracy, fascism, and monarchy are all examples of programs within the single political system. Programs within the religious system include all of the world religious, including Islam and Christianity. As with the programs of the political system, these confessionals and doctrines describe the content that falls on either side of the

transcendent/immanent binary. What might seem divine revelation to the Sunni Muslim might not be so to a Protestant. Each of these programs are competing interpretations of the same distinction, and they do not always coexist easily together, even if they are all oriented toward the same purpose of ensuring the continuation of their respective system‘s distinction.

Each program is advanced by one or more organizations. Organizations are ―decision-making‖ structures with physical addresses and identifiable members that assist in the

communication system‘s autopoiesis by providing a tangible existence to these programs– ―god made flesh,‖ if you will (see Nassehi 2005). Organizations also reduce the chance that

communication will be rejected by creating and promoting programmatic content that provides information about the content that lies on each side of a given distinction (Luhmann 2000a: 185;

[2013] 1997a: 812-65). Marrying programmatic content to a physical address and exclusive

membership transforms the rather abstract concept of a communication system to potentially quite real world force.

The United States is an organization of the political system. It has an exclusive membership which it defines in political terms. It links its political decisions that it makes to previous political decisions, and it advances a particular political program, which I argue in later chapter is ―democracy.‖ The same features are present with other states such as Germany, Denmark, and Cuba, and also political parties and other explicitly political organizations.

Likewise, the Islamic State is an organization of the religious system. It also has an exclusive membership which it defines in religious terms. It links its religious decisions to prior religious decisions, and advances a particular religious program of Salafism. Much more will be written about organizations and their programs in later chapter.