[OSList] Designing an OS way

[John Watkins]

Michael,

I think Gregory Bateson addressed the question of equilibrium most eloquently a long time ago in his great book, Steps to an Ecology of Mind!  And I've seen some great analysis of it in Jay Lemke's book, Textual Politics.  Let's see if I can find the relevant quotes...

Bateson: Systems “…maintain a dynamic equilibrium or steady state… [through] maximiz[ing] the chances against the maximization of any single simple variable” (124).  “The steady state is maintained by continual nonprogressive change” (125).  What Bateson noticed was that allowable levels of fluctuations in some subset of a larger system were used to create relative stability in the larger system, but that those fluctuations never led to fundamental shifts in the architecture of the system, as they continually shifted out of and then returned to a kind of dynamic equilibrium.   It is a “corrective action… brought about by [the awareness of] difference” (Bateson, 1972:381).  A social system “…does not elect the steady state; it prevents itself from staying in any alternative state” (381). Or, “[T]he constancy and survival of some larger system is maintained by changes in the constituent subsystem” (Bateson, 1972:339). 

Lemke calls that a “meta-stable non-equilibrium” (Lemke, 1995:11).  He goes on to argue that as social systems develop, they become more ordered and differentiated, increasingly complex, and as such, demonstrate irreversibility.  At some point, in various layers of their hierarchy (hierarchy in systems theory is not the same as hierarchy of authority or knowledge, e.g., bureaucracy; it is a concept of scale, in scope, time, or space), open, complex systems begin to demonstrate non-symmetry, or the possibility of bifurcation (branching, “choice” points), due to the amplified, interacting oscillations of various sub-systems.  Bifurcation in larger systems can enable larger out-of-equilibrium fluctuations in, or unpredictable interactions between, sub-systems to result in evolutionary, or adaptive, change in the larger system...

Does this help?

John
 

  
On Sep 19, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Michael Herman wrote:

> i want to echo florian's appreciation for your story, john, thank you.  and i have a question about "equilibrium."  
> 
> in financial markets, gene fama won a nobel prize for his theory of "efficient" markets, suggesting that markets always reflected all current information, immediately returning to "equilbrium" after every news release, so that above-normal returns were not possible.  many now question or dismiss this.
> 
> so, in a world that is always moving, what does the theory you described so nicely have to say about equilibrium?  does it then lead into questions about locality and "self" ...the department might be in equilibrium but the company is falling apart, or vice versa... so the boundaries of the "self" that is being invited to organize or re-organize really matter.
> 
> mostly i'm just wondering if you can say more to map the open systems, thermodynamics, and esp equilibrium story to what we have all seen happening in organizations and open spaces.  is "equilibrium" the same as "normal?"
> 
> m
> 
> 
>  
> --
> 
> Michael Herman
> Michael Herman Associates
> 312-280-7838 (mobile)
> 
> http://MichaelHerman.com
> http://ManorNeighbors.com
> http://OpenSpaceWorld.org
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20110919/980d222e/attachment-0008.htm>