Nội dung được dịch bởi AI, chỉ mang tính chất tham khảo
Khám Phá Ranh Giới Hệ Thống
Tóm tắt
Tính tự duy (Autopoiesis) thường được xem là lý thuyết hệ thống trong luật pháp. Trong bài báo này, lý thuyết phức tạp được trình bày như là một cách tiếp cận hệ thống thay thế. Để định vị lý thuyết phức tạp như một lựa chọn khả thi cho tính tự duy, tôi thảo luận về sự hiểu biết khác nhau về ranh giới trong mỗi lý thuyết, và sử dụng điều này như một công cụ để phê phán tính tự duy. Phê phán của tôi nằm trong tư duy lý thuyết hệ thống nhưng bên ngoài cả tính tự duy và lý thuyết phức tạp (mặc dù tôi phải dao động giữa hai đối tượng phê phán). Bởi vì cả hai cách tiếp cận đều có sự hiểu biết về ranh giới, điều này cung cấp một công cụ hiệu quả để so sánh sự khác biệt của chúng, trong khi cho phép mỗi cái được mô tả bằng ngôn ngữ riêng của nó. Được lập luận rằng lý thuyết phức tạp cung cấp một cách tiếp cận ranh giới như là những giao diện phụ thuộc, xuất hiện, mà từ đó cấu trúc ranh giới tự do có thể học hỏi theo nhiều cách khác nhau. Nói chung, có thể đề xuất rằng cách tiếp cận phức tạp đối với các ranh giới cung cấp cho các luật sư tham gia vào lý thuyết hệ thống một góc nhìn phê phán mới để đánh giá các cấu trúc pháp lý.
Từ khóa
#tính tự duy #lý thuyết phức tạp #ranh giới #hệ thống #luật phápTài liệu tham khảo
Bankowski, Zenon. 1996. How does it feel to be on your own? The person in the sight of autopoiesis. In Law as communication, ed. David Nelken, 63–80. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing.
Cilliers, Paul. 1995. Postmodern knowledge and complexity (or why anything does not go). South African Journal of Philosophy 14(3): 124–132.
Cilliers, Paul. 1998. Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge.
Cilliers, Paul. 2001. Boundaries, hierarchies and networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 135–147.
Cilliers, Paul. 2002. Why we cannot know complex things completely. Emergence 4(1&2): 77–84.
Cilliers, Paul. 2005a. Knowledge, limits and boundaries. Futures 37: 605–613.
Cilliers, Paul. 2005b. Complexity, deconstruction and relativism. Theory Culture Society 22: 255–267.
Cilliers, Paul. 2007. Knowledge, complexity and understanding. In Thinking complexity: Complexity and philosophy Volume 1, ed. Paul Cilliers, 159–164. Mansfield: ISCE Publishing.
Cilliers, Paul. 2008. Knowing complex systems: The limits of understanding. In A vision of transdisciplinarity. Laying the foundations for a world knowledge dialogue. eds. Frédéric Darbellay, Moira Cockell, Jérôme Billotte, and Francis Waldvogel, 43–50. Lausanne, Switzerland: EPFL Press and Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Cilliers, Paul. 2010. Difference, identity and complexity. In Complexity, difference and identity: An ethical perspective (Issues in business ethics, Volume 26), ed. Paul Cilliers, and Rika Preiser, 3–18. London: Springer.
Heylighen, Francis, Paul Cilliers, and Carlos Gershenson. 2007. Philosophy and complexity. In Complexity science and society, ed. Jan Bogg, and Robert Geyer, 117–134. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing.
Holland, John H. 1995. Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Reading: Helix Books.
King, Michael. 1993. The ‘truth’ about autopoiesis’. Journal of Law and Society 20(2): 218–236.
King, Michael. 2001. The construction and demolition of the Luhmann heresy. Law and Critique 12: 1–32.
King, Michael. 2006. What’s the use of Luhmann’s theory? In Luhmann on law and politics. Critical appraisals and applications, eds. Michael King and Chris Thornhill, 37–52. Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
King, Michael. 2009. Systems, not people, make society happen. Edinburgh: Holcombe Publishing.
King, Michael, and Anton Schütz. 1994. The ambitious modesty of Niklas Luhmann. Journal of Law and Society 21(3): 261–287.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1988a. The unity of the legal system. In Autopoietic law: A new approach to law and society, ed. Gunther Teubner, 12–35. New York and Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Publishing.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1988b. Closure and openness: On reality in the world of law. In Autopoietic law: A new approach to law and society, ed. Gunther Teubner, 335–348. New York and Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Publishing.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1989. Law as a social system. Northwestern University Law Review 83(1&2): 136–150.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1992a. Operational closure and structural coupling: The differentiation of the legal system. Cardozo Law Review 13: 1419–1441.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1992b. The coding of the legal system. In State, law, and economy as autopoietic systems: Regulation and autonomy in a new perspective, ed. Gunther Teubner, and Alberto Febbrajo, 145–185. Milan: Giuffrè.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1997. Limits of steering. Theory, Culture and Society 14: 41–57.
Maturana, Humberto. 1978. Biology of language: The epistemology of reality. In Psychology and biology of language and thought: Essays in honour of Eric Lennenberg, ed. G. Millar, and E. Lennenberg, 27–63. New York: Academic Press.
Maturana, Humberto. 1980. Man and society. In Autopoietic systems in the social sciences, ed. F. Benseler, P. Hejl, and W. Kock, 11–31. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Mingers, John. 1995. Self-Producing Systems: Implications and Applications of Autopoiesis. New York: Plenum Press.
Murray, Jamie. 2008. Complexity theory and socio-legal studies, Coda: Liverpool Law. Liverpool Law Review 29: 227–246.
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas. 2006. Dealing (with) paradoxes: On law, justice and cheating. In Luhmann on law and politics, Critical appraisals and applications, ed. Michael King, and Chris Thornhill, 217–234. Portland: Hart Publishing.
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas. 2010. Niklas Luhmann, law, justice, society. Abingdon: Routledge.
Preiser, Rika, and Paul Cilliers. 2010. Unpacking the ethics of complexity: Concluding reflections. In Complexity, difference and identity, ed. Paul Cilliers, and Rika Preiser, 265–288. London: Springer.
Richardson, Kurt A. 2004. Systems theory and complexity: Part 1. Emergence: Complexity and organisation 37: 75–79.
Richardson, Kurt A. 2005. The hegemony of the physical sciences: An exploration in complexity thinking. Futures 37: 615–653.
Richardson, Kurt A., and Paul Cilliers. 2001. What is complexity science? A view from different directions. Emergence 3(1): 5–23.
Richardson, Kurt, A. Paul Cilliers, and M. Lissack. 2001a. Complexity science: A ‘gray’ science for the ‘stuff in between’. Emergence 3(2): 6–18.
Richardson, Kurt A., Graham Mathieson, and Paul Cilliers. 2001b. The theory and practice of complexity science: Epistemological considerations for military operational analysis. SysteMexico 1(1): 25–66.
Richardson, Kurt A., and G. Midgley. 2007. Systems theory and complexity: Part 4, The evolution of systems thinking. Emergence: Complexity and organisation 9(1/2): 163–180.
Ruhl, J.B. 1996. Complexity theory as a paradigm for the dynamical law-and-society system: A wake-up call for legal reductionism and the modern administrative state. Duke Law Journal 45(March): 849–928.
Ruhl, J.B. 2008. Law’s complexity: A primer. Georgia State University Law Review 24: 885–991.
Torpman, Jan. 2003. Learning to change: The production of contingency in modern legal systems. Law and Critique 14: 71–92.
Vermeule, Adrian. 2012. The system of the constitution. New York: Oxford University Press.
Waldrop, Mitchell, M. 1994. 2nd ed. Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. London: Penguin Books.
Webb, Julian. 2005. Law, ethics, and complexity: Complexity theory and the normative reconstruction of law. Cleveland State Law Review 52: 227–242.