Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Foundations of Niklas Luhmann’s Theory of Social Systems.Alex Viskovatoff - 1999 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 29 (4):481-516.
    Of all contemporary social theorists, Luhmann has best understood the centrality of the concept of meaning to social theory and has most extensively worked out the notion's implications. However, despite the power of his theory, the theory suffers from difficulties impeding its reception. This article attempts to remedy this situation with some critical arguments and proposals for revision. First, the theory Luhmann adopted from biology as the basis of his own theory was a poor choice since that theory has no (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Space is the Place: The Laws of Form and Social Systems.Michael Schiltz - 2007 - Thesis Eleven 88 (1):8-30.
    It is well known that Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems is grounded in Spencer-Brown’s seminal Laws of Form (LoF) or ‘calculus of indications’. It is also known that the reception of the latter has been rather problematic. This article attempts to describe the construction of LoF, and confront it with Niklas Luhmann’s ontological and epistemological premises. I show how LoF must be considered a protologic, or research into the fundamentals of logical systems. The clue to its understanding is to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Foundations for the social sciences explanation: Revisiting NiklasLuhmann’s contructivism.Jorge Gibert Galassi & Juan Pablo Venables - 2020 - Humanities Journal of Valparaiso 16:191-214.
    In this work, it is argued that one of the foundations of NiklasLuhmann’s theory of social systems, namely that it has no ontology, would prevent the elaboration of explanations in sociology. Because the theory has a formal-logical foundation, which does not presuppose ontology, there are insurmountable obstacles to achieving this objective. For this reason, it is valid to wonder about the merit of a theory that, after 20 years, insists on not aligning itself with ontological premises in a robust way (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Objectivity, value spheres, and "inherent laws": On some suggestive isomorphisms between Weber, Bourdieu, and Luhmann.Hans Henrik Bruun - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (1):97-120.
    I give an account of Max Weber's views concerning the basis of the objectivity of the cultural sciences. In this connection, I offer a critical discussion of his distinction between different "value spheres," each with its own "intrinsic logic." I then consider parallels between Weber's "value spheres" and central elements of Bourdieu's field theory and Luhmann's systems theory, and try to show to what extent Bourdieu's and Luhmann's problems, and the solutions they suggest, can be seen as similar to Weber's. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark