Cybernetics & Systems Theory

[@matthewmcteigue7347]

I like how it roasted the audience a few seconds into the video- "How much of a dork would you have to be to listen to a podcast on systems theory". Thanks.

[@bangbang07]

This is, possibly, one of the first instances where a detailed treatment of Luhmann and his conception of Systems Theory is being undertaken in KZbin. It's true that content regarding cybernetics, and correspondingly systems theory, is hard to come by even in popular discourse, and that's probably thanks to the ideological bias that the establishment has towards posthumanist theorising. I find that the criticisms of Habermas's stances ( although his take is very articulate and in-depth, as has been pointed out in this podcast) that they do not correspond to the 'realities' of the modern world to a large degree, is justified. To the contrary, Luhmann's views seem to be more coherent with today's world, albeit being very cold and unforgiving. But I think that's the point of his stance, to be free of ideology as much as possible. The same cannot be said for the state of sociology ( as a discipline) as it exists today, too caught up in the normative ideals based on a purported 'objective take' on society ( chuckles). Love that you chose to do a podcast on this 👍. Eagerly awaiting for more

[@collinharman1839]

Started reading Bateson earlier this year without very much context on cybernetics more broadly or how he connected to Deleuze, really happy to hear him brought up!

[@TheIrrelevant42]

Awesom episode! Btw, adding insult to injury from your intro: the as mentioned in [3:53] the prefix "cyber" actually IS related to the "cyber" in cybernetics - it's the origin of the prefix ;)

[@maze-le8245]

I like the variation of the format actually. Episodes with the whole crew are also worthwhile, but you sometimes have the tendency to talk over one another and get stuck in petty quibbles. In this constellation you kind of "get things done" (goes for this episode and the one for the "rons").

[@tomaszjanowski747]

Hi, I would like to ask you for advice. I am writing an essay on rationality in politics, in which I focused on rationality in the broad sense, because the rationality of politics depends on it. In my work I argue against rationality, showing various factors, far from rational, which determine our thinking - referring to Marx (historical materialism, ideology), Gramsci (cultural hegemony), Nietzsche (genealogy of morality, resentment) Foucault (episteme, connection between knowledge and power etc.) and Freud (the unconscious). I am considering to extend it by using Darwin's thought (determination by socio-biological factors). I was also wondering how I could enrich my work more - I was thinking about implementing structuralist ideas or the Frankfurt School, or maybe going more in a postmodern way. Do you have any advice or comments on my plan and possible developments? If so, I would be very grateful! Also, I'd like to thank you for your brilliant work, which inspired me during writing! Regards, have a nice day!

[@jamesfosterevans5423]

I would say Tomasz narrow your focus. If it is just an essay, say around 2,000 words, do not try to flesh out the Frankfurt School, postmodernism, social Darwinism, and so on. Choose a figure, say Marcuse (Freud and Marx) or Deleuze and Guattari (Freud, Marx, Nietzsche), or Gramsci, or Marx, or Nietzsche. Choose a main focus. For example, the historical reliance of both Marx and Nietzsche has been used heavily. Someone like Raymond Geuss is a good scholar who attacks moralism within political philosophy. If we are attacking rationality you need to define your meaning of reason so it fits with your critique. For example, Geuss attacks Rawlsian reason within his 'veil of ignorance' and suggests (as you mention) ideology affects our reason, etc. If you really want to drill the point in someone like Foucault is the main thinker you mention that attacks rationality within a political context.

[@Thedragonwithin]

How did your paper turn out?

[@anonymousbotch2301]

Re: Bi-weekly - "fortnightly" is the word you're looking for

[@thepodunkpunks]

These podcasts of y'all's have really helped me and my friends understand ideology in all the nooks and crannies of our modernity/postmodernity. Youre doing incredible work, thank you.

[@DanChristos]

"How much of a dork do you have to be to have clicked on a podcast about systems theory and cybernetics [...] We're even worse, how much of a dork do you have to be to record a podcast on systems theory" hahahaha!!

[@maryoberschlake1988]

Cyber-socialism sounds workable

[@KR-jq3mj]

Really enjoyed this content. Unfortunately cant afford to become a patreon and listen to the rest of your cybernetics but thanks for the free content 👍

[@petrospk6544]

kee-ver-nee-tes is the pronunciation of the greek word for governor(s), cybernetics literally means "the study/act of governing" "poesis" means "the act of making (something)", as well as "poetry" which is derived from the same word

[@DaveE99]

A politics without systems theory is just empty as it is it self a theory about systems.

[@childintime6453]

Episode on social media as informatin management system sounds cool

[@thea__2335]

im dork

[@SingularMK]

Good vid 👍

[@kruft5366]

I'm always amazed to find people interested in these topics and they haven't heard of David Bohm. I guess McCarthyism worked.

[@Liliquan]

Well they're Canadian, sooooooo

[@SgtPwnVids]

Idk if you will see this, but please make a pod on Lewis Mumford! I just read myth of the machine 1 and 2. You can clearly see his influence on D&G. (He created the idea of the megamachine)

[@GoodOldDaysAreOver]

Good stuff

[@TheGringuish12]

Based and autopoiesis pilled

[@maryoberschlake1988]

Hawthorne effect?

[@jedjedjedjedjedjed]

Ooooooo cool! 😎 I'm a big dork, CyberSystem me!!

[@DNA912]

I'm a proud dork