From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Systems (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Cybernetics.

Vote for deletion sept 2004[edit]

For a September 2004 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sociocybernetics

  • As an actual article, although unencyclopedic original "research", I think this is more of a VFD candidate than a speed delete. -- Infrogmation 15:51, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I think that some clarification and reformating is in order. I do not think it ought to be deleted.
  • Section: Sociocybernetics may hold the key to the future needs major reworking or deletion. -- NCriss 23:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


For sometime now, there has been a "neutrality" tag on the article, with the notation "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see discussion on talk page." Looking at this page, I could see no discussion, just the above notation by NCriss that a section (that no longer exists) needs reworking. I've removed the neutrality tag (and the one that said that the article was a "personal essay." I've left the clean-up tag, but for goodness sakes let's not just see how many tags we can add to an article, let's fix it! Sunray (talk) 15:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I deleted this:[edit]

"Other challenges faced by sociocyberneticians are those that stem from Bookchin's work "The Ecology of Freedom and the emergence and decline of Hierarchy".

Bookchin's argument is that what has often been described as "primitive" societies are best thought of as "organic" societies. People within them have differentiated roles as do the cells of a body, but this differentiation is largely reversible. Coordination between the cells is not organized by some "center" but through a network of feedback (cybernetic) processes. Particularly important are organisms' ability to evolve as well as reproduce. But simply saying that the process is "autopoietic" is to evade the task of identifying the multiple and mutually reinforcing cybernetic processes that are at work.

Yet Bookchin's claim is that the evolution of organic societies into our current, vastly destructive, hierarchical societies - over millennia - has also taken place through some ... (almost cancerous?) ... unstoppable autopoietic process. If we are to halt this process ... which is about to destroy us as a species, probably carrying the planet as we know it with us, it will be necessary to map and find ways of intervening in the sociocybernetic processes involved. No centralised system-wide, command-and-control oriented, change will suffice. Systems intervention requires complex systems-oriented intervention targeted at nodes in the system, not system-wide change based on "common sense"

I have not read the book, and I am not seeing documentation: neither in regards to the argument's existence, nor any supporting its claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC)