September 10, 2025Философская мысльOpen Access

The dialectic of closure and openness in Luhmann: a contrast with Simondon's processuality and Latour's flat ontology.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Luhmann's concept of autopoietic systems presents a unique understanding of complexity that contrasts with Simondon's focus on continuous becoming.
The article analyzes how Luhmann's systems are operationally closed yet open to structural changes in light of environmental disturbances.
The methodology combines contextual hermeneutics, conceptual-terminological analysis, structural-functional comparison, and critical reconstruction for in-depth analysis.
This comparative approach sheds light on the relevance of closure and openness in navigating the complexities of modern societal challenges.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

This article contrasts Luhmann's autopoietic systems with Simondon's processuality and Latour's flat ontology, suggesting a new understanding of complexity.

Cite This Study

Vladislav Olegovich Sayapin (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c23caeb210217d64789fed https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2025.8.75365

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

This article contrasts Luhmann's autopoietic systems with Simondon's processuality and Latour's flat ontology, suggesting a new understanding of complexity.

The dialectic of closure and openness in Luhmann: a contrast with Simondon's processuality and Latour's flat ontology.

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

The dialectic of closure and openness in Luhmann: a contrast with Simondon's processuality and Latour's flat ontology.

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider