Normative systems theory for sustaining democracy

Democracy is the most widely admired type of political system but also perhaps the most difficult to maintain. If democracy does not operate by the principles of justice, the people may prefer to be governed through their own consent. Legitimacy requires effective performance. But effectiveness may be sacrificed to consent. Democracy is sustainable when its institutional framework promotes normatively desirable and politically desired objectives. It can be said that the viability of a democratic system depends on the principle of justice, which leads to the functioning of autopoietic system in the complex environment of civil society.     

激进生成论及其反表征主义革命

生成论是当代具身认知科学中的一个新取向。它反对传统认知科学中的表征主义观点,主张心智并非认识者对环境信息的表征和加工,而是行动的制造者,是特定身体构造和身体能力的行动者与环境的互动与耦合过程。激进生成论认为自创生的生成论和感觉运动的生成论在反对表征主义方面过于“温和”。因此,它主张“激进化”生成论,强调基本心智就是一种反应形式,不包含任何内容性心理表征。因此,它要掀起一场反表征主义“革命”。这一激进主张受到来自左右两方面的批评。     

Academic Capitalism as a Key Challenge and the Emergence of the New Economy Scenario

What are the evolutionary scenarios of academic capitalism, able to deliver an ever more strategic knowledge, with a high added value within the global society? Under the current system of knowledge economy, characterized, at the beginning of this third millennium, by strong hyper-complexity, the challenge for the society evolution toward a sustainable world, full of varieties and opportunities, is the development of a form of capitalism able to guide and facilitate the reshaping of society through self-organizing systems (Lazslo 2011 Lazslo, E. 2011. “Prefazione”. In Teoria sistemica e complessità morfogenetica del capitalismo, Edited by: Pitasi, A. Rome: Aracne.  [Google Scholar]) the academic capitalism as a form of functional capitalism, the difference that makes the knowledge considered at a systemic level.     

The Idea of Creation and the Theory of Autopoietic Processes

Systems theory is proposed as a major resource for reconceptualizing a Christian theology of creation. Section I outlines the principles of the theory of autopoietic systems and discusses in particular Manfred Eigen's and Stuart Kauffman's differing views of the emergence of life. Section II shows how biblical texts conceive of God's "blessing" as a divine installment and reshaping of spatio-temporal fields for creaturely self-productivity. On this double basis, Section III undertakes a constructive attempt to formulate a theology of self-productivity within a Trinitarian framework. The unity of divine self-consistency and capacity for self-relativization is seen as the clue for understanding how God not only sustains the world in general but also influences particular processes by changing the overall probability pattern of evolving systems.     

How Frameworks Can Help Operationalize Sustainable Development Indicators

After nearly three decades of discussion about sustainable development are we any nearer to achieving it? And do we even know what a sustainable world will look like for future generations? Early definitions of sustainable development were so broad as to allow a range of interpretations based largely on individual interests and anthropocentric needs. We are measuring the performance of countless indicators of sustainable development, but is this more an exercise in applying data than meaningful progress? This article explores the ultimate goals of sustainable development and the most important means of achieving this by analyzing and comparing two frameworks designed to direct attention to the fundamental means and the ends of sustainable development.     

Creation, Co-operation, and Causality: A Reply to Gregersen

Niels H. Gregersen seeks to illuminate the nature of continuing divine action in the world and to show that the classical theistic doctrine of continuous creation is consonant with some recent scientific theories of self-productive ("autopoietic") systems. Central to these theories is the concept of co-operation; central to Gregersen's theological appropriation of these theories is also the notion of structuring causality developed by philosopher Fred Dretske. While supportive of Gregersen's overall aims and emphases, we find significant disanalogies between co-operation as a theological construct and as an evolutionary strategy. We also doubt the utility of Dretske's notion for his project.