Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Niklas Luhmann
MLN, Vol. 111, No. 3, German Issue. (Apr., 1996), pp. 506-522.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-7910%28199604%29111%3A3%3C506%3AARO%22A%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T
MLN is currently published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/jhup.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
http://www.jstor.org
Mon Dec 3 12:56:04 2007
Niklas Luhmann
See Karl Heinz Bohrer, Die Kritik der Romantik, Frankfurt 1989
MLN, 111 (1996):506522 O 1996 by The Johns Hopkins University Press
NIKLAS LUHMANN
Important changes in the conceptual repertoire of systems theory result when one substitutes "essential definitions" ( WesensdeJinitionen),but
also so-called analytic system concepts, with the theoretical notion of
the operative closure of systems. Essential definitions rested on a heteroreferential (jirerndrefkrentiell)orientation, analytic definitions on a selfreferential orientation of the observer. The notion of operative closure
and, related to it, the theory of autopoietic systems presuppose that selfreferential systems must be observed. They are just that which they
make out of themselves. An observation is therefore only then appropriate if it takes the self-reference of the system and, in the case of systems operating with meaning (sinnhaft operimend), the self-observation
of the system into account. The "paradigm shift" that is thereby accomplished displaces systems theory from the level of first-order observation (systems as objects) to the level of second-order observation (sys
tems as subobjects or obsubjects, to employ formulations ofJean Paul) .5
With this turn, the distinction between self-reference and heteroreference is relocated within the observed observing system. Not only
the scientific observer must be able to distinguish between him/herself
and others (that is, between concepts and objects); this verba/res distinction is valid for all observing systems, even when they are occupied
with sense perceptions and have to rely on the external world without
. ~ generalizabeing able to distinguish between reality and i l l ~ s i o nThe
tion of the concept and the structural problems of observing systems
has far-reaching consequences, which only became apparent through
mathematical analyses. This detour via mathematics frees us at the
same time from the mystifications previously attached to concepts such
as "meaning" (Sinn) or "mind" (Geist). They enable us to see today
more clearly why and how something like "imagination" is required and
in what sense construction/deconstruction/ reconstruction as an ongoing process, an ongoing displacement of distinctions (Derrida's dzffhance), is necessary in order to dissolve paradoxes in and as time.'
See Clauis Fzchteana seu Labgeberiana, in Jean Paul, Werke, vol. 3, Munich 1961,
pp. 1011-56, or Flegeeljahre, eine Biographie, in Werke, vol. 2, Munich 1959, pp. 567-1065,
esp. 641.
"his special condition of an unavoidable trust in the world that can only be disrupted through critical reflection holds, however, only for psychic systems. For this reason we can leave it out of consideration in what follows.
The parallels between deconstruction and second-order cybernetics are treated
more thoroughly in: Niklas Luhmann, "Deconstruction as Second Order Observing,"
Nrw Literary History 24 (1993), pp. 76382.
"
510
NIKLAS LUHMANN
beyond Spencer
Brown- as the correlate of the use of distinctions. With every deployment of distinctions in observation the system will also observe (mitbeobachten) the possibility of crossing the border of the distinction with a
further operation and thus moving from one side to the other-for example: from the positive to the negative, from the good to the bad, from
the allowed to the prohibited, from the useful to the non-useful, from the
profane to the sacred, etc., from the realistic to the fantastic and back
again.
With the memory function the system binds itself to its own, now unalterable past. In this way it produces a present with a past horizon and
motivates itself to proceed from the present state of the world rather
than presupposing everything as new and unknown at every moment
and thus always starting from the beginning.15 For this reason there is
no "originary" present, no present that would be its own origin. With
the oscillator function the system holds its future open-and not
merely as the freedom of performing this or that action, but with regard to the fact that everything can arrive different; and this not arbitrarily, but depending on the distinction being used, which, because it
l4 Hence of the freeing-up and the reimpregnation of the observational capacities of
the system. This according to Heinz FBrster, Das Gedachtnis. Eine quantenmechanische Untersuchung, Vienna 1948. This formulation, by the way, shows how identities emerge,
namely through confirmation (Bmahrung) in reimpregnation or, in the terms of
Spencer Brown (Laws ofForm, p. l o ) , through condensation and confirmation; in any
case, however, through the ongoing equation (Abgleichung) with new irritations but not
with fixed contents of the environment.
l 5 In doctrines of wisdom the opposite requirement is occasionally stated: "The wise
perceive every thing as new, in attentive observation if not at first glance." Baltasar
Gracian, Criticon oder Ueber die allgemeinen Laster des Menschen, Hamburg 1957, p. 15.
includes what it excludes, indicates what in any given case can be otherwise. This too does not require, but rather makes possible a chronometric ordering of future temporal positions.
The difference between the simultaneously required memory and oscillator functions makes the construction of time necessary, the distinction of past and future and the insertion of a present between them in
which alone the system can operate. Via temporal difference modaltheoretical paradoxes can be dissolved, for example the supramodal
necessity of contingency that was once so important to theology. The
necessary can now be seen as a consequence of its being past, the contingent as a feature of the future. With the distinction of past and future the system can, additionally, deal with the requirement that it simultaneously (!) generate and hold in store both redundancy and
variety; the requisite redundancy will then be attributed to the past, the
requisite variety to the future. And that still leaves the question open
whether one conceives of the present as constant, as enduring, and
time as flowing through it, or construes the present of the system as
process, as a movement out of the past in the direction of the future.
The system can think of itself as static and as the correlate to the eternity of God, for example as a soul which must endure its temporal existence; or as dynamic and with the necessity/impossibility of using the
present in order to shape the future. This distinction can then be used
to adapt the temporal structures to socio-cultural configurations. In any
case, however, the constructivist analysis compels one to conclude that
every present is furnished with past and future horizons and for that
reason that the future can never become present.16 The temporal horizons only shift with, indeed by virtue of, the operations of the system so
that from moment to moment new pasts and futures are being selected.
Reformulated in terms of the theory of games, what follows from
this analysis is that the game can only be played within the game and
only with distinctions that identify the individual operations a n d simultaneously the play itseV1' That's why Adam (in Paradise Lost) had to
have the world explained to him by the archangel Raphael; and that's
why Henry Adams can only describe his education as the play of an indeterminate I against an indeterminate world.18
"'n
this point see Niklas Luhmann, "The Future Cannot Begin: Temporal Structures in Modern Society," Social Research 43 (1976),pp. 130-52.
l 7 For several mathematical variants of this theme, cf. Louis H. Kauffman, "Ways of
the Game-Play and Position Play," Cybmnetics and Human Knowing2/3 (1994),pp. 1734.
la Henry Adams, The Education ofHenry Adams, New York 1918.
NIKLAS LUHMANN
With the differentiation of the art system and its disconnection from
external compulsions, an excess of communicative possibilities
'"
On this point see Hayles, Chaos Bound (note 2 ) . On the discussions set into motion
by the theory o f thermodynamics, see Kenneth D. Bailey, Socioloa and the New Systems
Themy, New York 1994.
' O See esp. Earl R. Wasserman,The Subtler Language: Cntzcal Readings ofVeoclassica1and
Romantic Poems, Baltimore 1959.
"
O n this see Peter Fuchs, Moderne Kommunikation: Zur The& des aperativen DisplaceFrankfurt 1993, p. 79ff.
ments,
'
For example, for the Renaissance in the twin concepts unita/moltitudine or, distinguished from these, va'simile/meraviglioso. For a representative example, see Torquato
Tasso, Discorsi dell'artepoetica e in partzculare sopra ilpoema eroica (1587), in: Prose, Milano
1969, where (p. 366) it is stated that the poet should rely more on the one than the other
("0 piu del verisimile o piu del mirabile") in order to produce "magior diletto." The
sphere of the "marvelous," however, is limited by the fact that means have to be found
"per accoppiare il meraviglioso co'l verisimile." (p. 367) Beyond this example, one could
of course recall such ancient cosmological distinctions as ordo/varietas or unitas/diversitas.
'3 At the same time, biology reorients its inquiries from pre-given essential characteristics to "irritability" as that characteristic which enables the evolution of living beings. SeeJean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet de Lamarck, Philosophie zoologzque, Paris
1809, reprint Weinheim 1960, esp. vol. I, p. 82ff.
'4 Cf. Baxter Hathaway, Marvels and Commonplares: Renaissance Literary Criticism, New
York 1968.
Of course, that doesn't mean that art can indicate the one-way traffic on Fifth
Avenue incorrectly or claim that Carthage defeated Rome. In this, Tasso is still right
(Discorsi,p. 367), but today that's no longer the problem.
P6 For example, in the sense of the "5lteste Systemprogramm des deutschen Idealismus," here cited from G. W. F. Hegel, Werke,vol. I, Frankfurt 1971, pp. 23436, or in the
sense of Friedrich Schlegel.
P7 CharlesJencks, "Postmodern vs. Late-Modern," in Ingeborg Hoesterey, ed., Zeitgeist
in Babel: T h Postmodernist Controversy, Bloomington 1991, pp. 9-21; here, p. 9.
~
"
514
NIKLAS LUHMANN
"
"Uber Philosophie," in Friedrich Schlegel, Werke, Berlin 1980, vol. 11, pp. 101-29;
here, p. 104.
30 Ludwig Tieck, Friihe Erzahlungen und Romane, Munich 1963, p. 378.
31 In this regard also the correspondences to postmodernism are not accidental. See
David Roberts, Art and Enlightenment: Aesthetic Theory aaferAdorno, I,incoln, Neb. 1991;
"Die Paradoxie der Form in der Literatur," in Dirk Baecker, ed., Problemr &Form, Frankfurt 1993, pp. 22-44.
from the religious system, the political or economic systems, nor from
the households of the most important families as to how artworks are
to be made. For this reason one could almost say: autonomy becomes
the destiny which is interpreted as a defence against external intervention; o r the invisible cage in which the artist is forced to select,
to be original and free. Romanticism thus views and deals with the
problem of autonomy on the level of the artwork and the creative freedom of the artist derived from it, but not on the social level of the functional system of art; for only in this way can Romanticism define its position. The social system of art lets itself be represented through the
idea of art.
All that reads like a commentary on the self-generated "unresolvable indeterminacy" that is unavoidable as soon as one reintroduces
the difference between system and environment within the system itself. And just as in mathematics imaginary numbers or imaginary
spaces are required in order to absorb paradoxes,32Romanticism condenses the imaginary to the fantastic, and thereby to forms that precisely do not mean what they show, but are nothing other than materialized irony.33 But that by no means implies that all forms dissolve,
that no distinction any longer holds, that everything becomes arbitrary. On the other hand, it does not suffice to postulate with Kant that
freedom is given for its rational use or that the genius must make a disciplined and cautious use of his geniality.34 Rather, the artwork receives the task of demonstrating its own contingency and being its own
program; and that makes very severe demands on both productive and
receptive observation, which therefore cannot happen "just any way."
Self-generated indeterminacy does not by any means imply that n o
meaningful operations, no determinations are possible; merely that
determinations must be recognizable as self-determinations and as
such observable. In other words, communication must be transferred
to the level of second-order observation.
Against this background the reason that the Romantics begin to play
3
' See Spencer Brown, Laws ofFwm, p. 58ff, where a tunnel is introduced beneath the
surface on which the system performs its acceptable calculations. Cf. Dirk Baecker, "Im
Tunnel," in Dirk Baecker, ed., Probleme drrForm, pp. 1437.
33 On the further development of this tendenc-th
ever new outraged opponents-up to surrealism, see Bohrer, Die Kritik dm Romantik, p. 39ff.
34 This is, by the way, a longstanding, pre-romantic idea. One encounters it in the distinction libertas/licentia of natural law theory or in the disegno doctrine of the n'nquecento
with its distinction between creative imagination and the skilled and practiced execution of a drawing.
516
NIKLAS LUHMANN
with "reality," doubling identities in the form of Doppelganger, twins, exchanged names, and mirror images, becomes intelligible: in order to
show that the same can also be otherwise and must be set into relation
with itself. Instead of the ontological guiding difference (Leitunterscheidung) between being and non-being-which on the side of being
congeals to substance so that in the reapplication of the distinction to
itself the side of being is confirmed-other
guiding distinctions
appear, for example, the distinction finite/infinite (determinate/
indeterminate) or, alternatively, inside and outside.35 Ontological
metaphysics, which took only one possible primary distinction as its
point of departure, now had to be outtrumped by a meta-metaphysics,
which could take shape with the typically Kantian question regarding
conditions of possibility. The localization of reality with respect to the
distinction inside/outside was then as now a hardly solvable p r ~ b l e m : ~ "
"1st das Reale auBer uns: so sind wir ewig geschieden davon; ist es in
uns: so sind wirs ~ e l b e r . " ~However,
'
because no adequate, sufficiently
rich, many-valued logic is available, the problem is displaced onto aesthetics. Translated into constructivist terminology, that means that the
decision as to what can be treated as reality and what not is made internal to the system. The reality test of "resistance" doesn't have to be
given up as a result, but it is no longer a matter of a resistance of the
environment to the system, rather of system operations to system operations within the same system-above all the resistance of the selfproduced memory against new impulses or occurent ideas, or the resistance of the already begun artwork or narrative against something
which can no longer be added to it. Viewed in this way, reality is nothing more than the correlate of consistency tests within the system, and
this can occur in such a way that magic, ghosts, the supernatural, etc.
are introduced into a tale so as to acquire narrative plausibility, which
can then be revoked within the tale itself when, at the end, a perfectly
natural explanation for all the strangeness is provided.38 The figure of
the Doppelganger thus means nothing more than that in reality there is
35 On the plurality of such "primary distinctions," see Philip G. Herbst, Alternatives to
Hierarchies, Leiden 1976, p. 88. Herbst's work is, by the way, quite probably the earliest
sociological response to Spencer Brown.
36 On the contemporary version of the problem, see N. Katherine Hayles, "Constrained Constructivism: 1,ocating Scientific Inquiry in the Theater of Representation,"
in George Levine, ed., Realism and Representation:Essays on the Problem ofRealism in Relation to Science, Literature, and Culture, Madison, Wisc. 1993, pp. 27-43.
37 Jean Paul, Vorschule derAsthetik, in Werke, vol. 5, Munich 1963, p. 7-514 (445).
38 This is a well-known narrative technique of Ludwig Tieck's, from William Louell to
Llas ZauberschloJ.
"
On this point, see Heinz von Foerster, "Das Gleichnis vom blinden Fleck," in Gerhard Johann Lischka, ed., D m entfrsselte Blick: Symposium, Workshops, Ausstellung, Bern
1992, pp. 15-47.
40 See also Ludwig Tieck, William Lowell, p. 603: "Es ist ein Fluch, der auf der Sprache
des Menschen liegt, daB keiner den anderen verstehen kann." Cf. also p. 383 (Balder's
letter to William 1,ovell).
NIKLAS LUHMANN
4 1 One can speculate that Kant's Kntik der Urteilskraft aimed at such an integration,
but failed to provide it.
virtue of the fact that it is found unexpectedly. This is called "wit" ( Witz)
and is found "intere~ting."~'
One can show that the same is different
and that diverse things allow identities to be known so long as one directs the comparison in terms of this cognitive interest. But why should one
do that? For the reason that it is a cognitive strategy that makes it possible to deal with extraordinarily complex, in the final analysis worldsocietal states of affairs. The semantics of the society is keyed to its
structural complexity and one component of this is that talk of ideas
and values provides a surface description that prevents inquiry from
reaching the paradox of the equivalence of the different and thus
from developing modes of description sufficiently complex to grasp
the complexity of the society.
One could speak in this connection of a cultural ~ ~ r n ~ t o m o l o g y . ~ "
The themes of culture have a symptomatic function. They do not
merely mean themselves, but also something else; and that becomes
especially noticeable when they are formulated as unconditional, transcendental, or absolute, and are introduced into the communicative
process with precisely this import. Thus there arises in the course of
the nineteenth century a second culture, a culture of suspicion that
raises the question of what is being disguised by the themes of culture.
I am referring, of course, to Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, and the sociology
of knowledge that follows in their path.
Poking around in allegedly latent structures is a way of searching out
hidden interests. The appropriate response to such searching is a tu
quoqueargument, namely the question as to the interest behind this interest in latency. The suspicion of veiled motives becomes universal
and therefore trivial; it is then a matter of nothing other than a double description of reality with first- and second-order observation.
The considerations set forth in the previous sections allow for a reformulation of the question as to the function of cultural themes. Society requires a memory function that allows it to accept the present
as the result of the past and as the starting point for subsequent operations. A memory, however, does not merely hold past events in reserve; it accomplishes above all a continuous discrimination of forgetting and remembering. Most everything sinks away and very little
is so condensed and reconfirmed that it can be reused. This sortal
4P For the subsequent development of this configuration, see Karl Heinz Bohrer,
Pldtzlichkeit: Zum Augenblick des asthetzschen Scheins, Frankfurt 1981.
43 This is the formulation of Matei Calinescu, "From the One to the Many: Pluralism
in Today's Thought," in Hoesterey, ed., Postmodmist Controversy,pp. 15674; here, 157.
520
NIKLAS LUHMANN
44 "Themesn-the reference, of course, is to communicating and therefore social systems. For perceptual (psychic) systems one would have to speak of "objects."
45 Novalis, Werke,ed. Ewald Wasmuth, Heidelberg 1957, vol. I, p. 129 (fragment 417).
Cf. fragment 2225 (vol. 11, p. 125): "Ale Erinnerung ist Gegenwart. Im reinen Element
wird alle Erinnerung uns wie notwendige Verdichtung erscheinen." Or Bliilhenslaub 109:
"Die gewohnliche Gegenwart verknupft Vergangenheit und Zukunft durch
Beschrankung. Es entsteht Kontiguitit, durch Erstarrung, Krystallisation. Es gibt aber
eine geistige Gegenwart, die beyde durch Auflosung identifiziert." Werke, Tagehiicherund
BriejFriedrich uon Hardenbergs, ed. Hans Joachim Mahl and Richard Samuel, Darmstadt
1978, vol. 2, p. 283. Cf. also Jean Paul, fitan, in Werke,ed. Norbert Miller, Munich 1969,
vol. 11, p. 478: "Nein, wir haben keine Gegenwart, die Vergangenheit mu13 ohne sie die
Zukunft gebiren."
522
NIKLAS LUHMANN
d o justice to Romanticism in a theoretical redescription. The systemstheoretical instruments of description break with the semantic repertoire in terms of which Romanticism sought to understand itself. For
the actual aim of this redescription is a theory of modern society for
which Romanticism can only have-but this in a most revealing waysymptomatic value.
University ofBielefild