Titlebook: Luhmann Observed; Radical Theoretical Anders Cour,Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos Book 2013 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmilla

OREX

Limits of Interpretation, Closure of Communication: Umberto Eco and Niklas Luhmann Observing Textschanges between disciplines and between theoretical assumptions were more open and more frequent than in later decades (probably also because there were much stronger and better acknowledged theories).

gain631

推延

Contingency, Reciprocity, the Other, and the Other in the Other Luhmann–Lacan, an Encountersential paradoxity lead to the recognition of the co-originarity of law (and indeed this to a certain extent applies to all other subsystems), on the one hand, and social communication, on the other. That means: any scheme of theoretical reconstruction of both concepts generates them in structural s

lobster

Luhmann’s Ontologyrmined category to be dismissed.. Synonymous with the Western metaphysical tradition that is anchored by Aristotelian logic, ontology is correlated with the pattern of social organization characterized by the epoch of regional high cultures, namely the hierarchically ordered form of differentiation

詳細(xì)目錄

The Autopoietic Fold: Critical Autopoiesis between Luhmann and Deleuzehope to show that, more than mere duplication, the process of folding gives rise to an infinity of repetition, in its turn generating a proliferation of autopoiesis. Deleuze folded in Luhmann, Luhmann folded in Deleuze. The folding does not displace the theories but allows them to go further into th

犬儒主義者

GNAW

過(guò)于平凡

Only Connect: Luhmann and Bioethicsre treated by tissue transplanted from a sibling, where the embryo-that-becomes-the-sibling has been genetically screened and selected before implantation to ensure that it is a donor-compatible tissue match. It is the first, and so far the only, instance of the ‘screening in’ of desirable genetic c

plasma

友好

Limits of Interpretation, Closure of Communication: Umberto Eco and Niklas Luhmann Observing Textse (although complex for the people involved) is easier to describe, therefore I will start from it: from the situation around the eighties in which exchanges between disciplines and between theoretical assumptions were more open and more frequent than in later decades (probably also because there we