Upgrade of cybernetics in the context of developing creativity
Abstract
The author attempted to consider upgrade of cybernetics in the context of developing creativity in modern scientific discourse. First-order cybernetics studied observed systems, second-order cybernetics dealt with observing systems, and third-order cybernetics studied the subject–polysubject environment – cyberspace. So, changes in the character of labour, the means of production, industrial relations and labour power have been analyzed. The article also considers the problem of “physicists and lyric poets”, which prompted researchers to look for possible ways to resolve the contradictions. It resulted in the establishment of interdisciplinary connections between cybernetics and art at the non-classical stage, while at the post-non-classical stage, an interdisciplinary synthesis led to their mutually beneficial collaboration. The author uses the notion of hyphspace as metaphorical abstraction for defining a virtual reality (a component of the noosphere) that exists inside a computer network (the subject–polysubject environment). Hyphspace at the present stage of cybernetics development is becoming the basis for its subsequent (but not final) upgrade – fourth order cybernetics. Cybernetics in an interdisciplinary synthesis with art is moving from cognizing human–machine systems to the formations with growing human-dimensionality, where there is a persistent increase in the number of users–nomads.
Santrauka
Autorė siekia apsvarstyti kibernetikos atnaujinimą kūrybiškumo plėtros kontekste šiuolaikiniame moksliniame diskurse. Pirmosios kartos kibernetika tyrinėjo stebimas sistemas, antrosios kartos kibernetika nagrinėjo stebėjimo sistemas, o trečiosios kartos kibernetika analizavo subjektinę-polisubjekto aplinką – kibernetinę erdvę. Buvo gvildenami darbo pobūdžio, gamybos priemonių, gamybos santykių ir darbo jėgos pokyčiai. Straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjama „fizikų ir lyrikos poetų“ problema, kuri paskatino tyrėjus ieškoti galimų būdų išspręsti prieštaravimus. Tai sukūrė tarpdalykinius kibernetikos ir meno santykius neklasikinio etapo metu, o postne-klasikiniame tarpsnyje tarpdalykinė sintezė nutiesė kelią jų abipusiškai naudingam bendradarbiavimui. Autorė vartoja šakniaerdvės sąvoką kaip metaforinę abstrakciją, skirtą virtualiai realybei (noosferos komponentas), egzistuojančiai kompiuterių tinkle (subjektinė-polisubjekto aplinka), apibrėžti. Dabartiniu šakniaerdvės raidos etapu tampa vėlesnio (tačiau ne galutinio) atnaujinimo – ketvirtosios kartos kibernetikos – pagrindu. Kibernetika, sudarydama tarpdalykinę sintezę su menu, pereina nuo žinomų žmogaus ir mašinos sistemų prie struktūrų, kurių atveju didėja žmogaus dimensiškumo lygis ir nuolat auga vartotojų bei nomadų skaičius.
Reikšminiai žodžiai: menas, kontrolė, kūrybiškumas ir kūrybingumas, kibernetika, kibernetinė erdvė, šakniaerdvė, nomadai, „fizikai ir lyrikos poetai“, subjektinė-poli-subjekto aplinka, atnaujinimas.
Keyword : art, control, creativity and creativeness, cybernetics, cyberspace, hyphspace, nomads, “physicists and lyric poets”, subject–polysubject environment, upgrade
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Attali, J. (1993). Na poroge novogo tysjacheletija. Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija.
Berehovyi, P. M., Bilokin, I. P., Lavitska, Z. G., Polishchuk, L. K., & Topachevskyi, O. V. (1965). Korin’. In I. P. Bilokin & O. L. Lyna (Eds.), Slovnyk-dovidnyk z botaniky (pp. 275–276). Radyanska Shkola.
Beskrovny, I. (2004). Homo Mobiles: shag v storonu matritsy. E-Learning World, 4, 25–31.
Bevzenko, L. D. (2002). Sotsialnaya samoorganizatsiya. Sinergeticheskaya paradigma: vozmozhnosti sotsialnykh interpretatsiy. Instytut sotsiologii NAN Ukrainy.
Biologicheskij slovar’ on-line. (2018). Kornevische. http://bioword.ru/K/K453.htm
Boltzmann, L. (1984). Izbrannye trudy. Nauka.
Burkov, V. N., & Kondratyev, V. V. (1981). Mehanizmy funktsionirovanija organizatsionnyh sistem. Nauka.
Clausius, R. (1870). On a mechanical theorem applicable to heat. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 4(40), 122–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786447008640370
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. University of Minnesota Press.
Delyagin, M. G. (2003). Mirovoy krizis: obschaya teoriya globalizatsii. INFRA-M.
Dibbell, J. (2012). Tenevaja set’. V mire nauki, 5, 55–61.
Duivestein, S., & Bloem, J. (2013). The dark side of social media: alarm bells, analysis and the way out. LINE UP boek en media bv.
Foerster, Von H. (1979). Cybernetics of cybernetics. In K. Krippendorff (Ed.), Communication and control in society (pp. 5–8). Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc.
Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. ACE.
Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Horuzhij, S. S. (2008). Problema postcheloveka, ili transformativnaja antropologija glazami Sinergiynoy antropologii. Filosofskiye Nauki, 2, 10–31.
Kirk, P. M., Cannon, P. F., Minter, D. W., & Stalpers, J. (Eds.). (2008). Dictionary of the fungi. CAB International.
Knysh, I. (2016). Filosofskyi dyskurs: rhizome versus radix versus hypha. Filosofija i Politologija v Kontekste Sovremennoy Kultury, 6(15), 157–164.
Knysh, I. (2017a). Merezhevyi filosofskyi dyskurs stosovno pryntsypiv: rhizome versus radix versus hypha. Praktychna Filosofija, 1(63), 53–62.
Knysh, I. (2017b). Suchasnyi menedzhment u konteksti LLL-osvitnioi paradygmy. Versus: Naukovo-Teoretychnyi Chasopys, 2(10), 30–34.
Knysh, I. V., & Kochubey, N. V. (2017). Tekhnolohichni aspekty stanovlennja novoyi osvitnioi paradyhmy. Informatsiyni Tekhnolohii i Zasoby Navchannja, 60(4), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v60i4.1600
Knysh, I. V., Kochubey, N. V., & Niesvietov, O. O. (2017). Innovative enterprise structures: world and national experience. Science and Practice: Innovative Approach. Collection of Scientific Articles (pp. 275–277). Series: Economics and Finance. Les Editions L’Originale.
Kochubey, N. V. (2013). Sinergeticheskiye kontsepty v nelineynykh kontekstakh: seti, upravleniye, obrazovaniye. Palmarium Academic Publishing.
Kononov, D. A., Kulba, V. V., & Shubin, A. N. (2004). Informatsionnoye upravleniye: printsipy modelirovanija i oblasti ispolzovanija. Trudy IPU RAN, 23, 5–29.
Kutyrev, V. A. (2015). Posledneye tselovaniye. Aletija.
Lefebvr, V. A. (2003). Algebra sovesti. Izdatelstvo “Kogito-Tsentr”.
Lefebvr, V. A. (1973). Konfliktuyushchiye struktury. Izdatelstvo Sovetskoye Radio.
Lefebvr, V. A. (1965). O samoorganizuyushchikhsya i samorefleksivnykh sistemakh i ikh issledovanii. In M. F. Vedenov (Ed.), Problemy issledovaniya sistem i struktur: materialy k konferentsii (pp. 61–68). AN SSSR.
Lefebvr, V. A., Shchedrovitskyi, G. P., & Yudin, E. G. (1965). “Estestvennoye” i “iskustvennoye” v semioticheskikh sistemakh. In M. F. Vedenov (Ed.), Problemy issledovanija sisyem i struktur: materialy k konferencii (pp. 141–149). AN SSSR.
Lepskij, V. E. (2012). Refleksivnye aspekty v evolutsii predstavleniy ob upravlenii. Refleksivnye protsessy i upravleniye (pp. 26–59). Izdatelstvo “Kogito-Tsentr”.
Maksvel, Dzh. K. (1952). Izbrannye sochinenija po teorii elektromagnitnogo polja. GITTL.
Marks, K. (2019). Kapital. T. I, K. I.: Process proizvodstva kapitala. https://www.esperanto.mv.ru/Mark-sismo/Kapital1/
Mazur, P. S., & Duchlinski, P. (2020). Credibility and creativity in network society. Creativity Studies, 13(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2020.6585
Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, 38(8), 114–117.
Morin, E. (2005). Metod: priroda prirody. Progress-Traditsija.
Motloch, J. L. (2017). Big history understanding of complexity, informatics and cybernetics. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 15(6), 54–60.
Mozheiko, M. A. (2001). Rizoma. In A. A. Gritsanov & M. A. Mozheiko (Eds.), Postmodernizm: entsiklopedija (pp. 656–660). Interpresservis/Knizhnyi Dom.
Nejman, fon Dzh. (1960). Obshchaja i logicheskaja teorija avtomatov. http://db3.nsc.ru:8080/jspui/bit-stream/SBRAS/9093/5/Neuman_Can_Turing.pdf
Paek, K.-M. (2019). The transformative potential of creative art practices in the context of interdisciplinary research. Creativity Studies, 12(1), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2019.9701
Polonsky, V. (1968). Soznaniye i tvorchestvo. Izdatelstvo Pisateley v Leningrade.
Saco, D. (2002). Cybering democracy: public space and the internet. University of Minnesota Press.
Shestakova, I. G. (2013). Noosfera: materializatsija idei kak kljuchevoj faktor sovremennogo progressa, Istoricheskije, filosofskije, politicheskije i yuridicheskije nauki, kulturologija i iskusstvovedenije. Voprosy Teorii i Praktiki, 3(29), 202–206.
Snow, Ch. (1970). Dve kultury i nauchnaja revoljutsija. In Y. B. Etingoff & M. D. Millionshchikov (Eds.), Nauka i chelovechestvo (pp. 84–98). Znaniye.
Stepin, V. S. (2003). Samorazvivayushchiyesja sistemy i postneklassicheskaja ratsionalnost’. Voprosy Filosofii, 8, 5–17.
Swinburne, R. (2014). The existence of god. Oxford University Press.
Umpleby, S. А. (2016). Reviving the American society for cybernetics, 1980–1982. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 23(1), 19–27.
Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics: or control and communication in the animal and the machine. The MIT Press.
Yemelin, V. (2004). Globalnaja set’ i kiberkultura: Rizoma i internet. Onjarlndepmhgl. http://emeline.narod.ru/
Yemelin, V. A. (1999). Informatsionnye tekhnologii v kontekste postmodernistskoy filosofii (PhD/Doctoral Thesis). Moscow State University, Russia.