english version
To “Guiding distinction. Observation with social system theory” – Dubrovnik 024
Lecture performance (1)
The german term „Sinn“ (2) refers to sensory perception. The persuasive nature of sensory perception could represent a connection to the evidence that is inherent to the senses.
The possible deception through sensory perception refers to the relationship between appearance and reality, the diversity of which can be traced back to perception.
In the „a sense of having“ the evolutionary side shows itself. The sense of balance of the string dancer has trained himself, thus becomes comparable to a physiological characteristic. This variation of SINN speaks of circular, systems connecting, new systems forming abilities, skills, competencies.
The evolutionary side of SINN shows itself in „having a sense“. The physiological property of the sense of balance is trained and optimized during rope dancing. This variation of SINN speaks of circular, systems connecting, new systems forming abilities, skills, competencies.
SINN
The fact that Luhmann attaches such importance to the concept of „SINN“ in his reflections (3) is remarkable! „Ist Sinnsuche“one of the core concepts of “old European” thought from which Luhmann sought to distance itself?
SINN is unthinkable without physiology, without psyche, consciousness, without the social, without unifying entities such as self, God, spirit, world, without leading distinctions such as immanent/transcendent, culture/nature, etc.
SINN suggests a telos, a perspective towards which everything meaningful leads. In SINN, the fate of the Earth is linked to the cosmos.
Myths, fairy tales, stories and plays tell about Senns and ist meaning.
SINN is appreciated, sung about, built, danced, cooked, eaten, starved, run, stormed, clothed, promised, expected, bought, consumed, disciplined, sued for, forced, found again.
Ist is heard, chosen, seen,
Is courted, manipulated, loathed, excluded, appropriated, emphasized, exaggerated, ignored, loved and hated.
For SINN, wars are started and peace is made, people are murdered, subjected to torture… Children are loved, praised, tormented, coddled, abused for it.
Difference theory
Luhmann formulates a difference theory of SINN in which distinctions are crucial.
SINN does not differ from nonsense, from nosense, it differs from the world, from truth, from meaning, from knowledge, from essence, from being, etc.
According to Luhmann, SINN has much, indeed everything, to do with the modalities of probability, of possibility, and with tenses such as present, past and future. In addition to the time dimension, SINN also has a factual dimension and a social dimension with various interconnections.
The distinction between experience and action in relation to SINN also has an importance here that should not be underestimated.
Key distinctions
like true / not true, sick / healthy, beautiful / hideous, are revealed through negations.
Digital/analog, manifest/latent, regional/global function across two sides and a border that separates one side from the other. What the two have in common is their difference; a third factor remains excluded:
This inevitably leads to paradoxical connections, since one thing is always contained in the other.
SINN decomposed
Worlds open up between Luhmann’s view of SINN and that of the old European school of thought. The difference between Luhmann’s understanding of SINN and our everyday understanding of SINN is elementary!
The difference is caused by the fact that SINN is the reservoir in which social evolution becomes diffuse. SINN not only appears at the cutting edge of socially differentiated modernity, forms of SINN compete in many present times, entire areas of SINN are excluded, overlooked, denounced, mocked, laughed at.
Luhmann’s theory implies that there are other forms of SINN than his that can be just as justified. He offers his view in addition, there is no claim to exclusivity!
Separation of morality and SINN
In summary, I would say that Luhmann separates morality and SINN. In “old European thinking”, as in everyday consciousness, the two are inseparably glued together, which makes it difficult to isolate morality from SINN when it comes to questions of SINN.
The „Lebenswelt“ excludes areas of life – which are not congruent with it – such as work, leisure, family, love life, friendship, neighborhood, region, landscape, mobility, health, school, science, art, architecture, design/clothing, religions , politics, business/money, literature, music, dance, film, social media,
etc., which in turn provide SINN schemas
In the description of SINN, the individual’s “meaningful life” inevitably gets mixed up with the differentiated
SINN of the life worlds.
Humans in social systems
The “Luhmann Talk” says: Humans do not appear in Luhmann’s system theory!
On the contrary, he indirectly included the “plasticity of humans” (Joseph Beuys). Luhmann indirectly included the incalculably capable human being: the hunger artist, peace preacher, the Mafiosi, the boring person, the fashion icon, the inventor of the atomic bomb and even more variations of the anthropos in his theory.
In Luhmann, humans appear indirectly in the form of unmanageable, unforeseeable possibilities (4).
Luhmann shows himself to be a true realist and, on the other hand, a modern idealist, because he assumes a freedom that is not given.
SENSE of possibility
For Luhmann, “the difference between what is currently given and what is potentially possible” in experience and action means SINN!
In further differentiations of this sentence, “identities” are symbolically generalized into schemas of the time, social and factual dimensions, each with two horizons, which are temporally divided into “before and after”, socially into “ego and alter-ego” and objectively into “ “inside and outside”.
The bipolar horizons and combination variants keep the possibilities of SINN wide open.
With “Experience or Action,” Luhmann introduced a key distinction into the question of SINN that is focused on in Christianity: In the death on the cross, passive suffering is assigned a significant, world-constituting role compared to active action. (5)
Luhmann and evil
The question arises: can a theory with such a high degree of abstraction actually be used for questions of SINN that individuals ask themselves?
If you take Luhmann’s theoretical approach really seriously, you also have to accept evil, human cruelty as a possibility that can, will lead to good. (6) What is extremely difficult for a morally gifted person to do without falling into malicious sarcasm.
Here Luhmanm appears in the tradition of great thinkers – as a renewing prophet of the apocalypse (7).
methodology
A Lecture Performance (LP) should not be confused with a free lecture on a scientific paper.
LP does not point to an outcome outside the event: “The performance itself is the event!”
Every good scientific lecture is structured like an LP, but the performance character itself is not explicitly reflected. Which – at least in my opinion – should be the case with a lecture performance.
GL
(1) is in the tradition of action teaching by Bazon Brock and the blackboard drawings by Joseph Beuys, whose student and collaborator I was.
(2) I also use the term SINN in English because neither maening nor sence covers the meaning of SINN.
(3) Niklas Luhmann “Social systems – outline of a general theory” Suhrkamp Wissenschaft 666
(4) In anticipation, Robert Musil illustrated the attitude that Luhmann tried to capture in the theoretical construct in the novel “The Man Without Qualities”. One heading reads: “If there is a sense of reality, there must also be a sense of possibility.”
(5)Joseph Beuys. Christ thinking: Thinking Christ
Mennekes, Friedhelm, Catholic Bible Works Publishing House, 1996
(6) Mephistopheles in Goethe’s “Faust”: (I am) “a part of that power that always wants evil and always creates good.”
(7) “Apocalyptic thinking” see Bazon Brock.de
Luhmannsschwarzehefte 