Abstract

One can discard Luhmann’s contributions as flawed (e.g., Padgett & Powell, 2012, pp. 55-58) or discuss the limitations of the theory from a sociological perspective (e.g., Giddens, 1984, at p. xxxvi f.; Leydesdorff, 2010), but in my opinion, important steps were made by Luhmann in sociological theorizing when compared with his predecessors such as Parsons and Habermas, but also when compared with more empirically oriented contemporaries such as Merton and Giddens. These new developments were made possible by an interdisciplinary orientation in which Luhmann absorbed into his sociology, on the one side, Maturana’s theory of autopoiesis (self-organization) and, on the other, Husserl’s philosophy, and then provided a sociological reconstruction that can eventually be operationalized (Leydesdorff, 1996 and 2012). In my opinion, these new steps in terms of sociological theorizing were made mainly in the 1970s and 1980s, whereas the emphasis shifted to a synthesis of this oeuvre in the 1990s (e.g., Luhmann, 1997) and to the more philosophical ambition of developing a general theory of observation (Baecker et al., [1992] 1999; Gumbrecht, 2003 and 2006; Leydesdorff, 2006).

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.