>>OK, from here on out hierarchy_B (for Boris) will refer to a particular
>>form of social organization characterized by a strictly hierarchical
>>(tree-like) system of command and control, in the style of military
>>organization...
>
>>While I'm clear about hierarchy_B, at this point I have only a vague idea
>>of SPECIFICALLY what you (and/or Beer) mean by "recursive system"..
>
>>It would help a lot if you would give either a very specific formal
>>description of a recusrive_B system, or a small, simple example,
>>contrasting it with a hierarchical_B system.
>
>That was the whole purpose of the quotation from Beer's book: I can't state
>the proposition any better, myself.
Well, then please restate it. We need rigor here: I need a very specific
formal description or a small, simple example and how it's different from a
hierarchy_B.
>In recursive architecture, the mesosystem is composed of parts or
>microsystems that are embedded within it and, in turn, it is a component of
>a macrosystem within which it is contained.
OK, this is a step in the right direction, but still more of a
characterization. Let's call that a recursion_B. So far, I see little of
contradiction between recursion_B and hierarchy_B: in a military hierarchy,
the units are indeed embedded within each other: corps to divisions to
brigades to platoons to companies (I'm sure I screwed something up there).
What I think you're missing is that there's a distinction between the
STRUCTURAL relations (physical embedding, spatial and temporal scaling) and
the FUNCTIONAL relations (how they communicate with each other).
>The "links" between parts or
>components are interactive; the macro/meso/microsystems are interconnected
>and interrelated; information flows abundantly between them,
Isn't this also true in a hierarchy_B? Remember, both commands and reports
are forms of information flow. What you need is a concept of CONTROL, which
is centralized in a hierarchy_B, but perhaps not in a recursion_B.
>and a resulting
>equilibrium is established and maintained by continuous feedback and
>re-adjustment -- that is, causal circular feedback.
It's not at all clear how this follows. Is this a DEFINITION of a
recursion_B or a PROPERTY of a recursion_B? And where is the feedback?
COnsider a recursion_B where units are embedded in each other. I can
imagine cyclic relations among the components of a unit at a given level,
and also cyclic relations between units on different levels. Even in a
hierarchy_B there are cyclic relations between levels: remember, the two
sides of the cycle need not be identical, you can have commands going in
one direction, reports in the other.
>In plain language, the various systems are interdependent -- which is the
>essential reason for my original question as to exactly what you meant by
>"metasystem transition." Is it a transition in which the identity and
>integrity of the mesosystem disappears into the macro/metasystem? Or, is it
>a transition in which the identity and integrity of the mesosystem
>continues, but in a more comprehesive (larger?) environment or context?
The latter.
O---------------------------------------------------------------------------->
| Cliff Joslyn, NRC Research Associate, Cybernetician at Large
| Mail Code 522.3, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771 USA
| joslyn@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/joslyn 301-286-5773
V All the world is biscuit-shaped. . .