Tesis para optar al grado de Magíster en Filosofía mención Epistemología / La controversia entre JürgenHabermas y NiklasLuhmann estuvo vigente durante aproximadamente tres décadas. El punto de inicio fue una obra conjunta publicada en 1971 (Teoría de la sociedad o tecnología social). El desenlace, el fallecimiento de Luhmann en 1998. Durante este periodo, la obra de ambos autores se mantuvo en constante diálogo, adquiriendo la relevancia de debates tan recurridos como el efectuado entre Karl Popper y Theodor Adorno. En esta investigación pretendemos mostrar que esta controversia (inserta en el contexto no tanto de la filosofía sino de las ciencias sociales) no es ajena al pensamiento filosófico, sino que representa una instancia de renovación de las principales ideas filosóficas en torno a la modernidad, inauguradas por Kant y Hegel. Nuestra postura es que en Habermas y Luhmann se confrontan dos posibilidades de iniciar el pensamiento filosófico y teórico, como algo apriorístico o como un resultado.

Independent Homicide Inquiries (IHIs) investigate homicides committed by persons in receipt of mental health services. They explore the potential causes of these events in order to learn lessons and improve the future provision of mental health services. IHIs decipher complex mental health care histories that, on further inspection, appear resistant to linear causal theories about what actually happened. IHIs are thus constantly open to indeterminacy in their findings regarding what caused the homicide, whether it was predictable and whether it could have been prevented. This is important because IHIs use these findings as a platform for changing the way mental health services are provided. The present thesis implements a theoretical framework, based on Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory, which explains why this problem occurs. Luhmann argued that reality is constructed by distinctly meaningful social systems of communication based around specific social codes. He furthermore posits that decisions are open to continual objection, disagreement and regret. Not only can decisions be decided otherwise by virtue of being decisions, but that social systems will observe decisions in different ways. Decisions can always be observed to be objectionable, incorrect and regrettable after they have been taken. Using this framework, this thesis asks how IHIs retrospectively understand the provision of mental health services in the cases that appear before them. It argues that IHIs construct their investigation and findings using specific social communications that give their observations specific meaning. In light of an expanding, interconnected decision making edifice that comprises mental health services however, the link between identifiable decisions and acts of homicide is obfuscated by ‘systems and processes’. This, in turn, obfuscates individual agency. The thesis consequently calls for a revision of what it means to hold mental health professionals to account in the aftermath of homicide.

This study aims to examine if and how New Public Management have affected trust between citizen and the schooling system in Sweden, and how we can understand New Public Managements effects upon trust. The study uses statistical data from national surveys (SOM-institute) to analyze how trust towards the schooling system has evolved over the years 1986-2000. From the theoretical frameworks of Niklas Luhmann and Bo Rothstein, New Public Management is analyzed as to how it might affect trust. The study shows that New Public Management possibly have had an effect on trust between citizens and the schooling system. Also the study concludes that the reforms contain risk factors that poses a real threat towards the trusting relationship between citizen and state. Although factors have been discerned they fail to explain to a satisfying degree how they might affect the schooling system and more extensive research is required as to how we can understand New Public Managements effects upon trust.

Studien har haft som syfte att undersöka hur införlivandet av en Migrationsdomstol i Malmö påverkat det asylrättsliga förfarandet samt att undersöka hur yrkesverksamma personer inom det asylrättsliga området i Malmö förhåller sig till den nya instans- och processordningen. Studien vilar främst på ett kvalitativt förhållningssätt. Arbetet har utförts med en induktiv ansats och uppsatsens empiri har insamlats genom kvalitativa intervjuer. Studien visar dels att såväl rättsäkerheten som förtroendet för instans- och processordningen ansetts öka och att möjligheten till ett muntligt förfarande vid Migrationsdomstolen uppskattas av de asylsökande. Studien visar även att det finns offentliga ombud inom det asylrättsliga området som helt påvisar en total avsaknad av förtroende för det asylrättsliga förfarandet och som påvisar en rad brister och problem. Att Migrationsverket utser de offentliga ombuden anses problematiskt ur ett rättsäkerhetsmässigt perspektiv. Kvalitet och kunskap hos de som arbetar som tolkar anses varierande och i vissa fall bristfällig och otillräcklig. Migrationsöverdomstolen anses allt för hård i dess överprövningar och ger för lite vägledning. Studien konstaterar även en bristfällig kommunikation och diskussion om de problem som finns inom det asylrättsliga området och att Advokatsamfundet anses ge för lite support och hjälp till de offentliga ombuden. / The study has served to examine how the incorporation of a Migration Court in Malmö affected the asylum proceedings and to examine how professionals in the field of asylum law in Malmö relate to the new instance and process scheme. The study is based primarily on a qualitative approach. The work has been done with an inductive approach and empirical thesis was collected through interviews. The study shows that both the rule of law as trust in authority has been increased as an outcome of the incorporation of the new instance and process scheme and the possibility of an oral presentation during the trials has been something that the asylum seekers have address as something positive. The study also shows that there are public representatives in the field of asylum law which completely demonstrates a complete lack of confidence in the asylum legal field. These public representatives address a number of shortcomings and problems within the field. These public representatives appoint that there are lacks of legal security because of the Migration board function of choose the public representatives before the trials. The quality and the knowledge of some of those who work as interpreters is considered by those how have been interview as variable and in some cases inadequate and insufficient. The Migration Court of Appeal considered too harsh in re-examinations and give too little guidance. The study also notes that there are lacks of communications and discussion of the problems that exist within the field of asylum and the Association of lawyers is considered to provide too little support and assistances to the lawyers who are working within the field of asylum law.

Die meisten Menschen verbringen heutzutage den Großteil ihres Daseins in Organisationen. Sie werden immer häufiger in Organisationen geboren (Krankenhaus), in Organisationen sozialisiert (Kindergärten, Schulen usw.), sind für ihre Existenzsicherung auf Lohnzahlungen von Organisationen angewiesen, und zunehmend fristen sie ihr Lebensende in Organisationen (Krankenhaus, Altenheim etc.). Aus soziologischer Sicht sind Organisationen deshalb besonders interessant und verdienen eine besondere Beachtung in der Gesellschaftsanalyse. In dieser Untersuchung soll nicht der Siegeszug der Organisation in der soziokulturellen Evolution der Gesellschaft im Mittelpunkt stehen, sondern die Frage: Wie kommt das Driften (Maturana, Varela, 1991) der Organisation zustande? Geht man davon aus, dass in der Evolution Aussterben die Regel und Anpassung die Ausnahme ist, scheint der Aspekt des Driftens organisierter Sozialsysteme besonderes Augenmerk zu verdienen. Liest man die für Deutschland veröffentlichten Zahlen der Unternehmensinsolvenzen, gerade in den heutigen Zeiten der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise, scheint der Fortbestand einer einmal ins Leben gerufenen Organisation eher ungewiss als gesichert zu sein. Des Weiteren scheint es so zu sein, dass Organisationen gewissen Lebenszyklen (Küpper, Felsch) unterworfen sind. In den älteren Organisationstheorien wurde noch von einem einheitlichen Zweck ausgegangen, der die gesamte Strukturierung der Organisation übergreift. Alle Organisationsmitglieder haben ihr Handeln im Hinblick auf die Verwirklichung dieses spezifischen Zwecks der Intention nach rational zu gestalten. In der Organisationsanalyse stellte man aber fest, dass Zweckverschiebungen innerhalb der formalen Organisationen eher die Regel als die Ausnahme sind. (Mayntz, 1963 u.a.) Dies Problem der rational gestalteten Organisation wurde somit den Organisationsmitgliedern zugeschrieben. Gleichsam als die andere Seite der formalen Organisation agieren die Mitglieder der formalen Organisation in der informellen Organisation als Mikropolitiker (Bosetzky, Heinrich, 1989), die die formalen Strukturen unterminieren, um ihre persönliche Nutzenmaximierung voranzutreiben. Übernimmt man diese Perspektive für die Betrachtung der formalen Organisation, kann man sich schwer der Annahme verweigern, dass die Organisationsmitglieder grundlegend feindlich gegenüber der Organisation gesinnt sind. Mit dieser Perspektive würde man all den freiwilligen Mitgliedern in Hilfsorganisationen, sozialen Vereinen usw. nicht gerecht werden. In der hier durchgeführten Analyse wird die Perspektive der Luhmannschen Systemtheorie eingenommen. Damit sind die Organisationsmitglieder nicht aus der theoretischen Betrachtung eliminiert, sondern im Gegenteil, sie werden in der Umwelt der organisierten Sozialsysteme verortet. Das hat den entscheidenden Vorteil, dass den Organisationsmitgliedern aus der theoretischen Betrachtung heraus mehr Freiheit zugestanden wird als in akteurszentrierten Theorien. Denn Systembildung bedeutet immer die Streichung mindestens eines Freiheitsgrades (Foerster von, 1997). Mit der Luhmannschen Systemtheorie wird des Weiteren davon ausgegangen, dass sich gleichsam unbeobachtet hinter dem Rücken der Anwesenden ein Netzwerk webt, ein soziales System sich bildet. Alle sozialen Systeme beruhen letztlich auf der Unterscheidung von Bewusstsein und Kommunikation. Die Kommunikation selbst kann man nicht beobachten sondern nur erschließen. Solange sie störungsfrei läuft, bleibt sie den Anwesenden unbewusst. Erst bei Störungen des Kommunikationsflusses macht sie sich bemerkbar, obgleich sie fast nie den Anwesenden bewusst wird. Denn die Kommunikation drillt den Menschen auf den Menschen, weil sie sich der Wahrnehmung entzieht (Fuchs, 1998). Die Autopoiesis der Kommunikation ist auf die Anwesenheit zweier psychischer Systeme bzw. Bewusstseinssysteme angewiesen. Sie ermöglichen überhaupt erst den Raum oder den Phänomenbereich, in dem die Autopoiesis sozialer Systeme möglich ist (Luhmann, 1990). Die Autopoiesis der Kommunikation setzt entsprechend immer Interaktion der Anwesenden voraus. In der Interaktion selbst, werden sich die Anwesenden in besonderer Weise wechselseitig bewusst und können sich entsprechend anders zur Geltung bringen, als in den Strukturzwängen einer formalern Organisation. Die Kommunikation selbst gibt den Beteiligten gewisse Changiermöglichkeiten an die Hand, z.B. das An- und Ausschalten verschiedener operativer Displacement (Fuchs, 1993), um ihren störungsfreien Ablauf zu ermöglichen und entsprechende Brüche zu vermeiden. Zum Beispiel den nahtlosen Übergang von einem Thema zu einem anderen. Die Interaktion selbst wird als zeitinstabiles Kontaktsystem (Luhmann, 1997) begriffen, das mit dem Auseinandergehen der Beteiligten erloschen ist. Die hier kurz angerissene Bedeutung der Kommunikation in der Luhmannschen Systemtheorie erklärt, warum ihr in der durchgeführten Analyse ein so breiter Raum eingeräumt wurde. Organisationen sind Sozialsysteme eines anderen Typs und besitzen damit verbunden ganz andere emergente Eigenschaften. Sie können mit der diffusen Kommunikation der Interaktion nichts anfangen. Ihre Operationen basieren auf Entscheidungen. Jede Entscheidung schließt an eine Entscheidungskommunikation an, aber sie selbst ist die Sinnverdichtung dieser Kommunikation. Und eben dieser Sachverhalt stellt ihre Effizienz, ihr Tempovorteil gegenüber allen anderen Typen sozialer Systeme dar. Erst wenn es der Organisation gelingt Entscheidungen an Entscheidungen zu knüpfen, ist sie in der Lage ihr eigenes Netzwerk ihrer eigenen Entscheidungen zu etablieren. Nur in der Form der Entscheidung kann sie ihre für sie selbst nicht weiter hintergehbaren Systemelemente (Entscheidungen) aneinander anschließen, Entscheidungen anhand von Entscheidungen produzieren. Gelingt ihr das, gewinnen die Entscheidungen füreinander Relevanz, können sich wechselseitig stützen, vorbereiten und entlasten. Jede Entscheidung muss jetzt ihre eigene Vorgängerentscheidung und den jeweiligen Kontext anderer Entscheidungen mit berücksichtigen. Es bildet sich ein Zusammenhang der Entscheidungen, der die Grenzen des Systems begründet und bezeichnet. Da jede Organisation sich immer nur jeweils im Moment ihres Entscheidens realisiert, bekommt sie ein Zeitproblem. Man muss nicht nur entscheiden, sondern man muss mit Bezug auf den Entscheidungszusammenhang korrekt und rechtzeitig entscheiden bevor sich das zu entscheidende Problem zu Ungunsten der Organisation von selbst erledigt hat. Alles was jetzt in der Organisation als relevant betrachtet werden soll, muss die Form einer Entscheidung annehmen. Dies bedeutet nicht, dass in der Entscheidungskommunikation nicht Einfluss auf die Entscheidung genommen werden kann, aber zum einen wird man aufgrund des Entscheidungsdrucks versuchen die Entscheidungskommunikation soweit wie möglich zu verkürzen, z.B durch Programmierung. Zum anderen sieht man der Entscheidung ihre Entscheidungskommunikation nicht an. Man kann sie nur noch erahnen. Organisationen kommunizieren am liebsten mit Organisationen in ihrer Umwelt, da diese gezwungen sind, selbst Entscheidungen zu produzieren, mit denen man selbst etwas anfangen kann. Man kann sie entweder in den eigenen Entscheidungszusammenhang übernehmen, oder man kann sie mit einer eigenen Entscheidung ablehnen. Aber jede Entscheidung, die die Organisation trifft bestätigt oder ändert ihre Strukturen. Dieser Gedankengang führte zu der Überlegung, dass informale Strukturen selbst organisierte Interaktionssysteme sein müssen. Sie müssen sich bereits in irgendeiner Form selbst organisieren. Sie stehen unter dem Gesetz des Wiedersehens. Die sozialen Kontakte werden sich in einem absehbaren Zeit- und Interessenhorizont wiederholen, sich verdichten und konfirmieren (Luhmann, 1997) und dies erfordert bereits ein gewisses Maß an Organisation. Man muss die nächsten Treffen planen, ein Thema auswählen usw. Letztlich produzieren sie Entscheidungen mit denen die formale Organisation etwas anfangen kann. Dies ist einer der Gründe, warum sich die formale Organisation zunehmend den Zugriff auf informale Strukturen ermöglicht. / From sociological view organisations are especially interesting and earn a special attention in the society analysis. The starting point of this analysis is the question: How do the drifts (Maturana, Varela come about, in 1991) of the organisations? In the older actor-centred organisation theories was gone out from a uniform purpose which spreads the whole structuralisation of the organisation. The problem of the rational creation of the organisation was ascribed therefore, as an other side of the formal organisation, to the organisation members. In the analysis carried out here the perspective of Luhmann system theory is taken. One assumes from the fact that as it were unnoticeably behind the back of the persons present a network grows up, a social system forms. Organisations are social systems and own quite specific emergente qualities. Their operations are based on decisions. Every decision connects to a decisive communication, but it herself is the sensory compression of this communication. And just these circumstances show her efficiency, her tempo advantage compared with all other types of social systems. Only if to the organisation decisions succeed to attach to decisions, it is to be set up in the situation her own network of her own decisions. Now every decision must consider her own predecessor's decision and the respective context of other decisions with. A connection of the decisions, the borders of the system forms reasonably and called. One must decide not only, but one must decide with reference to the decisive connection correctly and on time before the determining problem has taken care in unfavours of the organisation by itself. Now everything should be looked what in the organisation as relevant, must accept the form of a decision. This does not mean that in the decisive communication influence on the decision cannot be had, but, on the one hand, one will will try to shorten on account of the decisive pressure the decisive communication as far as possible, e.g., by programming. On the other hand one does not look to the decision at her decisive communication. One can only foresee them. Organisations best communicate with organisations in her environment, because these are made produce even decisions with which one himself can start something. One can take over them either in own decisive connection, or one can reject them with own decision. But every decision, they the organisation hits confirmed or changes her structures. This train of thought led to the consideration that informale structures themselves must be organised interaction systems. They must already organise in any form themselves. They stand under the law of the reunion. The social contacts will recur in a foreseeable time and interests horizon, condense and confirm (Luhmann, in 1997) and this already requires a certain measure in organisation. One must plan the next meetings, a subject select etc., In the end they produce decisions with those the formal organisation something can start. This is one of the reasons, why the formal organisation allows itself increasingly the access to informale structures.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The present study has the objective to present some key elements of systems theory of Niklas Luhmann. Systems theory has widely circulated in the past half century, with contributions from biology, cybernetics and mathematics. Luhmann rejects the old tradition based on ontological concepts, the notion of system as a whole composed of parts, the search for the essence of the elements. In exchange initially proposes a systems theory that is guided by the distinction between system and environment. In its mature phase designs functionally differentiated social systems, autopoietic, self-reference and endowed with meaning. The first chapter will be devoted to the presentation of the evolution of systems theory, elements that are common to any social system and to question the place of the subject in theory luhmannian. The second chapter is devoted to communication, synthesis of information, the act of communicating and the act of understanding. Communication is the basic operation of social systems. We'll see how the contact with the psychic and living systems. The third chapter is devoted to the law. This subsystem has the social function of generating expectations of conduct. The self-reference, autopoiesis and select the legal operations of non-legal. The binary code legal / illegal conduct legal communication and indicates the pipes that are nonconforming or conforming to the law. The recursion of operations and the memory of the right, through positive and repeated decisions, reinforce this subsystem normative. Luhmann's work is vast, having numerous references to the tradition of philosophy and sociology, as it appropriates elements of the exact sciences and natural sciences. You can find two phases this author reference in their works. The division occurs in March with the introduction of the concept of autopoiesis, rescued the theory of Maturana and selfreference design and functionality. For all that, the theory developed by Luhmann shows extremely interesting and complex. Keywords: Theory of systems. Self-reference. / O presente trabalho possui o objetivo de apresentar alguns elementos centrais da teoria dos sistemas de Niklas Luhmann. A teoria dos sistemas possui grande difusão na metade do século passado, com contribuições da biologia, da cibernética e da matemática. Luhmann rechaça a tradição vétereo-européia baseada nos conceitos ontológicos, na noção de sistema como todo composto de partes, na busca da essência dos elementos. Em troca propõe inicialmente uma teoria dos sistemas que se pauta pela diferenciação entre sistema e entorno. Na sua fase madura concebe os sistemas sociais funcionalmente diferenciados, autopoiéticos, autorreferenciais e dotados de sentido. O primeiro capítulo será dedicado à apresentação da evolução da teoria dos sistemas, dos elementos que são comuns a qualquer sistema social e à pergunta pelo lugar do sujeito na teoria luhmanniana. O segundo capítulo é dedicado à comunicação, síntese da informação, do ato de comunicar e do ato de entender. A comunicação é a operação elementar dos sistemas sociais. Veremos como ocorre o contato com os sistemas psíquicos e vivos. O terceiro capítulo é dedicado ao direito. Esse subsistema social possui a função de gerar expectativas de conduta. A autorreferência e a autopoiésis selecionam as operações jurídicas das não-jurídicas. O código binário legal/ilegal conduz a comunicação jurídica e indica as condutas que são conformes ou desconformes ao direito. A recursividade das operações e a memória do direito, através da positividade e das reiteradas decisões, reforçam esse subsistema normativo. A obra de Luhmann é vasta, possuindo diversas referências à tradição da filosofia e sociologia, da mesma forma que se apropria de elementos das ciências exatas e biológicas. É possível encontrar nesse autor duas fases de referência em suas obras. O marco de divisão ocorre com a introdução do conceito de autopoiésis, resgatado da teoria de Maturana, e a concepção de autorreferência e funcionalidade. Por tudo isso, a teoria desenvolvida por Luhmann se mostra extremamente interessante e complexa.

,Was können Soziolog_innen Nützliches für die Gesellschaft tun?‘ Es gibt verschiedene Möglichkeiten und Perspektiven auf diese Frage zu antworten. Ich wähle eine gesellschafttheoretische und setzte an bei der Systemtheorie von Niklas Luhmann. ,Etwas Nützliches tun?‘, dies können Soziolog_innen nicht nur, und vielleicht auch nicht in erster Linie, indem Sie sich als Expert_innen für bestimmte Themenbereiche zu Wort melden und fest strukturiertes Fachwissen zur konkreten Problemlösung anbieten. Folgt man der systemtheoretischen Perspektive von Niklas Luhmann, so erhält man zunächst eher einen ,Überblick‘ über die ,Gesellschaft‘ als Ganzes und ihrer Ausdifferenzierung in verschiedene funktionale Teilsysteme (Wirtschaft, Politik, Wissenschaft, Kunst, Erziehung, u.a.), sowie deren Autonomie und dann deren dennoch wechselseitiger aufeinander bezogene Angewiesenheit, im Sinne des füreinander Zur – Verfügung- Stellens von Möglichkeitsbedingungen des je eigenen Operierens. Ein derartig abstrakter Blick, lässt die Frage nach der ,Nützlichkeit‘ soziologischer Reflektion schnell in den Hintergrund treten und man richtet es sich bequem ein im Elfenbeinturm faszinierender akademischer Begriffsspiele. Was man dabei schnell übersehen kann, ist, dass gerade der begrifflichen Abstraktion ein Potential inhärent ist, einen Beitrag für die Bearbeitung konkreter komplexer gesellschaftlicher Probleme zu liefern. In der vorliegenden Dissertation versuche ich, für diese Möglichkeit der Systemtheorie durch Arbeit an den Grundbegriffen quasi eine Vorarbeit zu leisten und mit Hilfe einer Integration pragmatistischer Modelle eine Perspektive zu entwickeln, die in der Lage ist, brückenbildende Kommunikationsprozesse zwischen den (relativ) autonomen Funktionssystemen zunächst theoretisch- begrifflich zu beschreiben. Die Arbeit ist so konzipiert, dass in einem weiteren Schritt im Anschluss an die durchgeführte Theoriearbeit ein Konzept ,soziologischer Gesellschaftsberatung‘ entwickelt werden kann, das sich der Aufgabe widmet, komplexe, langfristige Problemkonstellationen soziologisch zu beobachten und zu bearbeiten.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:29:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ariane Cintra Lemos de Moraes.pdf: 1025671 bytes, checksum: 8f816bcfbc6c32eadb60b2083685d4dd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-06-05 / This work has its objective to analyze the programmatic norms nature and compare them with all other norms of law. This analysis will be made by a sociological observation of Niklas Luhmann s system theory and was chosen and justified because the failure of the traditional understanding of programmatic norms has failed, bringing more damage than good to law, causing more complexity and contingency, irritation and frustration to law and society comparing to others norms. Concepts as norms, constitutional norms, and juridical principles will be analyzed by Luhmannian terms as observation, difference, form, complexity, contingency, irritation and frustration. The core idea of this work is to answer to this question: comparing to other norms what is the difference between the programmatic norms and the others and what does it do to law. The answer of this question on a synthetic way is that those norms don not program anything because it s a communication as any other norms, but its difference rely upon the Constitution as peculiar program as structural coupling that units two autopoietic systems the law and politics / O presente trabalho objetiva analisar a natureza da norma programática e compará-la às demais normas do Sistema Jurídico. Esta análise será feita ante uma observação da teoria sistêmica de Niklas Luhmann. A escolha do tema justifica-se, eis que a tradicional análise da norma programática como diretriz do sistema jurídico mostra-se equivocada, e que ao contrário do que pretende, prejudica o próprio direito causando-lhe mais complexidade e contingência, mais frustações e irritações à sociedade e ao direito do que qualquer outra norma jurídica. Conceitos como norma jurídica, norma jurídica constitucional e princípio serão analizadas novamente, mas agora mediante conceitos luhmannianos como observação, diferença, forma, complexidade, contingência, expectativa, irritação e frustação. O cerne do trabalho reside na seguinte pergunta: em comparação às demais normas do direito, qual seria a peculiariedade das normas constitucionais programáticas e quais as conseqüências para o direito resultantes desta peculiaridade? Como resposta sintética a esta pergunta, o que se observa é que a norma programática não direciona coisa alguma porque é comunicação como qualquer outra comunicação jurídica, porém é diferente porque tem como programa a Constituição que é forma peculiar chamada acoplamento estrutural que une dois sistemas igualmente autopoiéticos, o sistema jurídico e o sistema política

A teoria da sociedade de Niklas Luhmann, construída como teoria de sistemas sociais, encontra freqüentes críticas voltadas contra seu pretendido distanciamento moral e político no diagnóstico da sociedade contemporânea. Pesa sobre a teoria de sistemas sociais a generalização de um juízo prematuro conforme o qual ela se reduziria a uma sociologia conservadora de tendência tecnocrata, uma herdeira radicalizada do positivismo. Contudo, e contrariamente a essa percepção geral, a teoria de sistemas sociais parece ter um potencial crítico ainda inexplorado em toda a sua extensão, e que pode ser ativado por uma leitura que permita expandir o alcance da teoria. Essa expansão pode ser promovida quando a teoria de sistemas sociais é mobilizada para fundamentar uma teoria da comunicação de matriz materialista (capítulo 1), capaz de permitir que sua categoria fundamental a autopoiese seja compreendida em estreita relação com a apresentação do capital por Karl Marx (capítulo 2) e confrontada com uma teoria do capitalismo (capítulo e 3). Na seqüência, a teoria de sistemas sociais é empregada para dar conta das múltiplas dimensões da desigualdade social (capítulo 4) e da dinâmica dos conflitos e das contradições da sociedade atual (capítulo 5). Esta tese propõe um primeiro passo na direção de uma recepção crítica da obra teórica de Niklas Luhmann. Trata-se de testar os limites e as possibilidades da teoria de sistemas sociais. / Niklas Luhmanns theory of society, built as theory of social systems, is usually met with criticisms pointed against its intended moral and political distance in diagnosing contemporary society. Weights upon the social systems theory the generalization of a premature judgement according to which, this theory would be reduced to a conservative sociology with technocratic tendencies, a radicalised heir to positivism. However, and against this usual perception, the theory of social systems seems to have a critical potential not yet developed in its full extension and which may be activated by an interpretation capable of expanding its range. This extension can be carried out when we handle social systems theory in order to ground a materialistic theory of communication (chapter 1), enabling a close connection between its main conceptual category autopoiesis and Karl Marxs presentation of the capital (chapter 2), as well as a confrontation with a theory of capitalism (chapter 3). Afterwards, social systems theory is used to explaining the manifoldness of social inequality (chapter 4) and the dynamics of contemporary conflicts and societal contradictions (chapter 5). This thesis proposes a first step in the direction of a critical reception of Niklas Luhmanns theoretical work. It is a matter of testing limits and possibilities of social systems theory

Esta tese se divide em duas partes. Na primeira parte serão expostas as escolas e teorias mais importantes para o conceito de sentido. Na segunda parte será exposto o conceito de sentido espectral. A primeira seção é monográfica e trata de investigar o conceito de sentido em quatro diferentes campos das ciências humanas: a lógica, a linguagem, a fenomenologia e a teoria dos sistemas. A segunda traz a proposição teórica do conceito de sentido espectral e o discute em função de diagramas de comunicação e sentido. Com isso, a discussão da primeira parte deste trabalho deverá introduzir as dimensões do conceito de sentido que, por sua vez, serão relacionados com certo padrão de difusão e consumo da informação. Essa relação entre os modos de produção das matrizes de media e um determinado conceito de sentido é explorada ao longo de todo o trabalho. Espectral, com isso, é uma metáfora para a particular produção de sentido do ambiente digital. Esse campo do sentido eletrônico será descrito e delineado em contraposição às metáforas não-espaciais de difusão do ciberespaço, que sugerem um campo aberto de aceleração e expansão não comensurável. Desse modo, o conceito de sentido espectral apresentará dois blocos de elementos complementares cuja finalidade é vincular as metáforas não-espaciais, exteriores e difusas do ciberespaço, com uma descrição dos mecanismos interiores desse sentido digital. Esses mecanismos serão descritos teórica e graficamente por meio de cinco componentes: serialização, aglutinação, seleção, nódulos e disrupção. Essas operações, por sua vez, percorrem uma superfície cujos movimentos são simultaneamente concêntricos e arborescentes. A descrição desse movimento será feita por meio de três circuitos: círculos interiores, círculos exteriores e círculos crescentes. A superfície, por sua vez, será descrita com o conceito de anéis de cebola. A vinculação entre as camadas concêntricas e a superfície do ciberespaço conforma o próprio conceito de sentido espectral. / This thesis is divided in two parts. The first part discusses the most influential schools and theories regarding the concept of meaning. The second part presents the concept of spectral meaning. This first section is monographic and consists in an investigation into the concept of meaning within four different fields of human sciences: logics, language, phenomenology and social systems theory. The second section presents the theoretical thesis concerning the concept of spectral meaning and discusses it in the light of communication and meaning diagrams. Therefore, the first part of this work introduces the varied understandings of the concept of meaning which, in a second phase, will be related to specific patterns of information and communication. This relationship between modes of production across different media matrices and a given concept of meaning is continually explored throughout the thesis. Spectral is, therefore, a metaphor for the specific production of sense in the digital environment. This field of electronic meaning will be described and portrayed in opposition to the non-spatial metaphors of diffusion that haunt the cyberspace, regularly depicting it as an open and incommensurable field of acceleration and expansion. Accordingly, the concept of spectral meaning will present two sets of paired elements in order to connect the non-spatial, diffusive and exterior metaphors of the cyberspace with a representation of the electronic meaning and its internal mechanisms. These mechanisms will be described theoretically and graphically along five main components: serialization, netclustering, gatekeeping, nodes and breakthrough. These operations, on the other hand, go through a surface whose activity is both concentric and arborescent. The description of this movement will be target along three cycles: inner circles, outer circles and growing circles. The surface itself, conversely, will be described with the concept of onion rings. The connection between the concentric layers and the cyberspace surface comprehends the concept of spectral meaning itself.