ORDER OR ORGANIZATION?
| Collection | International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics |
|---|---|
| Year | 2004 |
| Vol. (num.) | 2(2) |
| ID | ◀ 2387 ▶ |
| Object type | General information |
According to J. WICKEN (quoted by R.N. ADAMS): “Biological structures are not 'ordered' in the sense prescribed by information theory; they are 'organized' …whereas ordered systems are generated according to simple algorithms and therefore lack complexity, organized systems must be assembled element by element according to an external 'wiring diagram' with high informational context” (1979,p.353-61).
The “wiring diagram” seems to be a somewhat dubious metaphor. The “diagram” is nowhere to be found in living beings or societies, which start at most with positional values, and resulting polarizations.
K. DENBIGH'S formulation (also quoted by ADAMS) seems clearer and less inspired from a mechanicist metaphor: “… a crystal is more ”orderly“ than a cell since in the former the atoms and molecules stand in a fixed relationship to each other; they repeat themselves at fixed distances… The cell, however, is more organized. DENBIGH does not attempt a final definition of organization but does suggest two requirements. One is that of ”complexity“: an organized system necessarily consists of parts and subparts and these are interconnected” (1988, p.73) (One could say that the parts are very heterogeneous, as they result from an intense process of differentiation).
- “Secondly, a further necessary condition for a system to be said organized depends on the notion of function… One cannot speak about something being organized without at once raising the issue, what it is organized for?” (DENBIGH, 1975, p.85)
In synthesis, order should be considered repetitive, while organization is heterogeneous, complementary and hierarchical.