,\
CQý11.1I: i1VTS l. ýTNf THE CYBERNETICS OF S L. lý?. i.. i T AND REGULATION IN SOCIAL SYSTEMS
A Ph. D.
.L
HES 1S S BMa: TTE
ED
TO
THE DEPAl_:. `. C MENT OF CYBERI, T : CS 13RU A, ý_L UN?: e7ERS ITY
BY
MICHAEL U. BEN--rLI
1976
ý. '::
ABSTJ, A^T
The, methods and principles of cybernetics are applied to a discussion of stability and regulation in social sys- tems to : ing a global. viewpoint,, The fundamental but still
classical notion of stability as applied to homeostatic and ultrastable s_ystýems is discussed", with a particular reference
to a specific wel: t. -studied example of a closed social group (the Tsembaga studied by Roy Rappaport in New Guinea).
The discussion extends to the problem of evolution in large systems and the question of regulating evolution is
addressed without special qualifications. A more comprehen- sive idea of stability is introdu. cýed as the argument turns
to the problem of evolution for viability in nene. ral Concepts pertaining to
. he problem of evolution are exempla fiel by computer. =L-mulation model of an abstractly
defined ecosystem in which various dynamic processes occur allowing the study of adaptive and evolutionary behavior.
In particular, the role of coalition formation and cooperative
behavior is stressed as a key factor in the evolution of com-
plexl tY
.,
The model consists of a population of several species of dimensionless automata inhabiting a geometrically define.
environment in which a commodity eisen iti l for metabolic
requirements (food) appears. Au L. oTaCU t".., can sense properties
of their ený;, ironmen-t, move about it, compete for food, repro-
-_ ý
duce or combine into coalitions thus for mtiýzg new and more complex species. Each species is associated with a specific genotype from which the species' behavioral characteristics
(its phenotype) are derived. Complexity and survival effi-
ciency of species increases through coalition formation, an event which occurs when automata are faced with an "unde-
cidabie" situation that is resolvable only by forming a new and more complex organization.
Exogenous manipulation of the food distribution pattern and other critical factors produces different environmental
conditions resulting in different behavior patterns of auto- mata and in different evolutionary "pa hways, "
Eve. --l,, the computer program developed to implement this model, accepts ah gh-level command language which
allows for the setting of parameters, definition of initial
configurations, and control of output formats. Results of the simulation are produced graphically and include various
pertinent tables. The program was given a modular hi. erarchi- cal structure which allows easy generation of new versions
incorporating different sets of rules.
The model strives to capture the essence of the evolu- tion of complexity viewed as a general process rather than
to describe the evolution of a particular "real" system.
this respect it is not context-specific, and the behaviors which are observable in different runs can receive various
interpretation depeý: d. inq on specific identifications. Of
In
-il-
these, biological, ecological, and sociological . 't_nteLpreta- tions are the most obvious and the latter, in particular,
is stressed.
111--
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many sources contributed to the thoughts developed in
this study. I must acknowledge a particular debt, however, to R. Buckminster Fuller, Gordon Pask, Ross Ashby and Stafford
Beer, whose work for me has had an important personal meaning.
I have been especially privileged of being a student and friend of both Dr. Fuller and Dr. Pask. Dr. Pa. sk was the
advisor in this study making possible a true learning (evolu- t ionary)
. experience .
The J. M. Kaplan Fund in New York provided a small grant
which was helpful in the initial steps of this study. Thanks are due to Mr. R. Kaplan and Mr. R. Rubinow of the Foundation.,
as well as Dr. R. Whaley, President, and Dr. J. Ginnick, Vice
President programs, of the University City Science Center in.
Philadelphia which administered the grant. Mr. P. ZNeaman was instrumental in obtaining the grant. I am gratef-ul. 1 to ]Dr.
Fuller for continuous encouragement and support throughout the Project.
Mr. Christopher Wells tried to brush up my rusty pro- gramming skills and he made access to the computing facilities
of Columbia University possible. A special acknowledgment must go to Mr. Christo Tountas, my collaborator in developing Eve-l,
the simulation motel presented in Chapter 3.
Margery Devlin's secretarial services made an excellent
job of typing and retyping the scrLL_pt, and Mr. E. Kaufman drew
- i-\;,
-
the diagrams that accompany the text.
Last but not least, thanks are due to my wife, Marcia, who helped in a number of ways to carry this project through,
being patient most of the time.
_Vw
CONTENTS
PACE INTRODUCTION
... 1
1. HOMEOSTASIS AND STEADY STATE REGULATION IN A
WELL ADAPTED SOCIETY 6
1-1 Homeostatic Regulation 6
1-1.1. Stability and Homeostasis
... 6
1-1.2. Homeostasis and Ultrastability
... 13
1-1.3. The Universality of Homeostatic
Mechanisms ... 1.8
1-2 Steady State Regulation in a Well Adapted Social
System 22
1-2.1. The Tsembaga - General Background... .. 22 1-2.2. The Ritual Cycle
... 28
1-2.3. The Ritual Cycle - Further Cybernetic
Considerations
... ... ... ý:. 45 2. AMPLIFYING REGULATION AND VARIETY INCREASE IN
EVOLVING SYSTEMS 555,
2-1 Regulation and Evolution 55
2-1.1. Evolution as a Type of Stability... 55 2-1.2. The Evolutionary Perspective and the
Cybernetic Paradigm
... 60
2-2 Regulation for Effective Viability 62
2-2.1. The Cybernetic Formulation
... 62
2-2.2. Limits on Regulation ... 66 2-2.3. Amplifying Regulation, Strategies for
Effective Viability and Variety increase in Evolving Systems
... 67
3. EVE-1: A SIMULATED ECOLOGY WITH SOME C HARACTER"-
ISTICS OF EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS: ~ ES ýýýýý 72
3-1 Introduction 72
3-1.1. Simulation of Evolutionary Processes
... 72
3--1.2. Conditions Underyling Evolution... 78
3-1.3. The Role of Coalition Formation and Co-
operative Interactions in Evolution... 84
MVý4
PAGE
3-2 Descri ption of The Model 90
3-2.1. Design Objectives and Rationale... 90
3-2.2. Eve-l: General Overview
... ...: 94
3-2.3. The Environment 97
(a) Topology and Geometry
... 97
(b) Food
... 98
3-2.4. The Automata 100
(a) Species Characteristics: The Phe-
notypes ... 100
(b) Genetic Definition: The Genotypes... 102 (c) Generation of New Automata:
Reproduction and Coalition Formation
... 105
(d) Derivation of Phenotypes from Genotypes...
... 108 3-2.5. Implementation of Parallel and Random
Events in Eve-1
... 111
3-2.6 Using the Model 1.14
(a) Inputs
... 114
(b) Outputs
... 114
3-3 Some Results of Experimenting with Eve-1. 120
3-3.1. Introductory Remarks on the Behavior of the Model
... 120
3-3.2. Desc ription of Some Selected Computer
Runs 122
(a) Simple Evolutionary Runs
... 122 (b) Vision and Movement Capabilities
Prevail in Different Environments... 123
(c) Variety in the Environment Creates
Ecological Niches and Induces Symbiosis of Species
... 132
(d) The Introduction of Barren
Territory Accelerates Evolution and/
or Favors Vision
... 141 (e) Spacial Uniformity of Population
Distribution and Some Exceptions... 143
3-4 General Observations on the Behavior of the Model
3-4.1. Characteristics of the Steady State... 147 3-4.2. Evolutionary Pathways a nd Barriers... 149 3-4.3. Efficiency of the Total Population of
Automata
... ... 153 3-4.4. Evolutionary Events in Eve-i: An
Interpretation
... ... 154
-V11-
PAGE
4. SOCIETY AS A BRATr1 158
4--1 Society as a Product of Ivoli -ý, --ion ... 158 4-2 The Dynamics of Stability in Social Sys-ý_ems... L 167
4-3 Reflections on Some Implications ... 18.1
NOTES 18.7
Notes to Chapter. 1
... ... 1.87 Notes to Chapter 2
... ... 7.95 Notes to Chapter 3
... ... 202 Notes to Chapter 4
... ... 210
APPENDIX A 221
EVE-1 : SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL DETAILS 222
A-1 About the Hardware and Software
... ... 222 A-2 Model Specification: The Environment...
... 224 A-3 Model Specification: The Automata
... ... 225 A-4 Internal Data Structure In Eve-1 ... ... 226 A-5 Model Specification: Simulation of One Time
Step...
... 228
A-6 The Program. Written in Fortran...
... 235
APPENDIX B 254
CYBERNETICS--AN INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW 255
B-1 General System Theory and Cybernetics...
.., 255 B-2 The Emergence of Cybernetics
... ... 259 B-3 Cybernetics--Sources and General Background....
... 262 B-4 Definition of Cybernetics
... ... 266 B-5 Scope and Multidisciplinary Character. istics
.... ... 270 B-6 The Cybernetics of Social Systems--Early
Constraints and Current Approach..
... ... 277 B-7 Su. nunary ... .... 283 Notes to Appendix B
... ... 286
APPEN DIX C 297
SYSTE MS AND ORGANIZATION 298
C-1 The System Concept in Science
... ... 298 C-2 Definition of System
... ... 303 C-3 Observation, Behavior and Unce.,
_4ainty ... ... 312 C-4 Measuring Complexity--The Concept of Variety...
... 320
-vi j'i
PAGE C-5 Open and Closed Systems
...
C-6 Entropy Information and Organization...
C-7 Feedback and Self-Regulation...
C-8 The Self-Organizing System
...
C-9 The Organization of Complexity...
Notes -to Appendix C
...
APPENDIX D
THE ORGANIZATION OF BEHAVIOR
""s""""". ", 326
... ý... ... 331
...,.... 338
... 348
... 355
... 363
D- 1 System-Environment Interaction ... 379
D-2 The Machine as a Metaphore ... 382
D-3 The Organizational Approach in Cybernetics... 387
D-4 Simulating the Functioning of the Reticular Formation--An Illustration ... 391
D-5 The Organizational Model ... 395
D-6 The Structure and. Organization of Behavior ... ... 398
D-7 Examples from Biology and Ethology ... 404
D-8 Extending the Organizational Model to Problems of Cognition and Learning ... 409
D-9 The Organization of Evolutionary Processes, Cognitive Systems and Learning ... 4]6 D-1_0 Relevance to the Study of Social Systems... 423
Notes to Appendix D ... 427
BIBLI OGRAPHY ... 436
ýixý
INTRODUCT ION
Many valuable investigations and practical enterprises have brought the methods and principles of cybernetics to
bear upon the regulation of large systems; societies, firms
and other business organizations, command and control systems, some special and relatively tractable cases of closed social
groups studied by anthropologists (for example, the Tsembaga, discussed as an outstandingly clear study in section 1.2)
and more. In general, the classical notion of "stability"
has been employed, i. e., the maintenance of dynamic or static equilibrium, wholly or partly invariant with "goal" condition::,
that are specified within the framework of sensibly chosen but predetermined state variables.
This approach, though indubitably correct as far as it goes, runs into difficulties when the system is evolu-
tionary; a point which is readily exemplified by considering
the other than closed aspects of the Tsembaga society, i. e.
the reassignment of people to local groups who perform the ritual and thus maintain ecological stability as well as
social identity. One manifestation of the difficulties is
as follows: although the principles of cybernetics are piece- meal applicable, it is difficult to apply the cybernetic para- digms which have burgeoned since the early 1970vs to provide,
as they can, a unifying theory and its proper interpretations.
In this thesis I try to extend the cybernetics of large
- Ar
social systems in order to obtain a greater degree of unifi-
cation and show, by considering special simulation and model- ling programs (Chapter 3 which contains the burden of the
argument) that essays of this kind are implementable
o The other chapters of the thesis are concerned with the requisite background and an outline of an interpretation of the imple- mented calculus related to historical data the details of
which are presented in Appendix C and Appendix D of the work.
The thesis contents are thus arranged in the following
manner. (See also the diagrammatic representation below. )
Chapter 1 describes the fundamental but still classical notion of stability as applied to homeostatic and ultrastable systems
giving general examples in section 1.1 and a specific, well-
studied example (the Tsembaga ritual cycle) which is discussed
and reanalyzed in section 1.2. Much of the historical acknowl- edgment together with detailed exemplification is relegated
to Appendix B. Chapter 2 addresses the problem of evolution
(with biological, social, ecological and other large systems in mind); the question of "regulating" evolution is discussed without special qualifications in section 2.1,
- and the more comprehensive idea of stability as "organizational closure"
(self-reconstruction and P Individuation are nearly equisig- nificant) is introduced in section 2.2 where the argument
turns to evolution for viability, survival and development;
growth in structural sophistication and/or distribution of control being prerequisites for correct establishment of
- 3-.,
"viability. "
Chapter 3, by far the more lengthy, is devoted to a
simulation model Eve-1, intended to exemplify my thesis and also to provide the basis for a variety of practical, predic- tive and regulatory tools. The behavior and characteristics
of the Eve-1 computer program are described globally in this chapter since the detailed construction, listing and data
organization of Eve-1 are dealt with in Appendix A. (However, typical runs are discussed and given an interpretation in
Chapter 3. ) It should be stressed that Eve-l, or any other
computer program of its kind, is a simulation and not a reali- zation; not, that is, an actual doing. The point is impor-
tant because concepts like "organizational closure" or "evo- lution°' refer to realizations. The simulating program acts
as a guide and highlights imperfections of any simulation, a fact which became obtrusive as the Eve-1 program was designed.
But it is equally important to notice that a realization, in the genuine sense, is possible and requires only a slight
departure from the available technology. Chapter 4 includes
an interpretative discussion, addressed particularly to a view of society and of the dynamics of stability in social systems,
together with conclusions and some speculative comments.
An important application of the work (others are imp l i-- cit in the argument even if not explicitly spelled out in the body of the thesis) concerns problems of social development
in their broadest sense. One conclusion, appropriate in that
-4--
context, is that "sane" social development (evolution) and decentralized/distributed/control are not as often supposed
incompatible but simply different facets of the same innate mutualism which promotes evolution and is the more recently
advanced, peculiarly cybernetic concept of stability;
The material delegated to Appendices B, C and D con- tains a review of cybernetics and system theoretic concepts which are pertinent to the content of chapters 1,2,3 and
4, This background material could be helpful to a reader
who is not familiar with the now classical concepts of cyber- netics. Otherwise, Chapter 1 is the logical place to begin
and brief reference to the appendices can be made according
to indications in the text. Notes to Chapters 1,2,3 and 4 appear immediately after Chapter 4 whereas notes related
to Appendices B, C and D follow each appendix respectively.
5. _
Y
A Schematic Representation of the Contents
-6-
1. HOMEOSTASIS AND STEAD' STATE REGULATION IN A WELL ADAPTED SOCIETY
1-1. Homeostatic Regulation
1-1.1. Stability and Homeostasis
The concept of homeostasis is crucial to the under- standing of processes that maintain equilibrium in viable
systems. It provides a uniffying principl3 underlying those activities which mediate the stability of \, iahle organiza-
tions under certain conditions of displacement from estab- lished norms.
The term "stability, " when it is used in relation to dynamic systems, implies that some fundamental. condition
remains invariant in spite of changes that a. system may be undergoing. Such an invariance--the state that is not
changed by the system's transformations'--represents the state of equilibrium for that system, and this state of equilibrium
will be more or less stable, depending on now- sensitive it is to disturbances acting to displace it.
In viable systems of even a relatively moderate
complexity, equilibrium is rarely associated with a single
r
state. Instead, it is defined by a set of states, and sys-"
tems of this kind will be stable, as long as disturbances do not lead to a permanent displacement from states that belong
to that set. (! ) An important feature of systems that are
characterized by multiple states of equilibrium is that their stability is a composite property of tie whole. It pr_ esu>>__
-7-
poses that the system's interacting components are stable and it depends on some degree of coordination between the activi--
ties of these components. (2)
Depending on. the type of system that is under con- sideration, conditions of equilibrium may assume substantially
different forms. Von Foerster, for example, has emphasized this point in discussing the different types of equilibrium
that are associated with mechanical, thermodynamic and hom. eo- static systems respectively. (3) In the case of mechanical
systems, Von Foerster has pointed out, the notion of equilib-- rium is associated with motion. Specifically, "with that
motion--among all possible motions--for which a certain
mechanical quantity--action----is minimized. " In thermodynamic systems, where behavior is described in statistical terms
because of a fundamental uncertainty about the system's
microscopic states, equilibrium is associated with "the set of all states for which a certain probabilistic quantity--
entropy--is maximized. " Finally, in the case of homeostatic systems, "equilibrium is obtained by an organized structure
which channels available energy in such a way that it opposes deviations from a certain state of the system. " (4 )
The term "homeostasis" was originally coined by Cannon (5) in order to describe the condition of dynamic
equilibrium by virtue of which organisms maintain their
integrity in spite of impinging environmental disturbances.
Living organisms are vulnerable, healthy life being able to thrive only within a narrow range of conditions. A living
-8-
organism is an open system (see Appendix C, section C-5) en- gaged in a continuous exchange of materials with its external
world. Entropic processes act to dissolve the orderly co- herence characterizing a functioning organism and make it
uniform with its surrounding. These processes are countered by an opposing activity by which environmental constituents
are being continuously synthesized into a stable pattern, and by which the integrity of the organism is, at least tempo-
rarily, maintained.
The idea that living organisms are stable entities
maintaining a fragile integrity in the face of constant en- vironmental flux was not altogether new to 20th Century biol-
ogists. In its primitive form, Cannon traced the concept to Hippocrates. It is only in the 19th Century, however, that
earlier "vitalistic" notions gave way to essentially physio-
logical explanations anticipating the key cybernetic ideas of feedback and control. In 1817, Magendie used the term
"reflexis" to define the cyclical activity produced by a dis- turbance which traveled along specific channels from the
affected part of the body to the central nervous system, to be reflected along other channels back to the point of origin, where it reversed or inhibited the effects of the disturbance
which initiated it. (6) Later (1878), Claude Bernard suggested that in order to survive perturbations originating from the
external world, an organism must be able to maintain an in-
ternal environment, its "milieu interne, " in a constant con- dition. He wrote : "It is the fixity of the 'milieu interieur'
_gp
which is the condition of free and independent life, and all the vital mechanisms, however varied they may be, have only
one object, that of preserving the internal environment. "(7) Following these ideas Cannon was able to demon-
strate that the stability of the animal's internal environ--
ment is mediated by complex interactions of specific physio-
logical process. He defined homeostasis as the steady states maintained in the organism by the coordinated activity of its
interacting physiological processes. (8) These, he showed,
were organized in a cyclic chain of cause and effect whereby a displacement from a normal condition set in motion compen-
sating actions reversing the effects of the displacement.
While the idea of reflexis was conceived in rela- tion to the organism's automatic "behavioral" reactions to external disturbances, homeostasis has been associated with processes that maintain its internal environment stable.
Cybernetics has shown both mechanisms to be essentially of a similar type. In both, an established condition constituting
a "norm, " is maintained by complex cyclic chains of activi- ties. Both are goal-directed and self-regulating (in the sense of Appendix C, section C-7) and belong to the general class of purposeful mechanisms whose universal operating
structure was brought to light by Bigelow, Wiener and Rosen- blueth.
Homeostatic mechanisms operate as error-controlled
regulators following the scheme of a typical feedback system.
The structure of the mechanism entails the following func-
