“ Meaning ” as a Sociological Concept Lecture
Loet Leydesdorff
2012-01-01
Abstract:The development of discursive knowledge presumes the communication of meaning as analytically different from the communication of information. Knowledge can then be considered as a meaning which makes a difference. Whereas the communication of information is studied in the information sciences and scientometrics, the communication of meaning has been central to Luhmann’s attempts to make the theory of autopoiesis relevant for sociology. Analytical techniques such as semantic maps and the simulation of anticipatory systems enable us to operationalize the distinctions which Luhmann proposed as relevant to the elaboration of Husserl’s “horizons of meaning” in empirical research: interactions among communications, the organization of meaning in instantiations, and the self-organization of interhuman communication in terms of symbolically generalized media such as truth, love, and power. Horizons of meaning, however, remain uncertain orders of expectations, and one should caution against reification from the meta-biological perspective of systems theory. Introduction The communication of meaning as different from the communication of information can perhaps be considered as a differentia specifica of social systems. Whereas biological systems are sometimes able to provide meaning to information and thus shape a semantic domain (Maturana, 1978; Maturana & Varela, 1980), and human minds can reflexively change the meaning of information, the capacity to communicate both information and meaning can be considered as an evolutionary achievement in inter-human languaging (Luhmann, 2002). When meaning can be communicated, this communication can further be codified and discursive knowledge also developed. The issue is beset with conceptual difficulties. First, the distinction between information and meaning can be conflated by defining information in terms insufficiently independent from meaning: as “meaningful information” or, in Bateson’s (1972, at p. 489) formulation, as “a difference which makes a difference.” Shannon-type information is defined as a series of differences (in a probability distribution), whereas such differences can only make a next-order difference for a receiving (or observing) system that is able to provide the information with meaning. Secondly, “meaning” in the sociological tradition is 1 The text is adapted from: Loet Leydesdorff, ‘“Meaning” as a sociological concept: A review of the modeling, mapping, and simulation of the communication of knowledge and meaning.’ Social Science Information, 50(3-4) (2011), 1-23. Semiotic Institute Online 2 often considered primarily as a subjective category and is not sufficiently understood in terms of inter-subjective communication. Third, the distinction between the communication of meaning and the communication of knowledge needs further elaboration. I shall argue that knowledge can be considered as “a meaning which makes a difference,” whereas meaning is generated when first-order differences (Shannon-type information) make a difference for a receiving system. However, the communication of knowledge requires the relative closure of the discourse in terms of specific codes of communication. These issues and distinctions are particularly salient nowadays, given the emergence of a knowledge-based economy (Foray, 2004; Leydesdorff, 2006a). Unlike a political economy, which can be considered as based on interactions among (i) economic exchange relations and (ii) political arrangements, the additional dynamics of (iii) knowledge-based communication requires the structural organization of the sciences (Whitley, 1984; Dasgupta & David, 1984). A third structured subdynamics can then be added to inter-human communication at the level of society. This third subdynamics potentially disturbs the relative stabilization of political economies in nations and tends to globalize and meta-stabilize existing market relations (Leydesdorff & Zawdie, 2010). The distinction between information and meaning Shannon-type information is defined as yet content-free (Theil, 1972; cf. BarHillel & Carnap, 1953; MacKay, 1969). This condition of “still-to-be-providedwith-meaning” by a system of reference is also manifested in the units of measurement (e.g., bits of information) which are dimensionless. Shannon-type information does not yet contain meaning other than the mathematical definition of the expected information value contained as uncertainty in a message as a finite series of differences—in other words, a probability distribution. What the expected information content of the distribution means can only be defined by an observing system using its own selection mechanism. Meaning is defined “in use” (Wittgenstein, 1953). Note that selection by an observing system is deterministic and system-specific, whereas variation can be stochastic. The meaning provided to the (Shannon-type) information can sometimes reduce uncertainty. Reduction of uncertainty can be measured as negentropy (Brillouin, 1962): this possibility originates from the difference which the difference (or a