Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T23:18:47.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vulnerable bodies, vulnerable systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2015

Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos  and
Thomas E. Webb
Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos*
Affiliation:
Professor of Law and Theory, School of Law, University of Westminster. Email: andreaspm@westminster.ac.uk
Thomas E. Webb
Affiliation:
Faculty Academic Fellow in Law, The Law School, Lancaster University. Email: t.webb@lancaster.ac.uk.
*
andreaspm@westminster.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we examine the concept of vulnerability as it relates to the materiality of systems, the exclusion of human physical corporeality, and social exclusion in Luhmann's theory of social autopoiesis. We ask whether a concept of vulnerability can be included in autopoiesis in order to better conceptualise social exclusion and the excluded, with a view to understanding how, if at all, the dangers posed by this exclusion are mitigated by autopoietic processes. We are emphatically not returning to the human subject over operational systems, but seek instead to develop an understanding of the embodied nature of humans and their vulnerability within an autopoietic framework. We argue that the awareness of the risks to social functional differentiation posed by unmanaged exclusion – disenchantment, disassociation and, most drastically, dedifferentiation – provided by our analysis indicates why hyper-exclusion must be mitigated.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 11 , Issue 4: Critical Socio-legal Engagements with Systems Thinking , December 2015 , pp. 444 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amnesty International (2014) The Human Cost of Fortress Europe, online: <http://www.amnesty.eu/content/assets/Reports/EUR_050012014__Fortress_Europe_complete_web_EN.pdf> (last accessed 22 July 2015).+(last+accessed+22+July+2015).>Google Scholar
Bankowski, Zenon (1994) ‘How Does it Feel to Be on Your Own? The Person in the Sight of Autopoiesis’, Ratio Juris 7(2): 254–266.Google Scholar
Blaschke, Steffen (2015) ‘It's All in the Network: A Luhmannian Perspective on Agency’, Management Communication Quarterly 29(3): 463–468.Google Scholar
Borch, Christian (2011) Key Sociologists: Niklas Luhmann. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bottomley, Anne (2002) ‘The Many Appearances of the Body in Feminist Scholarship’, in Bainham, Andrew, Day Sclater, Shelley and Richards, Martin (eds), Body Lore and Laws. Oxford: Hart, 127–148.Google Scholar
Cesaratto, Todd (2013) ‘Luhmann, All Too Luhmann: Nietzsche, Luhmann and the Human’, in la Cour, A. and Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. (eds), Luhmann Observed: Radical Theoretical Encounters. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 108–134.Google Scholar
Connolly, William (2013) ‘The “New Materialism” and the Fragility of Things’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 41: 399–412.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha A. (2008–2009) ‘The Vulnerable Subject: Anchoring Equality in the Human Condition’, Yale Journal of Law and Feminism 20: 1–23.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha A. (2012) ‘“Elderly” as Vulnerable: Rethinking the Nature of Individual Responsibility and Societal Responsibility’, Elder Law Journal 20: 71–112.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha A. (2014) ‘Equality, Autonomy, and the Vulnerable Subject in Law and Politics’, in Fineman, Martha A. and Grear, Anna (eds), Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. London: Ashgate, 13–28.Google Scholar
Fineman, Martha A. and Grear, Anna (eds) (2014) Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Firth, Georgina and Mauthe, Barbara (2013) ‘Refugee Law, Gender and the Concept of Personhood’, International Journal of Refugee Law 25(3): 470–501.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, Sharon A. (2010) ‘Biopolitics and the Regulations of Vulnerability: The Case of the Female Trafficked Migrant’, International Journal of Law in Context 6: 277–294.Google Scholar
Grear, Anna (2007) ‘Challenging Corporate “Humanity”: Legal Disembodiment, Embodiment and Human Rights’, Human Rights Law Review 7(3): 511–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grear, Anna (2011) ‘The Vulnerable Living Order: Human Rights and the Environment in a Critical and Philosophical Perspective’, Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 2(1): 23–44.Google Scholar
Grear, Anna (2014), ‘Vulnerability, Advanced Global Capitalism and Co-symptomatic Injustice: Locating the Vulnerable Subject’, in Fineman, Martha A. and Grear, Anna (eds), Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. London: Ashgate, 41–60.Google Scholar
Halsall, Francis (2012) ‘Niklas Luhmann and the Body: Irritating Social Systems’, New Bioethics 18(1): 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Michael (1991) ‘Child Welfare within the Law: The Emergence of Hybrid Discourse’, Journal of Law and Society 18(3): 303–322.Google Scholar
King, Michael (1993) ‘The “Truth” About Autopoiesis’, Journal of Law and Society 20(2): 218–236.Google Scholar
King, Michael (2001) ‘The Construction and Demolition of the Luhmann Heresy’, Law and Critique 12: 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Michael (2009) Systems, not People, Make Society Happen. Edinburgh: Holcombe Publishing.Google Scholar
King, Michael and Thornhill, Christopher (2003) Niklas Luhmann's Theory of Politics and Law. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1989) Ecological Communication, trans. Bednarz, J. Jr.Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1990) Political Theory in the Welfare State. New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1992a) ‘The Coding of the Legal System’, in Teubner, Gunther and Febbrajo, Alberto (eds), State, Law, and Economy As Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New Perspective. Milan: Giuffrè, 145–185.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1992b) ‘Some Problems With “Reflexive Law”’, in Teubner, Gunther and Febbrajo, Alberto (eds), State, Law, and Economy As Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New Perspective. Milan: Giuffrè, 389–415.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1992c) ‘The Concept of Society’, Thesis Eleven 31: 67–80.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1992d) ‘Closure and Structural Coupling’, Cardozo Law Review 13(5): 1419–1442.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1994) ‘How Can the Mind Participate in Communication?’, in Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich and Pfeiffer, K. Ludwig (eds), Materialities of Communication (Whobrey, William trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1995) Social Systems (Bednarz, J. Jr. trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1996) Protest: Systemtheorie und Soziale Bewegungen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (1997) Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (2004) Law as a Social System, trans. Ziegert, K, ed. Kastner, F., Nobles, R., Schiff, D. and Ziegert, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (2008a) ‘Beyond Barbarism’, Soziale Systeme 14(1): 38–46 [first trans. Moeller, H. G., in Moeller, H. G. (ed.) (2006) Luhmann Explained. Chicago: Open Court].Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas (2008b) ‘Are There Still Indispensable Norms in Our Society?’, Soziale Systeme 14(1): 18–37.Google Scholar
Maturana, Humberto and Varela, Francisco (1972) Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dordecht: Reidel Publishing.Google Scholar
Maturana, Humberto and Varela, Francisco (1992) The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: Shambala.Google Scholar
Mauthe, Barbara and Webb, Thomas E. (2013) ‘In the Multiverse What Is Real? Luhmann, Complexity and ANT’, in Cour, Anders La and Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (eds), Luhmann Observed: Radical Theoretical Encounters. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 243–262.Google Scholar
Moeller, Hans-Georg (2006) Luhmann Explained: From Souls to Systems. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Moeller, Hans-Georg (2008) ‘“Human Rights Fundamentalism”: The Late Luhmann on Human Rights’, Soziale Systeme 14(2): 126–141.Google Scholar
Moeller, Hans-Georg (2012) The Radical Luhmann. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire (2003) ‘Who Are Law's Persons?’, Modern Law Review 66(3): 346–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire (2004) ‘Our Legal Lives as Men, Women and Persons’, Legal Studies 24(4): 621–642.Google Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire (2011) ‘Liberating the Legal Person’, Canadian Journal of Law and Society 26(1): 193–203.Google Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire (2012) ‘Legal Personality and the Natural World: On the Persistence of the Human Measure of Value’, Journal of Human Rights Law and the Environment 3: 68–83.Google Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire and Owens, Rosemary J. (1997) ‘Sexing Law’, in Ngaire, Naffine and Owens, Rosemary J. (eds), Sexing the Subject of Law. New South Wales: LBC Information Services, Sweet and Maxwell, 3–24.Google Scholar
Neves, Marcelo (2001) ‘From the Autopoiesis to the Allopoiesis of Law’, Journal of Law and Society 28(2): 242–264.Google Scholar
Nobles, Richard and Schiff, David (2013) Observing Law through Systems Theory. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Paterson, John (1994) ‘Who Is Zenon Bankowski Talking to? The Person in Sight of Autopoiesis’, Ratio Juris 8(2): 212–229.Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (2007) Absent Environments. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (2010) Niklas Luhmann: Law, Justice, Society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (2011) ‘“ … the Sound of a Breaking String”: Critical Environmental Law and Ontological Vulnerability’, Journal of Environmental Law and Human Rights 2(1): 5–22.Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (2013) ‘Folding Autopoiesis: Between Luhmann and Deleuze’, in La Cour, Anders and Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (eds), Luhmann Observed: Radical Theoretical Encounters. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 60–81.Google Scholar
Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (2014) ‘Critical Autopoiesis and the Materiality of Law’, International Journal of Semiotics of Law 27(2): 165–177.Google Scholar
Rasch, William (2000a) Niklas Luhmann's Modernity: The Paradoxes of Differentiation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Rasch, William (2000b) ‘The Limit of Modernity: Luhmann and Lyotard on Exclusion’, in Rasch, William and Wolfe, Cary (eds), Observing Complexity: Systems Theory and Postmodernity. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 199–214.Google Scholar
Rasch, William (2013) ‘Luhmann's Ontology’, in La Cour, Anders and Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (eds), Luhmann Observed: Radical Theoretical Encounters. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 38–59.Google Scholar
Schütz, Anton (1994) ‘Desiring Society: Autopoiesis beyond the Paradigm of Mastership’, Law and Critique 5(2): 149–64.Google Scholar
Schütz, Anton (1996) ‘The Twilight of Global Polis: On Losing Paradigms, Environing Systems and Observing World Society’, in Teubner, Gunther (ed.), Global Law without a State. Aldershot: Ashgate, 257–294.Google Scholar
Schütz, Anton (2007) ‘How aufarbeiten ”Liquid Society”? Zygmunt Bauman's Wager’, in Přibáň, Jiří (ed.), Liquid Society and Its Law. Aldershot: Ashgate, 41–60.Google Scholar
Schütz, Anton (2009) ‘Imperatives without Imperator’, Law and Critique 20: 233–243.Google Scholar
Schütz, Anton (2011) ‘A Quandary Concerning Immanence’, Law and Critique 22: 189–203.Google Scholar
Sherwood-Johnson, Fiona (2013) ‘Constructions of “vulnerability” in Comparative Perspective: Scottish Protection Policies and the Trouble with “adults at risk”’, Disability & Society 28(7): 908–921.Google Scholar
Smart, Carol (1989) Feminism and the Power of Law. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stychin, Carl (2012) ‘The Vulnerable Subject of Negligence Law’, International Journal of Law in Context 8: 337–353.Google Scholar
Teubner, Gunther (1993) Law as an Autopoietic System. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Teubner, Gunther (2009) ‘Self-subversive Justice: Contingency or Transcendence Formula of Law?’, Modern Law Review 72(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Verschraegen, Gert (2002) ‘Human Rights and Modern Society: A Sociological Analysis from the Perspective of Systems Theory’, Journal of Law and Society 29(2): 258–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinbach, Christine (2013) ‘Gendering Luhmann: The Paradoxical Simultaneity of Gender Equality and Inequality’, in La Cour, Anders and Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas (eds), Luhmann Observed: Radical Theoretical Encounters. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 85–107.Google Scholar