Abstract
The title of this chapter is perverse.1 We know that for Niklas Luhmann, ontology is not a perennial puzzle to be solved anew, but a historically-determined category to be dismissed.2 Synonymous with the Western metaphysical tradition that is anchored by Aristotelian logic, ontology is correlated with the pattern of social organization characterized by the epoch of regional high cultures, namely the hierarchically ordered form of differentiation for which Luhmann uses the sociological and anthropological label ‘stratification.’ That the word ‘ontology’ first appears in the sixteenth century, now marking a subset of metaphysics, is taken by Luhmann as a sign of crisis, or, less dramatically, a sign of transition; and that the semantics of ontology, along with a host of other traditional concepts (such as ontology’s necessary cohort, reason), continues to play an acknowledged or unacknowledged role to this day is, for Luhmann, simply an indicator that some people have not been paying attention. What they have not been paying attention to is the emergence of a new form of social structure, functional differentiation, which, Luhmann claims, is planetary and no longer associated with regional differences. Accordingly, the stable ontology of old Europe must necessarily be replaced by a way of thinking more in tune with our complex, contemporary form of social organization.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Davies, Paul C. W. and Julian Brown (1986) The Ghost in the Atom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
d ’ Espagnat, Bernard (2006) On Physics and Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Forman, Paul (1971) ‘Weimar Culture, Causality, and Quantum Theory, 1918–1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile Intellectual Environment’ in Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3, 1–115.
Günther, Gotthard (2000) Die Amerikanische Apokalypse, Kurt Klagenfurt (ed.) (Munich: Profil).
Idee und Grundriß einer nicht-Aristotelischen Logik, (3rd edn, 1991) (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag).
Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno (1972) Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans. John Cumming (New York: Seabury Press).
Kumar, Manjit (2008 ) Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, and the Great Debate about the Nature of Reality (New York: Norton).
Luhmann, Niklas (2002) ‘The Cognitive Program of Constructivism and the Reality That Remains Unknown’, in Theories of Distinction: Redescribing the Descriptions of Modernity, William Rasch (ed.), trans. Joseph O’Neil et al. (Stanford: Stanford University Press).
Luhmann, Niklas(1988) Erkenntnis als Konstruktion (Bern: Benteli Verlag). Luhmann, Niklas(1997) Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft (Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp).
Luhmann, Niklas(1983) Legitimität durch Verfahren (Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp). Luhmann, Niklas(1998) Observations on Modernity, trans. William Whobrey (Stanford: Stanford University Press).
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1922) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. C. K. Ogden (London: Routledge).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2013 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rasch, W. (2013). Luhmann’s Ontology. In: la Cour, A., Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. (eds) Luhmann Observed. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137015297_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137015297_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-43698-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-01529-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social Sciences CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)