Rights statement: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=IJC The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, International Journal of Law in Context, 11 (4), pp 444-461 2015, © 2015 Cambridge University Press.
Accepted author manuscript, 429 KB, PDF document
Rights statement: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=IJC The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, International Journal of Law in Context, 11 (4), pp 444-461 2015, © 2015 Cambridge University Press.
Accepted author manuscript, 431 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Vulnerable bodies, vulnerable systems
AU - Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Andreas
AU - Webb, Tom
N1 - http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=IJC The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, International Journal of Law in Context, 11 (4), pp 444-461 2015, © 2015 Cambridge University Press.
PY - 2015/12
Y1 - 2015/12
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - autopoiesis
KW - systems theory
KW - bodies
KW - vulnerability
KW - law
U2 - 10.1017/S1744552315000294
DO - 10.1017/S1744552315000294
M3 - Journal article
VL - 11
SP - 444
EP - 461
JO - International Journal of Law in Context
JF - International Journal of Law in Context
SN - 1744-5523
IS - 4
ER -