Posted by: Johan Normark | March 28, 2012

2012: The autopoietic system perspective

I have mentioned before that I will use various object-oriented perspectives in my future book on blogging about the “2012-phenomenon”. A crucial component here is how the 2012-object/2012-hyperobject/2012-system interacts with its environment. What does this interaction look like? Can there ever be any communication between New Age and science-based knowledge systems?

In this post I follow Levi Bryant’s use of autopoietic systems theory which he uses in his book The Democracy of Objects. When facing a vast array of various real and imaginary objects in our environment we as individual systems/objects or the systems/objects we somehow interact with make a distinction by marking what is of relevance to us. This means that there always is an unmarked space outside this distinction. The distinction is transcendental with respect to indication. The indicated does not precede the distinction but it is the very condition under which the indicated comes into being for the system drawing the distinction. This means that the 2012-object/system make other basic distinctions than the academic “Mayanist system” do. Distinctions are contingent and they can always be drawn otherwise and therefore produce other objects as effects. The Mayanist system excludes alien space crafts and divinities as possible objects in their system of knowledge. The 2012-system includes these imaginary objects.

Operations of the autopoietic system only refer to itself. Communication takes place in a system but never between systems. A system cannot communicate with its environment and vice versa. This means that the Mayanist system never truly communicates with the 2012-system. Outside objects/systems may perturb and irritate the 2012-system, as I constantly do through my blog, but what I write is not information for the perturbed 2012-system. Any information that may enter the system is constituted by the distinctions that belong to the organization of the system itself. The same perturbation can therefore affect different systems and produce different information. What happens is that systems transform or translate perturbations.

The autopoietic systems are characterized by unrest. In a communication system it is not enough to maintain equilibrium or homeostasis. Something new must be added to make it exist. All systems are affected by entropy and only the production by new elements or events will make them persist. Therefore, new information constantly perturbs the 2012 communication system through blogs, twitter, forums, conferences, etc.

The most interesting part of the autopoietic systems approach is that these system both constitute their own elements and are operationally closed. This means that the human 2012ers are not part of the 2012-system themselves. They are withdrawn from each other. The 2012ers are simply the environment of the 2012-system. The 2012-system is a communication system and it is operationally closed in relation to the mental systems of each 2012er. Thus, it is communications that communicate in the 2012-system, not the persons. The 2012-system has created its own distinctions, themes, etc. that is different from those made by each 2012er. Information is purely system-specific and it only exists for that system. There is therefore no pre-existent information. Information is only internal achievements of systems.

Let us now see how this information can perturb and be translated within the 2012-system (or the Mayanist system).



  1. The new science, that is coming out of Russia, from Russian scientists, and David Wilcock wrote about in his book; The Source Field Investigations
    will be changing everything in the next 10-20 years. The old peer reviewed, evidence based scientific method kind of sciences will be gone, the way of the dinosaurs.
    The new age will be not so much about the Maya calender, or the 2012- hyperobject or 2012/system. or 2012-phenomenon, or religion, or consciousness raising etc., but it will be about the new sciences.
    In my opinion, the cat is out of the bag, and it can not be put back.

  2. Thanks Gilgamesh. You exactly show my point that direct communication between systems is impossible …

    Wilcock is a crackpot. Are you perhaps referring to Smelyakov?

    • I m not sure if Wilcock even mentioned Smelyakov in a list of many others in his book, But his book; The Sours Field Investigations is really just the tip of the iceberg, it was supposed to be 1500 pages, but his publisher only wanted the book to be 500 pages.
      Wilcock investigate everything, and in my opinion, maybe not everything he writes is 100% correct, but in my estimation he is correct about 90%. And as you know, no book, or writer is 100% correct all the time in everything. I m sure it will be the same with your book.

      • From the perspective of the 2012 phenomenon he is probably 90% correct. That number will be significantly lower if I am to evaluate it. However, I will not spend my time on a conspiracy theorists who “investigate everything”. It will fall outside the distinctions I make.

      • I enjoyed reading the Source Field Investigation book, I could hardly put it down. The book is mostly About the source field Science. But on his website I see, now he is really into the Occult conspiracy and aliens stuff.
        I agree with you, he can just leave the conspiracy theories and the aliens for David Icke, and Jesse Ventura.

  3. JohanGood Program On Pbs About The Lost Maya Of Northern Yucatan,Most Scientists Assumed The Pucc Region Cities Were The Result Of Migration From The South 800ce,Underneath Some Of These Buildings Was Construction From 2500bce.
    Went To The Walters Museum Yesterday They Have The Bourne Collection Of Pre-columbian Artifacts.Mostly Ceramics ie;Olmec Were-babies,Large Incense Burners And Some Plumbate.From Mexico,Central America, And South America.What A Great Gift To The Museum.


%d bloggers like this: