Hi John,

It actually takes its origin back to second order cybernetics and
digital signal processing techniques. You raise an interesting
point in that one must observe his or her self in order to
effectively extend the natural feed-back of first order systems in
general. My firend who helped me develop The Language of Universal
Translation Revised had noted that if you take two mirrors and
scratch off the reflective coating on one of them and align the
mirrors perfectly, then one can peer through the 'hole' in the
mirror and see an infinite reflection approaching the point of
perspective between the two mirrors, (which is dead center if the
mirrors are perfeclty aligned). It reminded me of a song by
Kraftwerk called either Hall of Mirrors or the Looking Glass, its
been a while since I heard it. This in effect is the principle that
lasers operate on and it allows us to draw some interesting
conclusions about the second order system versus the third order
system:

1) Second order systems approximate infinities by switching the
network on and off, while third order systems are continuous,
without the need for a switch.
2) Second order systems can be digitally modelled whereas a third
order system cannot.
3) Second order systems are abstract in the environment, while third
order systems are the environment, whereas the two spheres of the
psycho-dynamic (psi), and techo-dynamic (tau) realms can intersect
to form an intersection that looks like an eye.
4) The eye of convergent third order systems can be effectivley
decoupled from the network as a systems perspective as opposed from
a systems perspective.

Therefore a third order 'system' is the reflection, the point of
perspective and the eye, which according to the decoupled action
postulate, can be applied as a virtual reality whereby the
conceptualization of a system is mapped by its instructions for the
education of its developer in which certain 'hooks' may be
implicated for the purposes of extended communications between the
two realms. The only problem is that third order systems are
supposdley highly unstable, making their applications more
experimental at present than anything. You may want to read the
Tractatus Paridoxio-Philisophicus by Richardo Uribe. Here's the
address:

<A HREF="https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/jhutchin/www/BCL/">Tractatus
Paridoxio-Philisophicus</A>

BTW, I'm happy to see you here John.

Enjoy!

Patrick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca"
Cyberneticist

--- In cyberneticsNow@yahoogroups.com, "John K. Balor"
<balor1999@...> wrote:
>
> I have been a member of the Psycho-Cybernetics discussion forum
for
> many years, and I never seen anybody with such a profound
> understanding of what Psycho-Cybernetics REALLY is, as the people
on
> this CyberneticsNow forum.
>
> As the Psycho-Cybernetics forum had problems with spam and lack of
> moderation, I would very much appreciate of the Psycho-Cybernetics
> people would move over to this excellent CyberneticsNow forum
where
> there seems to be a much better environment for discussing the
> essence of Psycho-Cybernetics and Social Cybernetics in general.
>
> Could those who are members both on this forum and on the Psycho-
> Cybernetics forum please motivate people to move over to this
forum?
>
> There are many interesting questions being asked in the mail
below.
> Personally, I think I would say that Psycho-Cybernetics is second
> order cybernetics as third order cybernetics would probably
require
> somebody to observe somebody who observeres himself. The idea of
> Psycho-Cybernetics is simply to observe oneself (provide
feedback),
> which, to me, seems to be fully consistent with the idea of second
> order cybernetics.
>
> John K. Balor
>
>
> --- In cyberneticsNow@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ashley Meuser-
> Bianca" <cyberperson001@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all. I've been in the throws on conducting a survey on modern
> > cybernetetics in second-order systems, constructivism,
relativism,
> > holism, reductionsim, etc. in which I've found an interesting
> article
> > at Principia Cybernetica Web:
> >
> > <A HREF="http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Cybernetics-
> > EPST.pdf">http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Cybernetics-
EPST.pdf</A>
> >
> > It provides excellent overview of these systems as an
introduction
> to
> > second order cybernetics. For anyone with a serious interest in
> > cyberenetics, the Principia Cybernetica is an excellent place to
> find
> > resources such as this for which a relevant perspective could be
> > built atop of the works of Maltz in particular.
> >
> > However, it is very surpirsing to see the divide in psycho-
> > cybernetics and conventional cybernetics and Maltz is seemingly
> left
> > out of the main-stay of cybernetics materials that I've been
> > researching here and elsewhere on the web, its become as if he is
> > light years ahead as an understanding--even today.
> >
> > As a former skeptic of psycho-cybernetics, I had thought that
such
> > notions of mind-control in themselves, which had bee nexplored
here
> > at this group, could pose a threat to the average individual
> wherein
> > situations could be architected by some out-side force by which
the
> > line between conventional thinking and delusional thinking could
> > become blurred thus leading to confusion between those who have
> been
> > exposed to certain environmental stimuli and those who had not--
or
> > even as an understanding of cybernetics in general. However after
> > reading Psycho-Cybernetics, I began to perceive these notions as
a
> > way to individualize cybernetics and avoiding the concept of
> > delusional thinking altogether. In a way that the benefits out-
> > weighed negative aspects through which mind-control had
originally
> > conjured to my own mind--to include in the experience, certain
> > factors that have a basis in either the subject or object as an
> > irrational domain in itself, and that could be almost infinitely
> > explored as a distinction. I now believe that psycho-cybernetics
> > would explain such things as psycho-education, telepathy, and
> > alternative modes of communication through which even
transhumanism
> > as has evolved over the years, as could be interpreted and
> explained
> > by the cybernetic system in such domains as the irrational. I
began
> > developing a perspective of connectionisms in modern cybernetics
to
> > which the constructivism vs relativism argument could once and
for
> > all be settled by a solid model for self-realizing and self-
> > organizing systems--almost a third-order cybernetics have you.
> >
> > The first question is, is psycho-cybernetics already a third-
order
> > cybernetics already? Well the answer to this question could no
> > further be answered in time than explained without a primary
> > understanding of systems theory. What's required is some
rethinking
> > into the way we perceive cybernetics and interact with each
other.
> > Instead of something that is applied to the subject as an object
> > oriented system (a paradox in itself), we would begin seeing it
as
> > something that is applied to the irrational domain instead, a
> > canonical system between these two spheres wherein we would
begin
> to
> > find patterns in the such a domain which could be applied to
either
> > subject or object, and there from, factor in certain stimuli that
> > could be best described as extra-para-remedial between
interactive
> > systems at greater precisions. Could a world's society be
> controlled
> > as the flow of information becomes a flow of objects, and could
> this
> > flow of objects be controlled and regulated to the point of
virtual
> > transport without the all the business of the middle-man? A form
of
> > C2C ie. consumer to consumer exchange have you?
> >
> > The first step that one could take is to use the network in
order
> to
> > realize his or herself as a truly autonomous system. A so called,
> > third order cybernetics, reborn to the network in discovering
> faults
> > that had existed in the psycho-physical system itself prior to
such
> > existence. The second question here to the previous paragraph is,
> > what structures could evolve as a result of a social rennaisance
> that
> > should cause the way we in which we come to terms with
technology,
> to
> > change the order to embrace this, objectivism, and come to terms
> with
> > each other? Well, this rennaisance in the web, the so called Web
> 2.0
> > is the first sign of this. However without an actual upgrade in
the
> > protocols which we use to exchange information on the web, I
think
> > its alot of hot-air. It does not yet allow for the canonical
> system,
> > at least as it is understood in digital signal processing, to
> emerge
> > with the infinities that determine the domain between subject or
> > object, as an applied system ie. augmented reality. It would take
> > total and complete autonomy in order to discover its untold
> history,
> > wherein the essence of the constructivism that exists in modern
> > cybernetics would become just another encapsulation and a means
to
> > filter this encapuslation as an infinite impulse response (and
> avoid
> > past mistakes due to these faults in the process). A feed-back
loop
> > between the objective envoronment and its subjective realm that
> > could 'chisel' from the emergent system, the history of such
faults
> > as they become apparent. A social system of re-cycling in which
we
> > could take the 'garbage' on the net, and turn it into something
> > useful. Case in point. We learn from our mistakes, and we learn
> > even more on the net that the emergent qualities can be re-used.
> I'm
> > not quite sure if all of this is necessarily 'good', but it
exists.
> >
> > The net has a way of amplifying certain information to affect the
> > user in ways that are supposed to be predictable. But what
happens
> > when this positive feedback causes the system to become unstable
> > because the predictions are out-dated, and the out-dated
> predictions
> > can be used 'against' something? Nothing can be predicted with
one
> > hundred percent certainty. A greater dynamic range is required to
> > capture the effective signal, and separate it from the noise,
even
> > the one hundred percent prediction becomes rationalized. As the
> > range increases, so does the noise, and hence the predictability
> > decreases, and the irrational number extends. Which is what we
> > want. A one hundred percent certain and continuous system. And
here
> > exists the 'magic' of cybernetics. It is an effective tool to
> > control the noise and generate the sub-band. And it is the sub-
band
> > that can be incorporated and filtered by the second-order system
> > quite effectively, and dynamically, like a non-canonical system
> (from
> > what I've read so far). Its quite easy to superimpose an non-
> > canonical second order IIR filter onto the second-order
cybernetic
> > system, and say that similarities exist, sonservatively speaking.
> > Both use positive and negative feed-back to attenuate and
> > discriminate certain qualities of the signal that we could say
are
> > desirable, both work on a stimulus or signal that acts on the
> circuit
> > or the environment. And with virtual reality, we have a way of
> > projecting the objective realm of the user into the network, to
> > increase the precision of the filter in order to increase the
> dynamic
> > range by creating a dual in order to increase the precision of
the
> > prediction instead of the accuracy. So systems become easier to
> > understand and 'chisel' to conserve the perception mechanism that
> > proves Maltz's self-success mechanism in psycho-cybernetics.
> >
> > And to this, I've derived from the second-order system, what I
> call a
> > canonical model of the second-order system, separating the
> > environment into two "spheres" which comprise the physical and
> psycho-
> > physical realms. It would extend the second order system in a way
> > that hope Maltz would be proud.
> >
> > The question is, are we ready for third-order cybernetics, and
do
> the
> > opposing trends towards projecting the medium and filtering the
> > content become too exclusive? Will we ever be ready for third-
order
> > cybernetics? Is there a convergence? Perhaps there is a way to
> > explain this model in which we could incorporate digital signal
> > processing in a way that depends less on the environmental system
> > itself, and increase the chance that for every unique individual,
> > there is a unique signal. This has been known for years in the
> > development of psycho-social compendiums and role-playing games.
> >
> > I'd just like to offer my take on this specific work to
conjecture
> > that there is a third-order cybernetics out there that we've yet
to
> > come together and define. In that, I propose that a future model
> > exists for which these second-order systems actually derive from
> that
> > maps the future onto the past, what I call the reverse transitive
> > implication of cybernetics, wherein the strict division in the
> field
> > could be described in what respects could otherwise be called
> arcane
> > to the past system instead of the future. And there is some what,
> > alot of room for this conjecture. We would see a dynamic
topology
> on
> > the web become a dynamic geography/cartography through
terracentric
> > realational databases. We would see augmentative systems emerge
to
> > provide a means of survival to the fledgling cybernetic system in
> > order to expand consciousness and evolve into the higher
> civilization
> > as this 'great mind' of technology. We would see the *controlled*
> > applications of this technology to develop a world in which a
real
> > diversity in virtual environments becomes the object of
democratic
> > terraforming leasing to the actual placement of planets as a
> quantum
> > synchrony with the big-bang and the near instantaneous transport
of
> > objects. Dynamic books. For that matter, we would see the
> > divergence of this single big-bang, into many big-bangs, through
> the
> > emergence of phenomena in the psyco-physical environment to
account
> > for so many so called 'multiple realities'--a concept that I had
> > attributed to different models of the universe that could be
> unified
> > into a signle 'univii'.
> >
> > But it has its limits when confined to the second order system,
> > taking advantage of the psycho-physical reality of systems more
> > advanced as an environmental attribute. In the discovery of these
> > phenomena, the instincts of a person could more or less drive
one
> for
> > the return of lost objects or time, to such a point that the
> > individual loses connection to the 'great mind' that has caused
the
> > emergence of these phenomena to become pronounced. Cybernetics
> could
> > be used, as it has been programmed, to create an enemy by the
> reality
> > that technology, economy, or even an eco-system, could've been
> > programmed to become just such an entity in order to fulfill its
> > purpose--in previous generations. With a lack of enemies, lack of
> > standards, and/or lack of a ratings system, it would lead to the
> > double bind of these scenarios, itself, to become confused and
> > deluded by its effective use whereby the reverse transitive
> > implication becomes an equivalence through that which it has been
> > designed to project or reject, and devalued--the re-occurences
of
> the
> > Y2K problem for instance. Manifolds of these systems could allow
> the
> > infamous 'hacker' to implant viruses on computers without even a
> > trace. People could become lost in this virtual environment,
losing
> > ties to the past whereby memories have been virtualized by an
> > authoritarian system, coming to power by taking advantage of
these
> > autonomous systems wherein broadcast media could become hyper-
> > manipulated.
> >
> > However unlikely due to the shear amount of information that is
> > available on the Internet and the virtues of true autonomy, both
> the
> > positive and negative aspects of this dynamicism can revert to
the
> > inherent connectionism that exists in the argument. I personally
> > believe that constructivism will fade to the truly canonical
system
> > whereby we've learned that the psycho-physical realm cannot be
> > subjectified. It will take an inclination to the implicit
> revolution
> > in thinking that such networks pose to the user, in order to
become
> > truly self-aware systems, and be able to sense such abuses when
> they
> > happen. Perhaps with the development of weighted connections. A
> > truly connectionless Internet is on the order of five to fifty
> years
> > away, and the individual system must not be overloaded to that
> point
> > before. It will take the development of a subject oriented
language
> > as a role based system for instance that the development of third
> > order cybernetics to become reality. In effect, we must control
the
> > control in order to realize the reality. So I do believe that
> psycho-
> > cybernetics is a third order cybernetics as this group
represents
> its
> > evolution.
> >
> > I hope that this article has shed some light for anyone who is
> > reading it and that we are able to come together to make some
> > definitions as to the developments that it will require. And for
> all
> > that I missed in this, happy belated MLK day.
> >
> > Patrick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca"
> > Cyberneticist
> >
>