ISA RC51 on Sociocybernetics

By Johannes van der Zouwen, Emeritus Professor of Social Research Methodology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam

I first met Felix Geyer in 1970, when he was Head of the Methodology Division at SISWO, Netherlands Universities Joint Social Research Centre. There he was doing what he did all his working life: bringing people with common interests together and trying to build an effective organization for these joint efforts. In this case, bringing together social researchers and methodologists of different universities, to work out a solid curriculum for research methodology to be accepted by all Dutch Universities. These meetings, organized by Felix, can also be viewed as the starting point of the formation of NOSMO, the Dutch Organization of Social Research Methodologists.

By that time Felix was very much interested in a topic that became the subject of his dissertation, i.e., alienation. He studied that topic with concepts and insights derived from General Systems Theory (GST). By that time, studying a social process with the conceptual tools of systems theory was quite novel. Remember that Walter Buckley’s book on “Sociology and Modern Systems Theory” was published only a few years earlier (1967).

From that time on we see that two labels can characterize his scientific work: 1) coordination: bringing people together to form an effective organization and 2) applying systems theory to the study of social structures and social processes; what many years later, (in 1978) was coined as “sociocybernetics”.

Felix used the context of two large organizations to reach these goals: The World Organisation of Systems and Cybernetics (WOGSC) and the International Sociological Association (ISA). Under the aegis of these organisations he (co-)organised many conferences. Most of these conferences resulted in publications about the ever-expanding domain of sociocybernetics.

I had the pleasure to work together with Felix organising many of these conferences and selecting and editing those conference papers that were fit for inclusion in special volumes. Therewith we applied a kind of “division of labour”: Felix was especially keen on papers that were offering new perspectives, where I was looking after the empirical testability of all these sweeping theories. A bit like “the good cop and the bad cop”; Felix being enthusiastic about still another new approach, I posing all kind of critical questions: like “where is the evidence for this theory”?   

In the many hours we worked together, preparing conferences and publications, I especially liked his good humour and his limitless energy. I remember one of his practical jokes that nearly went wrong. He was only recently appointed as the Secretary General of the ISA, and he had just acquired an answering machine with remote control, so that when he was out of office, he still could receive messages, and send out messages to the thousands of members of the ISA. To demonstrate this brand-new device, when working at my place, he recorded the general message: “Due to unforeseen circumstances, the forthcoming world congress of the ISA will be cancelled”. Of course, this dramatic message had to be removed from the recorder, but he could not manage that from my work place. So in a hurry he left for his office, in order to get that messages deleted before it could produce a lot of unrest in the ISA.

As indicated above, Felix had the strong conviction that the application of GST to the description and solution of sociological problems would turn out to be very beneficial to sociology. That meant for him that sociocybernetics had to gain a proper place, both in the world of the cyberneticians, and in the world of the sociologists. The recognition in the cybernetics world was gained in 1978 as Felix and I were asked by Dr. John Rose, the Director General of the WOGSC, to organise a large section (rather a sub-conference) on Cybernetics and Social Systems, resulting in the publication “Sociocybernetics”. From then on, we were invited to organise these sub-conferences during all subsequent WOGSC conferences.

Within sociology, i.e. the ISA, the process went more slowly. Felix knew that if the group of sociocyberneticians wanted to promote from an “Ad Hoc Group” into a Research Committee, the group had to acquire more scientifically active members, and to organise a series of successful meetings. 

And here things come together:

• First, a loyal home base (SISWO) that provided Felix with organizational support, despite the fact that his activities, i.e. promoting sociocybernetics, could be seen as quite distant from his formal task description.
• Second, a large network within ISA, evolved in the four years that he acted as Secretary-General of ISA.
• And, last but not least, the contributions of the members of the Ad Hoc Group. Stimulated by the enthusiasm of Felix, more and more of its members participated in conferences, and the number of papers and other publications increased, such that the promotion from an ‘ad hoc group’ to a ‘research committee’, was only a matter of time. 

For his contributions to sociocybernetics Felix was granted the title of Honorary Member of the WOGSC. In the Festschrift for Felix Geyer (Kybernetes, Vol. 35, 3/4, 2006) one can find much more information about his work. Let me conclude by saying that through his efforts sociocybernetics has gained in the social sciences the place it deserves. 

By Dr Philippos Nicolopoulos

Felix Geyer has passed away. We lost a distinguished international social scientist, an unforgettable colleague, a friend. It is difficult to express our sadness with words, but it is “a must” for us to pay tribute (in scientific terms) to his memory. So, we should write in memoriam for his scientific contribution, for his work in the field of sociocybernetics, for his abilities in organizing, for his human contacts, for his personality.

Felix Geyer was the inventor with J. van den Zouwen of the term “sociocybernetics” and he contributed so much to the establishment of the RC51 of International Sociological Association (ISA).  That’s why he became worthily emeritus president of this committee (c. on Sociocybernetics). The aforementioned term was successful, and its meaning exactly referred to the cybernetics of social systems with a new way which was not identified only with the 1^st order cybernetics (cybernetics of observed systems). Its meaning became broader and comprised the so-called 2^nd order cybernetics of the observing systems. This one was much more appropriate for the human systems. Its features fitted better mature human beings in their social dimension.

Felix in his works explained why the limited model of “input-output-feedback” (1^st order cybernetics, observed systems with clear distinction between system and its environment) was not adequate for human actions, processes and formations. He was always trying to push social scientists, who were dealing with social systems, to develop their views and theories in that perspective, in which the “observer”, his/her perception abilities, motivation and value world constitute a basic and crucial role in the whole process of communication and control, beyond the characteristics of 1^st order Cybernetics (Cyb).

In a very comprehensive paper presented at Bielefeld (World Congress of Socioloby, 1994), as well as in a similar paper presented in the Bucharest Congress of Cybernetics (1996), Felix, as I remember, described with a clear way the distinctions between the 1^st and 2^nd order Cyb. and underscored that the latter referred mainly to processes and concepts which are associated with “self” (self-organization, self-reference, self-steering, autopoietics, morphogenesis etc). Thus, the cybernetic model doesn’t remain a static one, but embraces dynamical process as positive feedback or change which many times characterize the human systems. Thus, we see beyond the limits of the homeostatic equilibrium notion, which is connected mainly with mechanical systems.

In the same paper (which many times is included in citations of books and articles of mine, which refer to sociocybernetic model), he connects his non- static perspective with chaos and complexity theory and especially with the system situation far from equilibrium, in which non-linear relationships obtain. After a bifurcation point there is always a possibility (but of course no certainty) to reach a higher organization structure.

I remember that in discussions with him, when I insisted on the social change processes (change against the established interests which maintain unfair and unequal social conditions), he accepted the change possibility and he connected it with the cross-catalysis process. For him sociocybernetics and 2^nd order cybernetics were associated with complexity theory and the systems theory beyond the equilibrium conditions.

Felix was intelligent and methodical but not dogmatic, he was open minded and prompt to discuss a different opinion from his own opinion or from the “established opinion”. Thereby he liked to discuss new ideas or to push and support you in creative scientific work despite his different theoretical direction. So, he liked to share with other scientists the scientific activity in their common scientific field (international meetings, conferences, congresses etc), regardless of their theoretical or ideological differentiations or disagreements.

That’s why his contribution in organizing (conferences, symposia, scientific communication and cooperation through the internet) was great.

My memories from Felix were many. I met him for first time in Bielefeld in the World Congress of Sociology of ISA (1994), in which I became member of thematic group on systems theory and cybernetics. After the first discussions in the congress we continued our contact through emails, and we shared the common interest to improve the activities of the aforementioned thematic group. So, we cooperated as we were preparing our sessions in Bucharest Congress in 1996 on Cybernetics. After that, we had the World Congress of ISA in Montréal in 1998, in Brisbane in 2002, the 1^st conference of Sociocybernetics in Colimbari, Crete and the 3^rd in Corfu (for which I cooperated with him more, for I had personally more responsibility in organizing), Lisbon Conference in 2004, Maribor Conference in 2005. So, a part of my initial work in the field of sociocybernetics was connected with Felix. He encouraged me to present my ideas and my work of this field in international scientific fora and always he helped me in organizing. I use and I used some of his papers and works in my classes or in independent lectures and I mentioned him in some citations of my own works in Greek or English.

All of us, who we have worked some years ago for the establishment of RC51 of ISA, we acknowledge his crucial contribution to the upgrading of the aforementioned thematic group to the RC51. Moreover, he was warm in human contact, cosy, and he had sense of humor. He was not only an “office scientist”, but he was full of “liveliness and energy”.

Felix Geyer passed away, but his scientific contribution and his warm personality are always present and alive. He will always live in the hearts and the spirits of all sociocyberneticians and is… always ready to help us for the organization of a new conference!

Dr Philippos Nicolopoulos
Former Associate Professor of the University of Indianapolis (Athens Campus), Former Assist. Professor of Sociology at the Faculty of Philosophy of the Univ. of Crete,
Attorney at Law at the Supreme Court of Greece

Kindly shared with us by Prof. Gerard de Zeeuw

On September 15, the Board of the Systeemgroep Nederland sent the following letter to Felix’s family and friends and to his carer (translated from the Dutch):

Dear relatives and friends of Felix Geyer,

Dear Mrs Ria Meul,

It is with deep regret that we learned of the death of Dr. Felix Geyer on August 23, 2020. He was a highly regarded colleague and a good friend.

His contributions as a colleague include serving as one of the founding fathers of the Systeemgroep Nederland. He was one of the first in the Netherlands to understand the importance of system theory for sociology and subsequently worked hard to develop its implications. He introduced the now generally accepted term for this development, namely sociocybernetics.

He has also worked hard to pass on that theory to others. We recall the many conferences he helped organise, together with colleague Prof. Hans van der Zouwen. His contributions also include various courses on system theory that were presented in the first years of the existence of the Systeemgroep Nederland.

Finally, we would like to recall what made Felix such a highly appreciated colleague. He was always ready to explain matters or contribute to discussions with great humour and respect for others. This often happened during a meal and while enjoying a drink. Felix combined conviviality with sharp analyses, a sense of proportion and well-founded advice.

In recent years, Felix gradually withdrew from public activities. We missed him very much and we will in the future.

On behalf of the System Group Netherlands,

The Board
Prof. Loet Leydesdorff
Drs. Martha Vahl
Prof. Gerard de Zeeuw