- Email: [email protected]
New Meaning of International Stability: What Should We Learn from Contemporary Systems Thinking?
Copyright © IFAC Supplementary Ways for Improving International Stability, Vienna, Austria, 1995
NEW MEANING OF INfERNATIONAL STABILITY: WHAT SHOULD WE LEARN FROM CONTEMPORARY SYSTEMS THINKING? Czeslaw Mesjasz Academy of Economics, Cracow, Poland
Abstract: The main aim of the paper is to examine what are the advantages and disadvantages of applications of analogies and metaphors based on systems thinking in describing and explaining change and status quo in international systems. The concept of "stability" can serve as best example for demonstrating the impact of classic cyberneticsbased systems thinking on the language of international relations theory and practice. In theoretical discussions it is often replaced with other systems analogies and metaphors turbulence and chaos as well as autopoiesis and self-organization. These terms seem particularly relevant to the emerging post-Cold War international situation. Keywords: chaos theory, international stability, stability analysis, systems methodology, turbulence Stability, that much overburdened word with unstabilized definition Richard Bellman in (Ashby, 1963, p.73) Slilbility - political and economic conditions that satisfy our interests From the "Doublespeak Dictionary for the 1990s" Edward S. Herman (1992)
in international relations studies on dynamics of broadly defined international systems.
1. INTRODUCTION
Ideas suitable in the bipolar world do not seem useful in exploring changes in contemporary international systems. However, "systems thinking" has yielded new concepts. Chaos theory, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, catastrophe theory, autopoiesis and self-organization theory, synergetics, etc., appear to be useful for international studies not as sources of rigorous models - in the meantime we have learned that social systems are much more intricate, but mainly as analogies and metaphors.
The concept of "stability" can serve as the best example for demonstrating the impact of "classic", cybernetics-based systems thinking on the language of international relations theory and practice (peace research, security studies). At present, the term stability is becoming less useful in studies of international systems. The notion itself, however, has gained a well-established interpretation in the language of practice. In theoretical discussions it is being replaced with other analogies and metaphors borrowed from systems thinking. Turbulence and chaos seem to be most representative. Their applications seem particularly germane in portraying emerging postCold War international situation.
The main aim of the paper is to examine what are the advantages and disadvantages of applications of analogies and metaphors based on systems thinking in describing and explaining change and status quo in international systems. We also intend to present an introduction to the research aimed at studying what is the impact of systems analogies and metaphors used 125
In the traditional sense, close to the original ideas of mathematics, although mostly appealing to intuition rather than mathematical rigour, stability means that if a system is perturbed slightly from its equilibrium state, all subsequent motions remain in a correspondingly small neighbourhood of the equilibrium (Eatwell, et al., 1987, vol. 4, p. 461). Stability can be also identified as probability that the quality of the system state is preserved during the given time (Scheffran, 1990, p. 190).
2. SYSTEMS MODELS, ANALOGIES, AND METAPHORS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS STUDIES International relations studies have become one of the most attractive areas for application of systems models, either taking shape of sophisticated mathematical formulae, and/or more or less advanced computer simulation models. There exists, however, a barrier impeding usefulness of any rigorous modelling of international relations. Significance of models is always measured by their impact on social praxis. Models are useful in theory and/or in policy making although their deficiencies make validity of their use rather limited. Sometimes publicized results of modelling can influence society, e.g. the first two Reports to the Club of Rome . It is, however, mainly the everyday language of politicians and journalists along with more or less precise "scientific" utterances that both describe and determine international reality.
Turbulence has been introduced into the studies of world politics by Rosenau (1990). He refers to extended understanding of turbulence including concepts relating to non-equilibrium thermodynamics elaborated by Dya Prigogine and applied in social sciences as source of more or less carefully elaborated analogies and metaphors. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics, or dissipative structures theory, provides a new pattern of change (prigogine and Stengers, 1984). According to that theory new structures emerge not in changing the state of equilibrium but in the state far from equilibrium. It is the fluctuations that enable a system to move from one state to another.
Analogies and metaphors referring to other disciplines remain an indispensable component of discourse in international relations. Systems analogies and metaphors acquire a specific normative sense while used in international relations theory and practice. Due to their origins in "rationalist" disciplines - mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology they are treated as objective and scientific in a rationalist sense. Thus their applications, in addition to enhanced explanative validity, by definition obtain supplemental, "sound", normative predictive and prescriptive, legitimacy in any debate on international relations and on other social issues . Consequently, in those applications, but not only, their metaphoric sense is neglected or misinterpreted.
Chaos, another notion stemming from systems thinking and popularized among laymen by Gleick (1987), remains currently one of most "trendy" terms of social sciences. Deterministic chaos theory opens new intuitive comprehension of randomness and probability. Traditionally, it was commonly believed that the world is unpredictable because it is complex, composed of myriads of elements standing in interactions. Chaos theory provides also a new understanding of systems change enlarging the collection of analogies and metaphors applicable in social sciences (Loye and Eisler, 1987).
Analysis of the specific value-Iadening can be illustrated with analogies and metaphors associated with the notions: stability, turbulence and chaos. In that case systems thinking can be seen as collection of "image producing fields" and international relation studies (social sciences) as a set of "image receiving fields" .
All concepts relating to systems change can be divided into two groups: 1. Ideas explaining maintenance, regulation and control, equilibrium-like behaviour, and some aspects of adaptability of already existing systems; they are primarily connected with early stages of cybernetics automatic control systems, adaptive systems. 2. Ideas explaining emergence and evolution of structurally new systems "non-equilibrium systems", "living systems".
3. THE CONCEPTS OF STABILITY, TURBULENCE AND CHAOS The origins of discussion on stability in cybernetics can be traced in the works of Bellman (1953) whose concepts, developing the ideas of Lyapunov and Poincare proved applicable in mathematical modelling of automatic control systems. In cybernetic stability is regarded as positive state although with some exceptions (Ashby, 1963)
126
state of being stationary (Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968, p. 1812). This quasi-literal sense of stability proves sufficient m verbal delineation of mathematical definitions.
4.STABllJTY,TURBULENCE,CHAOSAND THE LANGUAGE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 4.1 Stability
Narrowing the definition of stability meant transformation from donnant (quasi-literal) metaphor into a dead (frozen) metaphor with its own literal meaning (Ortony 1979; Lakoff and 10hnson; Tsoukas 1991). Using a metaphorical language we may state that stability was "killed" and lost its heuristic value as a donnant metaphor.
The tenn "stability" was brought into international relations studies by Lewis F. Richardson (1960). The concepts of stability and equilibrium of international systems thoroughly developed by Morton Kaplan (1957, 1957a), Karl W. Deutsch, 1. David Singer (1964) and Kenneth Waltz (1964).
In that stage stability became something that might be called a homologue of "perpetual peace" of technocratic era. The word "peace" seemed emotionally-Iadened, irrelevant to modem age. Likely the concepts of "positive" and "negative" peace motivated some scientists to use another, more precise term. Maybe the abuses of the word "peace" in the Soviet anti-Western propaganda were also one of the reasons for search for another term depicting the absence of war and other major conflicts.
They tried to use cybernetics in depicting dynamics of international systems and emphasized that those systems are not simply stable but in Ashby's sense ultrastable (Kaplan, 1957a, p. 279). The cybernetic pattern of equilibrium and stability stood behind of the origins of discussion "polarity vs. stability" with Deutsch and Singer (1964) favouring multipolarity, and Waltz (1964) favouring bipolarity. Those early cybernetics-based ideas of equilibrium and stability of international systems have been further developed into concepts transforming the initial sense of stability: (a) strategic stability interpreted as "stability against the outbreak of nuclear war"; (b) stability as absence of war, overlapping partly with the first concept, absence of major international conflict or any international crisis that could lead to system change or breakdown; (c) hegemonic stability relating to the world political economy; (d) system stability and resource stability; stability of regimes; (e) foreign policy stabilizers, cf. (Gilpin, 1981; Goldmann, 1986; Intrilligator and Brito, 1986; Keohane, 1984).
Nevertheless, since the works of the "classics" of international relations studies, stability in its confined sense has also permeated into the language of practice of international relations - policy making, diplomacy and journalism. Absence of military conflict as a positive situation is indisputable. In some instances, however, an emotionally neutral term can be used for concealing the interests of those depicting situation as stable, cf. Hennan (1992). Such an approach had an important theoretical repercussion. Change of metaphorical interpretation of stability tied international relations studies with cybernetic system analogy but in a very simplifying manner. Applications of stability in narrowed sense were caused by a hidden assumption of linearity, associated with predictability (return to equilibrium state after disturbance) . On the contrary, original meaning of stability of international systems, introduced by Deutsch, Singer and Kaplan, derivative from ultrastablity, had a direct link to non-linear explication with little chances for predictability.
The taxonomy incorporates only most significant ideas of international studies. They exhibit the following common features: (a) systems under consideration - international system, foreign policy system, world economy, etc., constitute more or less elaborated analogies with feedback-loop cybernetic systems; (b) concepts of stability of these systems are deriving from ultrastability of cybernetic systems; (c) stability is always a positive state of affairs; (d) in most of discussed works stability is understood as absence of war and/or major conflicts.
There are two reasons that caused such a prolonged utilization of classic cybernetic system analogy along with associated metaphors in international relations theory.
The pioneers of applications of the concept of stability in international relations tried to use their contemporary cybernetics in describing dynamics of international systems. Later, the meaning of stability was narrowed to the absence of war.
.1.'.
The bipolar world itself and theory of international relations - realism and neorea1ism in particular, which required a concept similar to equilibrium applied in neoclassical economics and which could also be used in mathematical modelling.
In the language of systems thinking stability is treated as a dormant metaphor corresponding to Latin stabilitas that means ability to stand firmly or the
127
Weiner, 1989, voI. 3, p. 22-23). Thus in everyday language and in mathematics, chaos is a dead metaphor, although with differing image-producing fields.
4.2 TurbuleJlce and chaos
Turbulence in world politics is understood as high complexity, dynamism and interconnectedness (Rosenau, 1990, p. 65). It is then treated not as a metaphor but as an analytical concept allowing to study three levels at which the world politics is influenced - individuals, collectivities and at the mix of the two levels. Such an approach emphasizes uncertainty of whole processes although with ordering processes based on the concepts of "nonequilibrium thermodynamics".
Concepts of chaos, non-equilibrium and turbulence draw our attention not to the sense of metaphors but to the meaning of analogies between social systems and various non-equilibrium source systems. Instead of refining "analytical" and "objective" validity of analogies by extended mathematization like in economics, it is possible to analyze which aspects of those analogies and associated metaphors better correspond with our perception of change in social systems.
Deepened anal ysis of the ideas of Rosenau exceeds the scope of the paper. Nonetheless, in spite of efforts to define turbulence as an analytical concept (Rosenau, 1990, p. 52), a closer look at its explication reveals its dominant descriptive metaphorical meaning.
Preliminary evaluation shows that those analogies and metaphors allow to grasp the main features of contemporary social and international systems typical for "communication age" world, e.g. differentiation, self-organization, etc. There are, however, two more important aspects of those analogies and metaphors that seem equally significant.
The term is associated with the analogy of world system as extremely intricate, fluctuating, "turbulent dynamic" system. In Latin turbuleJltus means stormy, violently disturbed, irregular and turba could mean crowd, disorderly mass of people (Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968, p. 1990/1993). Thus when used to describe social systems, turbulence returns to its initial meaning depicting disorderly behaviour of people. In that case, the metaphor is made live although in different sense - humanity can be viewed as a large more or less organized crowd.
Firstly, "technocratic" analogies and metaphors associated with classic cybernetics - stability and equilibrium, concealed emotional bearings of dynamics of international systems, or at least, exposed its appeasing symptoms. Additionally, they treated stability as a result of purposive action, for instance through deterrence. Analogies and metaphors connected with modern systems thinking - turbulence, chaos, non-equilibrium relate to other emotions: anxiety, fear, uncertainty, and frustrate the prospects for purposive, concerted human activities. Reminiscence of the specific normative features of those metaphors and analogies allows to contend that in applications of modern systems concepts in social sciences, anxiety and fear are sanctioned as a part of "objective" and "rationalist" elements of social reality.
Similar discussion can be illustrated with other uses of the language of chaos theory, non-equilibrium thermodynamics in grasping the dynamics of social systems. Basically they can be divided into two groups: (a) mathematical modelling of international systems; (b) new, paradigmatic views of dynamics of various social systems, including the world system. The concepts belonging to the second group depict social systems (world system) as "living ones", selforganizing, learning, thanks to the fluctuation far from equilibrium by means of "autocatalytic" processes In the period of changes it is becoming very unstable and in some works efforts are made to show explicile such trans1l10n processes as bifurcations, e.g. (De Greene, 1990, 1990a).
Secondly, the same analogies and metaphors, due to the same and other features, e.g. emphasis of differentiation and self-organization seem very relevant and supportive, also in a "rationalist" manner, for liberal-democratic systems and market economy cf. (Zeleny, 1985; Hayek, 1988). In turn, analogies and metaphors based on classic cybernetics could be regarded both as denying central planification, e.g. the "Law of Requisite Variety" (Ashby, 1963) or as a good foundation for superplanification (Afanasyev, 1977).
Metaphorical meaning of chaos allows to address not to anal ytical meaning of those concepts but just to the way they are created. According to The Oxford English Dictionary, chaos in its literal sense meant " ... any vast gulf, chasm, the nether abyss, empty space, the first state of the Universe" while in figurative sense that means: "A state resembling that of primitive chaos, utter confusion and disorder ... where the parts are undistinguishable" (Simpson and
128
dominated by various metaphors and analogies. Therefore the systems analogies and metaphors used in the language of social sciences (international relations studies) are bearing a specific appeal . Firstly, their normative value is enhanced, as it was discussed before, and secondly, viewed as an instrument of self-reference, they contribute to the development of the system. It will be then necessary to study what is the role of systems metaphors and analogies in the self-reference and autopoiesis of those systems. We have already proved that the first cybernetics-based analogies and metaphors strengthened the will and perhaps possibility to control social systems, e.g. stability - repeating that the system is stable most likely contributes to its stability.
5. CONCLUSIONS Two basic conclusions can be drawn from the above discussion although more questions will remain unanswered . Firstl y, in most of applications of the concepts taken from systems thinking too little attention has been paid to their interpretations as descriptive analogies and metaphors. It brought about double effect. In theoretical research many futile efforts have been made to make them more "scientific", "objective" and "analytical". Practice, in turn, has been enriched with "objective" terms with various hidden normative ladening. Some of these problems can be avoided if the following phenomenon were taken into account. It can be ironically called as "The Law of Metaphorical Infinity of Social (International Systems)": "Any theory and/or model elaborated in physics, chemistry, biology, automatic control theory. in order to study collective phenomena ("systems thinking"), can be applied as a source of analogies and metaphors in various attempts aiming at description. explanation (sometimes even prediction and prescription). of processes takillg place in social systems. beginning from small groups. and ending with the world system.
The question is becoming more intricate when we take into consideration analogies and metaphors derived from chaos theory and autopoiesis. It will be very challenging to study to which extent analogies and metaphors of self-organization, self-reference, chaos and autopoiesis viewed as an element of selfreference, self-organization and autopoiesiscontribute to the dynamics of social systems. In other words, we have to study whether those metaphors and analogies contribute to self-organization and autopoiesis, or maybe, their impact is quite opposite. The question is very general, and of course very speculative. The first answer that we can give seems, however, not so speculative in the light of the above discussion. In the period of decreasing role of mathematical modelling and in the time of growing meaning of discourse, relativism, or in other words,in the post-modernist world, the approach based on studies of the impact of systems analogies and metaphors is likely the only reasollable method to investigate dynamics ofinternational systems. This conclusion is especially important after the collapse of the simple world of the Cold-War. On the one hand we observe an unprecedent triumph of liberal democracy - "the end of history" illuustrated with such ideas as autopoiesis and self-organization. At the same time, for societies, politicians and scholars "the end of history" frequently appears to be chaotic and turbulent.
Secondly, along with the differentiation, pluralization, multipolarity, etc., observed in the contemporary world together with conviction about their inevitability and efficiency - "The End of History" declared by Francis Fukuyama(1992), more interest is paid to concepts drawn from systems thinking, which facilitate depiction and explanation of that reality. However, stress must be put not only on "objective" soundness of those concepts. Instead, they should be seen as analogies and metaphors allowing to reflect normative, emotionally-Iadened understanding of the world. Thus the studies which intend to deal with the old and new systems-thinking related terms: autopoiesis, chaos, complexity, equilibrium, fluctuation, homeostasis, nonequilibrium, self-organization, stability, synergy, turbulence, ultrastability, should firstly concentrate on their semantic aspects, and later, try to use them in depicting social (international) dynamics. The main question challenging further research on the use of systems analogies and metaphors in international relations studies, or in social sciences in general, can be summarized as follows.
.1;",
Social systems can be treated as self-referential and autopoietic systems of meaningful communication (Luhmann, 1990). Thus they are created by language
129
REFERENCES
Luhmann, N. (1990). Essays on Self-Reference. Columbia University Press, New York. Mesjasz, C. (1988). Applications of Systems Modelling in Peace Research, Journal of Peace Research, 25, 291-334. Mesjasz, C. (1994). Systems Metaphors, Systems Analogies and Present Changes in International Relations, Cybernetics and Systems, 25, 763-779. Ortony, A., Ed. (1979). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968. Oarendon Press, Oxford. Prigogine, I. and I. Stengers (1984). Order out of Chaos. Bantam, New York. Rayner, J. (1984). Between Meaning and Event: An Historical Approach to Political Metaphors, Political Studies, 32, 537-550. Richardson, L.F. (1960). Arms and Insecurity. Boxwood Press, Pittsburgh. Rosenau, I. N., 1990. Turbulence in World Politics. A Theory of Change and Continuity. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Sanford, A.I. (1987). The Mind of Man. Models of Human Understanding. Harvester Press, Brighton. Schefiran, I. (1990). Verification and Stability. The Strategic Impact of Uncertainty and Perceptions, In: H.G. Brauch, Ed. Verification and Arms ControL: ImpLications for European Security, Selected Papers, Part 11, pp. 191-196, AFES-PRESS, Mosbach. Simpson, I.A. and E.S.C. Weiner (1989). The Oxford EngLish Dictionary. 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford. Tsoukas, H. (1991). The Missing Link: A Transformational View of Metaphors in Organizational Science, Academy of Management Review, 16, 566-585. Waltz, K.N. (1964). The Stability of a Bipolar World, DaedaLus, 93, 881-909. Zeleny, M. (1985). Spontaneous Social Orders, InternationaL Journal of GeneraL Systems, 11, 117-131.
Afanasyev, V.G. (1977). The Scientific Management of Society. Progress, Moscow. Ashby, W.R. (1963). An Introduction to Cybernetics.. WHey, New York. Bellm an , R. (1953). StabiLity Theory of Differelltial Equations. McGraw Hill, New York. Bertalanffy, L. von (1968). GeneraL Systems Theory. Braziller, New York. De Greene, K.B. (1990). Supplementary Systems Paradigms for Different Stages of Societal Evolution with Special Reference to War and Peace, Systems Research, 7, 77-89. De Greene, K.B. (1990a). The Turbulent-Field Environment of Sociotechnical Systems: Beyond Metaphor, BehavioraL Science, 35, 49-59. Deutsch, K.W. and I.D. Singer, (1964). Multipolar Power System and International Stability, World PoLitics, 16, 390-406. Eatwell, J.; M. Milgate and P. Newman (1987). The New Palgrave. A Dictionary of Economics. Macmillan, London. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. The Free Press, New York. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and Change in WorLd PoLitics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Gleick, 1. (1987). Chaos. Making a New Science. Viking, New York. Goldmann, K. (1988). Change and Stability in Foreign Policy. The ProbLems and Possibilities of DetelZle. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Hayek, F. A. von (1988). The FataL Conceit: TI,e Errors of SociaLism. CoLLected Works of F.A. Hayek. Vol. I, Routledge, London. Herman, E. S. (1992). Beyond Hypocrysy. Decoding the News in an Age of Propaganda -Including the DouhLespeak Dictionary. South End Press, Boston. Intrilligator, M.D. and D.L. Brito (1986). Arms Races and Instability, The JournaL of Strategic Studies, 9, 113-131. Kaplan, M. (1957). System and Process in InternationaL Relations. WHey, New York. Kaplan, M. (1957a). Balance of Power. Bipolarity and Other Models of International Systems, American Political Science Review, 51,267-279. Keohane, R.O. (1984).After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World PoLiticaL Economy. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Loye, D. and R. Eisler (1987). Chaos and Transformation: Implications of Nonequilibrium Theory for Social Science and Society, BehavioraL Science, 32, 53-65.
130
NEW MEANING OF INfERNATIONAL STABILITY: WHAT SHOULD WE LEARN FROM CONTEMPORARY SYSTEMS THINKING? Czeslaw Mesjasz Academy of Economics, Cracow, Poland
Abstract: The main aim of the paper is to examine what are the advantages and disadvantages of applications of analogies and metaphors based on systems thinking in describing and explaining change and status quo in international systems. The concept of "stability" can serve as best example for demonstrating the impact of classic cyberneticsbased systems thinking on the language of international relations theory and practice. In theoretical discussions it is often replaced with other systems analogies and metaphors turbulence and chaos as well as autopoiesis and self-organization. These terms seem particularly relevant to the emerging post-Cold War international situation. Keywords: chaos theory, international stability, stability analysis, systems methodology, turbulence Stability, that much overburdened word with unstabilized definition Richard Bellman in (Ashby, 1963, p.73) Slilbility - political and economic conditions that satisfy our interests From the "Doublespeak Dictionary for the 1990s" Edward S. Herman (1992)
in international relations studies on dynamics of broadly defined international systems.
1. INTRODUCTION
Ideas suitable in the bipolar world do not seem useful in exploring changes in contemporary international systems. However, "systems thinking" has yielded new concepts. Chaos theory, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, catastrophe theory, autopoiesis and self-organization theory, synergetics, etc., appear to be useful for international studies not as sources of rigorous models - in the meantime we have learned that social systems are much more intricate, but mainly as analogies and metaphors.
The concept of "stability" can serve as the best example for demonstrating the impact of "classic", cybernetics-based systems thinking on the language of international relations theory and practice (peace research, security studies). At present, the term stability is becoming less useful in studies of international systems. The notion itself, however, has gained a well-established interpretation in the language of practice. In theoretical discussions it is being replaced with other analogies and metaphors borrowed from systems thinking. Turbulence and chaos seem to be most representative. Their applications seem particularly germane in portraying emerging postCold War international situation.
The main aim of the paper is to examine what are the advantages and disadvantages of applications of analogies and metaphors based on systems thinking in describing and explaining change and status quo in international systems. We also intend to present an introduction to the research aimed at studying what is the impact of systems analogies and metaphors used 125
In the traditional sense, close to the original ideas of mathematics, although mostly appealing to intuition rather than mathematical rigour, stability means that if a system is perturbed slightly from its equilibrium state, all subsequent motions remain in a correspondingly small neighbourhood of the equilibrium (Eatwell, et al., 1987, vol. 4, p. 461). Stability can be also identified as probability that the quality of the system state is preserved during the given time (Scheffran, 1990, p. 190).
2. SYSTEMS MODELS, ANALOGIES, AND METAPHORS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS STUDIES International relations studies have become one of the most attractive areas for application of systems models, either taking shape of sophisticated mathematical formulae, and/or more or less advanced computer simulation models. There exists, however, a barrier impeding usefulness of any rigorous modelling of international relations. Significance of models is always measured by their impact on social praxis. Models are useful in theory and/or in policy making although their deficiencies make validity of their use rather limited. Sometimes publicized results of modelling can influence society, e.g. the first two Reports to the Club of Rome . It is, however, mainly the everyday language of politicians and journalists along with more or less precise "scientific" utterances that both describe and determine international reality.
Turbulence has been introduced into the studies of world politics by Rosenau (1990). He refers to extended understanding of turbulence including concepts relating to non-equilibrium thermodynamics elaborated by Dya Prigogine and applied in social sciences as source of more or less carefully elaborated analogies and metaphors. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics, or dissipative structures theory, provides a new pattern of change (prigogine and Stengers, 1984). According to that theory new structures emerge not in changing the state of equilibrium but in the state far from equilibrium. It is the fluctuations that enable a system to move from one state to another.
Analogies and metaphors referring to other disciplines remain an indispensable component of discourse in international relations. Systems analogies and metaphors acquire a specific normative sense while used in international relations theory and practice. Due to their origins in "rationalist" disciplines - mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology they are treated as objective and scientific in a rationalist sense. Thus their applications, in addition to enhanced explanative validity, by definition obtain supplemental, "sound", normative predictive and prescriptive, legitimacy in any debate on international relations and on other social issues . Consequently, in those applications, but not only, their metaphoric sense is neglected or misinterpreted.
Chaos, another notion stemming from systems thinking and popularized among laymen by Gleick (1987), remains currently one of most "trendy" terms of social sciences. Deterministic chaos theory opens new intuitive comprehension of randomness and probability. Traditionally, it was commonly believed that the world is unpredictable because it is complex, composed of myriads of elements standing in interactions. Chaos theory provides also a new understanding of systems change enlarging the collection of analogies and metaphors applicable in social sciences (Loye and Eisler, 1987).
Analysis of the specific value-Iadening can be illustrated with analogies and metaphors associated with the notions: stability, turbulence and chaos. In that case systems thinking can be seen as collection of "image producing fields" and international relation studies (social sciences) as a set of "image receiving fields" .
All concepts relating to systems change can be divided into two groups: 1. Ideas explaining maintenance, regulation and control, equilibrium-like behaviour, and some aspects of adaptability of already existing systems; they are primarily connected with early stages of cybernetics automatic control systems, adaptive systems. 2. Ideas explaining emergence and evolution of structurally new systems "non-equilibrium systems", "living systems".
3. THE CONCEPTS OF STABILITY, TURBULENCE AND CHAOS The origins of discussion on stability in cybernetics can be traced in the works of Bellman (1953) whose concepts, developing the ideas of Lyapunov and Poincare proved applicable in mathematical modelling of automatic control systems. In cybernetic stability is regarded as positive state although with some exceptions (Ashby, 1963)
126
state of being stationary (Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968, p. 1812). This quasi-literal sense of stability proves sufficient m verbal delineation of mathematical definitions.
4.STABllJTY,TURBULENCE,CHAOSAND THE LANGUAGE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 4.1 Stability
Narrowing the definition of stability meant transformation from donnant (quasi-literal) metaphor into a dead (frozen) metaphor with its own literal meaning (Ortony 1979; Lakoff and 10hnson; Tsoukas 1991). Using a metaphorical language we may state that stability was "killed" and lost its heuristic value as a donnant metaphor.
The tenn "stability" was brought into international relations studies by Lewis F. Richardson (1960). The concepts of stability and equilibrium of international systems thoroughly developed by Morton Kaplan (1957, 1957a), Karl W. Deutsch, 1. David Singer (1964) and Kenneth Waltz (1964).
In that stage stability became something that might be called a homologue of "perpetual peace" of technocratic era. The word "peace" seemed emotionally-Iadened, irrelevant to modem age. Likely the concepts of "positive" and "negative" peace motivated some scientists to use another, more precise term. Maybe the abuses of the word "peace" in the Soviet anti-Western propaganda were also one of the reasons for search for another term depicting the absence of war and other major conflicts.
They tried to use cybernetics in depicting dynamics of international systems and emphasized that those systems are not simply stable but in Ashby's sense ultrastable (Kaplan, 1957a, p. 279). The cybernetic pattern of equilibrium and stability stood behind of the origins of discussion "polarity vs. stability" with Deutsch and Singer (1964) favouring multipolarity, and Waltz (1964) favouring bipolarity. Those early cybernetics-based ideas of equilibrium and stability of international systems have been further developed into concepts transforming the initial sense of stability: (a) strategic stability interpreted as "stability against the outbreak of nuclear war"; (b) stability as absence of war, overlapping partly with the first concept, absence of major international conflict or any international crisis that could lead to system change or breakdown; (c) hegemonic stability relating to the world political economy; (d) system stability and resource stability; stability of regimes; (e) foreign policy stabilizers, cf. (Gilpin, 1981; Goldmann, 1986; Intrilligator and Brito, 1986; Keohane, 1984).
Nevertheless, since the works of the "classics" of international relations studies, stability in its confined sense has also permeated into the language of practice of international relations - policy making, diplomacy and journalism. Absence of military conflict as a positive situation is indisputable. In some instances, however, an emotionally neutral term can be used for concealing the interests of those depicting situation as stable, cf. Hennan (1992). Such an approach had an important theoretical repercussion. Change of metaphorical interpretation of stability tied international relations studies with cybernetic system analogy but in a very simplifying manner. Applications of stability in narrowed sense were caused by a hidden assumption of linearity, associated with predictability (return to equilibrium state after disturbance) . On the contrary, original meaning of stability of international systems, introduced by Deutsch, Singer and Kaplan, derivative from ultrastablity, had a direct link to non-linear explication with little chances for predictability.
The taxonomy incorporates only most significant ideas of international studies. They exhibit the following common features: (a) systems under consideration - international system, foreign policy system, world economy, etc., constitute more or less elaborated analogies with feedback-loop cybernetic systems; (b) concepts of stability of these systems are deriving from ultrastability of cybernetic systems; (c) stability is always a positive state of affairs; (d) in most of discussed works stability is understood as absence of war and/or major conflicts.
There are two reasons that caused such a prolonged utilization of classic cybernetic system analogy along with associated metaphors in international relations theory.
The pioneers of applications of the concept of stability in international relations tried to use their contemporary cybernetics in describing dynamics of international systems. Later, the meaning of stability was narrowed to the absence of war.
.1.'.
The bipolar world itself and theory of international relations - realism and neorea1ism in particular, which required a concept similar to equilibrium applied in neoclassical economics and which could also be used in mathematical modelling.
In the language of systems thinking stability is treated as a dormant metaphor corresponding to Latin stabilitas that means ability to stand firmly or the
127
Weiner, 1989, voI. 3, p. 22-23). Thus in everyday language and in mathematics, chaos is a dead metaphor, although with differing image-producing fields.
4.2 TurbuleJlce and chaos
Turbulence in world politics is understood as high complexity, dynamism and interconnectedness (Rosenau, 1990, p. 65). It is then treated not as a metaphor but as an analytical concept allowing to study three levels at which the world politics is influenced - individuals, collectivities and at the mix of the two levels. Such an approach emphasizes uncertainty of whole processes although with ordering processes based on the concepts of "nonequilibrium thermodynamics".
Concepts of chaos, non-equilibrium and turbulence draw our attention not to the sense of metaphors but to the meaning of analogies between social systems and various non-equilibrium source systems. Instead of refining "analytical" and "objective" validity of analogies by extended mathematization like in economics, it is possible to analyze which aspects of those analogies and associated metaphors better correspond with our perception of change in social systems.
Deepened anal ysis of the ideas of Rosenau exceeds the scope of the paper. Nonetheless, in spite of efforts to define turbulence as an analytical concept (Rosenau, 1990, p. 52), a closer look at its explication reveals its dominant descriptive metaphorical meaning.
Preliminary evaluation shows that those analogies and metaphors allow to grasp the main features of contemporary social and international systems typical for "communication age" world, e.g. differentiation, self-organization, etc. There are, however, two more important aspects of those analogies and metaphors that seem equally significant.
The term is associated with the analogy of world system as extremely intricate, fluctuating, "turbulent dynamic" system. In Latin turbuleJltus means stormy, violently disturbed, irregular and turba could mean crowd, disorderly mass of people (Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968, p. 1990/1993). Thus when used to describe social systems, turbulence returns to its initial meaning depicting disorderly behaviour of people. In that case, the metaphor is made live although in different sense - humanity can be viewed as a large more or less organized crowd.
Firstly, "technocratic" analogies and metaphors associated with classic cybernetics - stability and equilibrium, concealed emotional bearings of dynamics of international systems, or at least, exposed its appeasing symptoms. Additionally, they treated stability as a result of purposive action, for instance through deterrence. Analogies and metaphors connected with modern systems thinking - turbulence, chaos, non-equilibrium relate to other emotions: anxiety, fear, uncertainty, and frustrate the prospects for purposive, concerted human activities. Reminiscence of the specific normative features of those metaphors and analogies allows to contend that in applications of modern systems concepts in social sciences, anxiety and fear are sanctioned as a part of "objective" and "rationalist" elements of social reality.
Similar discussion can be illustrated with other uses of the language of chaos theory, non-equilibrium thermodynamics in grasping the dynamics of social systems. Basically they can be divided into two groups: (a) mathematical modelling of international systems; (b) new, paradigmatic views of dynamics of various social systems, including the world system. The concepts belonging to the second group depict social systems (world system) as "living ones", selforganizing, learning, thanks to the fluctuation far from equilibrium by means of "autocatalytic" processes In the period of changes it is becoming very unstable and in some works efforts are made to show explicile such trans1l10n processes as bifurcations, e.g. (De Greene, 1990, 1990a).
Secondly, the same analogies and metaphors, due to the same and other features, e.g. emphasis of differentiation and self-organization seem very relevant and supportive, also in a "rationalist" manner, for liberal-democratic systems and market economy cf. (Zeleny, 1985; Hayek, 1988). In turn, analogies and metaphors based on classic cybernetics could be regarded both as denying central planification, e.g. the "Law of Requisite Variety" (Ashby, 1963) or as a good foundation for superplanification (Afanasyev, 1977).
Metaphorical meaning of chaos allows to address not to anal ytical meaning of those concepts but just to the way they are created. According to The Oxford English Dictionary, chaos in its literal sense meant " ... any vast gulf, chasm, the nether abyss, empty space, the first state of the Universe" while in figurative sense that means: "A state resembling that of primitive chaos, utter confusion and disorder ... where the parts are undistinguishable" (Simpson and
128
dominated by various metaphors and analogies. Therefore the systems analogies and metaphors used in the language of social sciences (international relations studies) are bearing a specific appeal . Firstly, their normative value is enhanced, as it was discussed before, and secondly, viewed as an instrument of self-reference, they contribute to the development of the system. It will be then necessary to study what is the role of systems metaphors and analogies in the self-reference and autopoiesis of those systems. We have already proved that the first cybernetics-based analogies and metaphors strengthened the will and perhaps possibility to control social systems, e.g. stability - repeating that the system is stable most likely contributes to its stability.
5. CONCLUSIONS Two basic conclusions can be drawn from the above discussion although more questions will remain unanswered . Firstl y, in most of applications of the concepts taken from systems thinking too little attention has been paid to their interpretations as descriptive analogies and metaphors. It brought about double effect. In theoretical research many futile efforts have been made to make them more "scientific", "objective" and "analytical". Practice, in turn, has been enriched with "objective" terms with various hidden normative ladening. Some of these problems can be avoided if the following phenomenon were taken into account. It can be ironically called as "The Law of Metaphorical Infinity of Social (International Systems)": "Any theory and/or model elaborated in physics, chemistry, biology, automatic control theory. in order to study collective phenomena ("systems thinking"), can be applied as a source of analogies and metaphors in various attempts aiming at description. explanation (sometimes even prediction and prescription). of processes takillg place in social systems. beginning from small groups. and ending with the world system.
The question is becoming more intricate when we take into consideration analogies and metaphors derived from chaos theory and autopoiesis. It will be very challenging to study to which extent analogies and metaphors of self-organization, self-reference, chaos and autopoiesis viewed as an element of selfreference, self-organization and autopoiesiscontribute to the dynamics of social systems. In other words, we have to study whether those metaphors and analogies contribute to self-organization and autopoiesis, or maybe, their impact is quite opposite. The question is very general, and of course very speculative. The first answer that we can give seems, however, not so speculative in the light of the above discussion. In the period of decreasing role of mathematical modelling and in the time of growing meaning of discourse, relativism, or in other words,in the post-modernist world, the approach based on studies of the impact of systems analogies and metaphors is likely the only reasollable method to investigate dynamics ofinternational systems. This conclusion is especially important after the collapse of the simple world of the Cold-War. On the one hand we observe an unprecedent triumph of liberal democracy - "the end of history" illuustrated with such ideas as autopoiesis and self-organization. At the same time, for societies, politicians and scholars "the end of history" frequently appears to be chaotic and turbulent.
Secondly, along with the differentiation, pluralization, multipolarity, etc., observed in the contemporary world together with conviction about their inevitability and efficiency - "The End of History" declared by Francis Fukuyama(1992), more interest is paid to concepts drawn from systems thinking, which facilitate depiction and explanation of that reality. However, stress must be put not only on "objective" soundness of those concepts. Instead, they should be seen as analogies and metaphors allowing to reflect normative, emotionally-Iadened understanding of the world. Thus the studies which intend to deal with the old and new systems-thinking related terms: autopoiesis, chaos, complexity, equilibrium, fluctuation, homeostasis, nonequilibrium, self-organization, stability, synergy, turbulence, ultrastability, should firstly concentrate on their semantic aspects, and later, try to use them in depicting social (international) dynamics. The main question challenging further research on the use of systems analogies and metaphors in international relations studies, or in social sciences in general, can be summarized as follows.
.1;",
Social systems can be treated as self-referential and autopoietic systems of meaningful communication (Luhmann, 1990). Thus they are created by language
129
REFERENCES
Luhmann, N. (1990). Essays on Self-Reference. Columbia University Press, New York. Mesjasz, C. (1988). Applications of Systems Modelling in Peace Research, Journal of Peace Research, 25, 291-334. Mesjasz, C. (1994). Systems Metaphors, Systems Analogies and Present Changes in International Relations, Cybernetics and Systems, 25, 763-779. Ortony, A., Ed. (1979). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1968. Oarendon Press, Oxford. Prigogine, I. and I. Stengers (1984). Order out of Chaos. Bantam, New York. Rayner, J. (1984). Between Meaning and Event: An Historical Approach to Political Metaphors, Political Studies, 32, 537-550. Richardson, L.F. (1960). Arms and Insecurity. Boxwood Press, Pittsburgh. Rosenau, I. N., 1990. Turbulence in World Politics. A Theory of Change and Continuity. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Sanford, A.I. (1987). The Mind of Man. Models of Human Understanding. Harvester Press, Brighton. Schefiran, I. (1990). Verification and Stability. The Strategic Impact of Uncertainty and Perceptions, In: H.G. Brauch, Ed. Verification and Arms ControL: ImpLications for European Security, Selected Papers, Part 11, pp. 191-196, AFES-PRESS, Mosbach. Simpson, I.A. and E.S.C. Weiner (1989). The Oxford EngLish Dictionary. 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford. Tsoukas, H. (1991). The Missing Link: A Transformational View of Metaphors in Organizational Science, Academy of Management Review, 16, 566-585. Waltz, K.N. (1964). The Stability of a Bipolar World, DaedaLus, 93, 881-909. Zeleny, M. (1985). Spontaneous Social Orders, InternationaL Journal of GeneraL Systems, 11, 117-131.
Afanasyev, V.G. (1977). The Scientific Management of Society. Progress, Moscow. Ashby, W.R. (1963). An Introduction to Cybernetics.. WHey, New York. Bellm an , R. (1953). StabiLity Theory of Differelltial Equations. McGraw Hill, New York. Bertalanffy, L. von (1968). GeneraL Systems Theory. Braziller, New York. De Greene, K.B. (1990). Supplementary Systems Paradigms for Different Stages of Societal Evolution with Special Reference to War and Peace, Systems Research, 7, 77-89. De Greene, K.B. (1990a). The Turbulent-Field Environment of Sociotechnical Systems: Beyond Metaphor, BehavioraL Science, 35, 49-59. Deutsch, K.W. and I.D. Singer, (1964). Multipolar Power System and International Stability, World PoLitics, 16, 390-406. Eatwell, J.; M. Milgate and P. Newman (1987). The New Palgrave. A Dictionary of Economics. Macmillan, London. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. The Free Press, New York. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and Change in WorLd PoLitics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Gleick, 1. (1987). Chaos. Making a New Science. Viking, New York. Goldmann, K. (1988). Change and Stability in Foreign Policy. The ProbLems and Possibilities of DetelZle. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Hayek, F. A. von (1988). The FataL Conceit: TI,e Errors of SociaLism. CoLLected Works of F.A. Hayek. Vol. I, Routledge, London. Herman, E. S. (1992). Beyond Hypocrysy. Decoding the News in an Age of Propaganda -Including the DouhLespeak Dictionary. South End Press, Boston. Intrilligator, M.D. and D.L. Brito (1986). Arms Races and Instability, The JournaL of Strategic Studies, 9, 113-131. Kaplan, M. (1957). System and Process in InternationaL Relations. WHey, New York. Kaplan, M. (1957a). Balance of Power. Bipolarity and Other Models of International Systems, American Political Science Review, 51,267-279. Keohane, R.O. (1984).After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World PoLiticaL Economy. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Loye, D. and R. Eisler (1987). Chaos and Transformation: Implications of Nonequilibrium Theory for Social Science and Society, BehavioraL Science, 32, 53-65.
130