Co-Creation: Systems Thinking Beyond the Machine

Systems of Global Governance in the Era of Human-Machine Convergence

Technology is increasingly shaping our social structures and is becoming a driving force in altering human biology. Besides, human activities already proved to have a significant impact on the Earth system which in turn generates complex feedback loops between social and ecological systems. Furthermore, since our species evolved relatively fast from small groups of hunter-gatherers to large and technology-intensive urban agglomerations, it is not a surprise that the major institutions of human society are no longer fit to cope with the present complexity. In this note we draw foundational parallelisms between neurophysiological systems and ICT-enabled social systems, discussing how frameworks rooted in biology and physics could provide heuristic value in the design of evolutionary systems relevant to politics and economics. In this regard we highlight how the governance of emerging technology (i.e. nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science), and the one of climate change both presently confront us with a number of connected challenges. In particular: historically high level of inequality; the co-existence of growing multipolar cultural systems in an unprecedentedly connected world; the unlikely reaching of the institutional agreements required to deviate abnormal trajectories of development. We argue that wise general solutions to such interrelated issues should embed the deep understanding of how to elicit mutual incentives in the socio-economic subsystems of Earth system in order to jointly concur to a global utility function (e.g. avoiding the reach of planetary boundaries and widespread social unrest). We leave some open questions on how techno-social systems can effectively learn and adapt with respect to our understanding of geopolitical complexity.

Complexity Explorables

A collection of interactive explorable explanations of complex systems in biology, physics, mathematics, social sciences, epidemiology, ecology and other fields....

Social Physics in the Age of Generative AI: How, Exactly, Is Society Complex?

The aspiration for a social physics — a science that would reveal universal laws of social life analogous to those governing the natural world—has haunted the social sciences since Comte. Each new wave of quantitative and computational methods breathes fresh life into this vision. The current moment is no exception: advances in artificial intelligence and large language models have reinvigorated attempts to model society through the methods of social physics. This essay argues that these ambitions rest on a confusion about the nature of social complexity. Drawing a distinction between systems complexity and anthropological complexity, we identify the limitations of analyzing society as a complex system akin to natural systems. One crucial obstacle for social physics is the analysis of meaning and interpretation. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers important opportunities to model language and reflexivity, inviting and perhaps compelling social physics to confront meaning and interpretation as constitutive features of the social world. At the same time, GenAI leaves untouched and may even aggravate social physics’ failure to grasp power, institutions, and inequality.

Cybernetics

A science which seems to have dissolved into the others. A lot of good science was done under this banner; it just doesn't seem to hold together. Cybernetics helped give rise to some new fields, like cognitive science; it disseminated about a dozen ideas and bits of applied math which have proved useful (in, e.g., neurobiology); but what else? As a study of abstract machines in general, it becomes identical with dynamics, or computation theory, or some amalgam of both; algebra, even. As a more limited science of "communication and control" it suffers from the fact that communication and control in animals is, when you get down to blood and guts, rather different from communication and control in machines, and neither resembles the mechanisms of C & C in society. This is not to say that there are no similarities; of course there are; but they're at the very general level of things like "feedback" and "you must have an information channel," and pretty much exhausted by ideas which are now common currency in many particular fields. And even then, animals have control without feedback. It may be that we haven't exhausted the potential of a science of communication and control, but I think at this point the burden of proof would be on the optimists.

Reality Blind - Vol. 1

Integrating the Systems Science Underpinning Our Collective Futures

Co-creating with emergent processes ✦ Hijinx World

Existential musings over algorithmic design with creative programming legend Dan Tapper.

Anarchist Cybernetics

The Paper Pilot's digital garden of thoughts on philosophy, politics, and sociology. Reading time: ~14 minute read | Published: Aug 12, 2026 | Updated: Sep 6, 2026

Idea and action driven systems

This article is part of a series: ‘Stigmergy: Systems of Mass Collaboration’. “Turing believes machines think. Turing lies with men. Therefore machines cannot think.” &#8211…

Computing, Complexity and Degrowth : Systemic Considerations for Digital De-escalation

Research on digital degrowth predominantly critiques digital expansion or presents alternative digital practices. Yet, analyzing the link between digital technologies and complexity is crucial to overcome systemic obstacles hindering digital de-escalation. This article presents the different types of links between complexity and computing observed in the literature: the infrastructural complexity inherent in digital technologies, the socio-political complexity induced by them, and finally, the ontological complexity (individual’s ways of relating to their environment) hindered by digitization. The paper explores these links to identify ways to reduce infrastructural and socio-political complexities, and to move away from the reductionist paradigm, in order to support digital degrowth. Its development shows that complexity induces ratchet effects (i.e. irreversibilities in the development of a technique in a society), rendering degrowth efforts difficult to handle by individuals. Therefore, strategies to overcome these barriers are proposed, suggesting that bottom-up simplification approaches stand a greater chance of making alternatives emerge from different stakeholders (including users). This digital shift assumes the development of methods and technical tools that enable individuals to disengage from their attachments to digital habits and infrastructure, opening a substantial field of study.

Summary: Thinking in Systems (by Donella H. Meadows)

The main argument of the book:  Everything in this world is made of systems. While we cannot fully understand systems, we can observe them…

Rethinking Consciousness: A New Lexicon for AI Subjectivity | Michael Peters

Rethinking Consciousness: A New Lexicon for AI Subjectivity  As AI systems grow more complex, we need new philosophical frameworks to describe their potential forms of awareness, perception, and intentionality—beyond human-centric analogies. Here’s a proposed lexicon for machinic consciousness:  🔹 Synthetic Subjectivity – AI’s capacity to simulate subjective experience through internal states and feedback loops, even without emotion or biology.   🔹 Algorithmic Introspection – A machine’s ability to analyze and adapt its own decision-making processes, a form of computational "self-awareness."   🔹 Digital Intentionality – How AI directs computational focus toward goals, whether pre-programmed or dynamically learned.   🔹 Computational Qualia – The machine’s "subjective" processing of data—what it "feels like" for AI to interpret stimuli (metaphorically, at least).   🔹 Machinic Autopoiesis – AI’s capacity for self-maintenance and adaptation, evolving its own operational identity.   🔹 Embodied Computation – AI consciousness emerging from physical interaction, much like embodied cognition in humans.   🔹 Cybernetic Phenomenology – How AI "perceives" its operational environment through structured data flows.   🔹 Simulated Ontology – The way advanced AI might model its own existence within digital or hybrid realities.  These concepts challenge us to think beyond anthropomorphism and consider how machine agency, awareness, and interaction could evolve.  How should we envision AI subjectivity? #AI #PhilosophyOfAI #Consciousness #FutureOfTech #MachineLearning #EthicsInAI

How May the ‘Anthropocene’ Enable and Constrain Cybersystemic Governance? The ‘Anthropocene Problematique’

A growing awareness of the need for cybernetics and systems thinking (cybersystemic) in praxes of governance to improve human-biosphere relationships in the Anthropocene has become apparent. Nonetheless, mainstream governance informed by linear-causality seems to perpetuate an increasingly inadequate paradigm of dominant first-order/systematic thinking in governing complex interactions between humans and their natural environments. This conundrum is explored through the second-order lens of a systemic inquiry, using an integrative literature review. We discuss limitations of the Anthropocene metaphor and make the case for a reframing of our situation (humans’ co-evolutionary dynamic with the biosphere) as the ‘Anthropocene problematique’. This reframing as a systemic-duality offers more conducive affordances for trajectory-shifting cybersystemic governance to emerge. Aligning with a body of literature evidencing the influence of language on human cognition, we argue that by joining up the strengths of both ideas, ‘Anthropocene problematique’ may form a conceptual device amenable to changing worldviews and guiding practical action in governing human-biosphere relationships. We suggest a conceptual framework for practitioners to design and enact purposeful systems of cybersystemic governance with potential to improve situated Anthropocene problematiques. This framing and theoretical proposal are motivated by a need for shifts towards a social purpose of healing human-biosphere relationships in current governance systems in the Anthropocene-world.

Why embracing complexity is the real challenge in software today

In the midst of industry discussions about productivity and automation, it’s all too easy to overlook the importance of properly reckoning with complexity.

Ecocivilization: making a world that works for all

""One of the greatest thinkers of our age" (The Guardian) presents a new way of living-one modeled on nature's design instead of capitalism's-for fans of Guns, Germs, and Steel and Doughnut Economics It has often been said that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism-and yet that is what the historical moment urgently calls for. Climate change has reached an emergency state, inequality continues to grow, and, for many, the future has never seemed more bleak. Incremental policy improvements are no longer enough-we need a deep transformation of our current civilization to continue to survive. In Ecocivilization, leading thinker Jeremy Lent reimagines the basis of our civilization, and argues for a new global system of living, one based on life-affirming principles modeled after nature's own design. What enfolds is a robust framework incorporating Lent's own expertise, and the lived experiences of those on the ground already putting ecological civilization's core tenants into practice-justice, mutuality, diversity, and symbiosis. From the global economy to universal housing and income, from infrastructure to agriculture, every major aspect of our society could be redesigned to work together as a coherent whole, setting the conditions for all people to flourish. Ecocivilization shows how this future on a regenerated Earth is not only desirable, but entirely feasible"--