102

E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126

Classical Papers - Principles of the self-organizing system
E:CO Special Double Issue Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 2004 pp. 102-126
Principles of the self-organizing system
W. Ross Ashby
Originally published as Ashby, W. R. (1962). Principles of the self-organizing system, in Principles of Self-Orga-
nization: Transactions of the University of Illinois Symposium, H. Von Foerster and G. W. Zopf, Jr. (eds.), Pergamon
Press: London, UK, pp. 255-278. Reproduced with the kind permission of Ross Ashbys daughters, Sally Bannister,
Ruth Pettit, and Jill Ashby. We would also like to thank John Ashby for his generous assistance in obtaining their
permission.
T
he brilliant British psychiatrist, neuroscientist,
and mathematician Ross Ashby was one of the
pioneers in early and mid-phase cybernetics
and thereby one of the leading progenitors of modern
complexity theory. Not one to take either commonly
used terms or popular notions for granted, Ashby
probed deeply into the meaning of supposedly self-
organizing systems. At the time of the following article,
he had been working on a mathematical formalism
of his homeostat, a hypothetical machine established
on an axiomatic, set theoretical foundation that was
suosed to oer a sucient descrition o a Iiving
organisn`s Iearning and adative inteIIigence. AshLy`s
honeostat had a snaII nunLer o essentiaI variaLIes
serving to naintain its oeration over a vide range o
environnentaI conditions so that i the Iatter changed
and thereLy shited the variaLIes Leyond the range
where the homeostat could safely function, a new
'higher` IeveI o the nachine vas activated in order to
randonIy reset the Iover IeveI`s internaI connections
or organization (see Dupuy, 2000). Like the role of ran-
don nutations during evoIution, i the nev range set
at randon roved unctionaI, the honeostat survived,
otherwise it expired.
One of Ashbys goals was to repudiate that
interpretation of the notion of self-organization, one
connonIy heId to this day, vhich vouId have it that
either a nachine or a Iiving organisn couId Ly itseI
change its own organization (or, in his phraseology,
the functional mappings). For Ashby, self-organiza-
tion in this sense vas a Lit o sueruous netahysics
since he LeIieved not onIy couId his ornaIisn Ly itseI
conIeteIy deIineate the honeostat`s Iover IeveI or-
ganization, the adative noveIty o his honeostat vas
ureIy the resuIt o its uer IeveI randonization that
couId reorganize the Iover IeveI and not sone innate
propensity for autonomous change. We offer Ashbys
careful reasoning here as an enlightening guide for
coming to terms with key ideas in complexity theory
vhose genuine signicance Iies Iess vith aciIe Landy-
ing aLout and nore vith an intensive and extensive
examination of the underlying assumptions.
Jeffrey Goldstein
Classical
Dupuy, J. (2000). The Mechanization of the Mind,
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
103
Ashby
104
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
105
Ashby
106
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
107
Ashby
108
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
109
Ashby
110
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
111
Ashby
112
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
113
Ashby
114
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
115
Ashby
116
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
117
Ashby
118
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
119
Ashby
120
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
121
Ashby
122
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
123
Ashby
124
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126
125
Ashby
126
E:CO Vol. 6 Nos. 1-2 pp. 102-126