The Importance of First-Order Observation in Luhmann’s Systems Theory

Niklas Luhmann adopted the concept of second-order observation from Heinz von Foerster and incorporated it into his systems theory as a methodology of radical constructivism. Beyond methodological discussions, however, Luhmann also revealed that the functional systems of modern society—such as politics, economics, science, and art—operate at the level of second-order observation. Therefore, Luhmann has often been regarded as a theorist of second-order observervation.

However, beginning in the 1990s, Luhmann frequently argued for the importance of “first-order observation” as ontological observation of the world, emphasizing that relying solely on second-order observation could lead to various difficulties and adverse effects. Why did he consider first-order observation to be indispensable and important? The goal of this presentation is to clarify this question.

For example, in the context of risk, Luhmann argues that the sharpening of conflicts between decision-makers and those affected is partly due to the intransparency brought about by mutual second-order observation and reflection. Therefore, he advocates for a “return to the level of first-order observation” in risk dialogue. Similarly, in the context of art, Luhmann contends that the modes of observation between artists and viewers regarding art pieces are so different that communication between them is difficult to bridge. Hence, he argues that perception-based observation of the artwork—that is, first-order observation—is essential.

By examining these Luhmann’s arguments, this presentation aims to clarify the uniqueness of his consideration of the importance of first-order observation within the context of his theory of second-order observation, which differs from second-order cybernetics. It also seeks to provide clues for examining the reference points of communication in real-world settings, such as risk dialogues and artistic communication. Furthermore, this presentation will highlight how Luhmann’s radical constructivism offers significant insights for contemporary discussions that seek to transcend pure constructivism, such as the recently debated “ontological turn” or “material turn.”