The History of Cybernetics: Ashby, Beer and Pask

摘要：安德鲁·皮克林《控制论的历史：阿什比、比尔和帕斯卡》越来越引起科学史学家的浓厚兴趣，毫无疑问，部分原因是它试图以一种有趣的方式来把握世界，而不是更熟悉的自然科学和社会科学--粗略地说，是整体地而不是还原地。大多数历史上的兴趣都集中在第二次世界大战控制论的创始人--诺伯特·维纳、约翰·冯·诺伊曼、沃伦·麦卡洛克、克劳德·香农--以及他们传播观点的一系列梅西会议(1946-53)。最受关注的是控制论的概念奇点-控制论作为负反馈和控制的理论，或者作为世界观或意识形态。这个项目沿着几个轴扩展了我们对控制论的实质和历史的理解。首先，它考察了新的人物和后来的时期。根据过去几年的研究，PI认为控制论中一些最引人入胜和最具原创性的工作是从20世纪50年代初开始由一群英国科学家完成的，其中最著名的是W·罗斯·阿什比、斯塔福德·比尔和戈登·帕斯克。其次，虽然我当然对这些人的想法感兴趣，但我也对他们的所作所为感兴趣--控制论的实践，这在很大程度上是一个未被探索的话题。第三，这导致了控制论的物质层面。就像他们之前的维纳一样，这个英国团体的控制论直接指的是一系列迷人的材料系统和人工制品。PI认为，控制论的奇点至少存在于这一层面上，也存在于思想层面上。第四，对实践的兴趣也导致了控制论的社会结构。我们熟悉传统科学通常的学术/学科中心，但控制论不是这样的。控制论者通常是流浪者或流浪者，在我们通常认为是不同的机构基础之间来回穿梭，包括大学，但也包括艺术、商业、工业和军队。这一社会层面构成了控制论奇点的另一个方面，这一点迄今尚未得到很好的认识。这项休假一年的建议支持编写一本关于英国控制论者的书，特别是关于啤酒和帕斯克的研究。(PI是一名研究生，已经在紧锣密鼓地研究阿什比)。关键线人已同意接受采访，并提供他们掌握的文件。这本书试图强调，在物质、社会和概念的特定纠缠中，控制论是一种不同于还原科学的历史形态--一种新的、令人着迷的STS社区研究对象，可能越来越引起更广泛的学术和大众兴趣。这位少年派的某些理论担忧伴随着他对控制论的兴趣，他打算在这本书的最后一章通过将控制论放在更大的同类作品中来展开，包括目前关于《复杂性》的作品以及他自己关于《实践的混乱》的作品。该项目对科学和技术研究内外的理论讨论作出了重大贡献。PI还探讨了这种讨论对人工智能、信息技术和认知科学的当代工作的相关性。

ABSTRACT: SES 00-94504Andrew PickeringThe History Of Cybernetics: Ashby, Beer And PaskCybernetics increasingly commands serious interest amongst historians of science, in part,no doubt, because of a sense that it has sought to grasp the world in an interestingly different way from the more familiar natural and social sciences-holistically rather thanreductively, to put it crudely. Most historical interest has focussed on the WorldWar II founders of cybernetics-Norbert Wiener, John von Neumann, WarrenMcCulloch, Claude Shannon-and the series of Macy conferences (1946-53) in whichtheir views were propagated. And most attention has been paid to the conceptualsingularity of cybernetics-cybernetics as a theory of negative feedback and control, or asa world-view or ideology.This project extends our understanding of the substance and history of cybernetics alongseveral axes. First, it examines new characters and a later period. Based on research over the past couple of years, the PI believes that some of the most fascinating and original work in cybernetics was done from the early 1950s onwards by a group of British scientists-foremost amongst them W. Ross Ashby, Stafford Beer and Gordon Pask. Second, while I am, of course, interested in the ideas of these men, I am also interested in what they did-the practice of cybernetics, a largely unexplored topic. This leads, third, into the material stratum of cybernetics. Like Wiener's before them, the cybernetics of the English group referred directly to a constellation of fascinating material systems and artefacts. The singularity of cybernetics, the PI argues, resides at least as much at this level as it does at the level of ideas. The interest in practice also leads, fourth, into the social structure of cybernetics. We are familiar with the usual academic/disciplinary centering of the traditional sciences, but cybernetics was not like that. The cyberneticians have typically been wanderers or vagrants, moving readily between institutional bases that we generally think of as distinct, including the university, but also the arts, business, industry and the military. This social level constitutes another, hitherto not well recognised, aspect of the singularity of cybernetics. This proposal for a sabbatical year supports preparation of a book on the Britishcyberneticians, especially the research on Beer and Pask. (The PI's a graduate student is already working intensively on Ashby). Key informants have agreed to be interviewed and furnish documents in their possession. The book seeks to emphasise that, in its specific entanglements of the material, social and conceptual, cybernetics was a different kind of historical formation from the reductive sciences-a new and fascinating kind of object for study by the STS community that may increasingly command much wider scholarly and popular interest. Certain theoretical concerns of the PI go along with his interest in cybernetics, which he intends to open up in the last chapter of the book by locating cybernetics within a larger body of cognate work, including current work on 'complexity' and his own work on the 'mangle of practice.' The project contributes significantly to theoretical discussions within and beyond science and technology studies. The PI also explores the relevance of such discussions for contemporary work in artificial intelligence, information technology and cognitive science.