更改

==Criticism==

==Criticism==

 

There are multiple criticisms of the use of the term in both its original context, as an attempt to define and explain the living, and its various expanded usages, such as applying it to self-organizing systems in general or social systems in particular.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fleischaker G | year = 1992 | title = Autopoiesis in Systems Analysis: A Debate | url = | journal = International Journal of General Systems | volume = 21 | issue = 2| pages = 131–271 | doi=10.1080/03081079208945065}}</ref> Critics have argued that the concept and its theory fail to define or explain living systems and that, because of the extreme language of [[self-referential]]ity it uses without any external reference, it is really an attempt to give substantiation to Maturana's radical [[constructivist epistemology|constructivist]] or [[solipsistic]] [[epistemology]],<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Swenson R |year=1992 |title=Autocatakinetics, Yes—Autopoiesis, No: Steps Toward a Unified Theory of Evolutionary Ordering |journal=International Journal of General Systems |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=207–208 |doi=10.1080/03081079208945072}}</ref> or what [[Danilo Zolo]]<ref>{{Cite journal | vauthors = Kenny V, Gardner G |year=1988 |title=The constructions of self-organizing systems |journal=The Irish Journal of Psychology |volume=9 |pages=1–24 |issue=1 |doi=10.1080/03033910.1988.10557704}}</ref><ref name="Wolfe">{{cite book |last=Wolfe |first=Cary | name-list-style = vanc |title=Critical environments: postmodern theory and the pragmatics of the "outside" |publisher=University of Minnesota Press |year=1998 |pages=62–3 |isbn=978-0-8166-3019-6 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tBQSBBWVg2cC&pg=PT85&lpg=PT85&dq=Zolo+Autopoiesis#v=onepage}}</ref> has called instead a "desolate theology". An example is the assertion by Maturana and Varela that "We do not see what we do not see and what we do not see does not exist".<ref>{{cite book | vauthors = Maturana H, Varela F | date = 1988 | title = The Tree of Knowledge. | series = New Science Library | publisher = Shambhala Publications | location = Boston | page = 242 }}</ref> The autopoietic model, said Rod Swenson,<ref>{{Cite journal | vauthors = Swenson R |year=1992 |title=Galileo, Babel, and Autopoiesis (It's Turtles All The Way Down) |journal=International Journal of General Systems |volume=21 |pages=267–269 |issue=2 |doi=10.1080/03081079208945080}}</ref> is "miraculously decoupled from the physical world by its progenitors&nbsp;... (and thus) grounded on a solipsistic foundation that flies in the face of both common sense and scientific knowledge".

There are multiple criticisms of the use of the term in both its original context, as an attempt to define and explain the living, and its various expanded usages, such as applying it to self-organizing systems in general or social systems in particular.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fleischaker G | year = 1992 | title = Autopoiesis in Systems Analysis: A Debate | url = | journal = International Journal of General Systems | volume = 21 | issue = 2| pages = 131–271 | doi=10.1080/03081079208945065}}</ref> Critics have argued that the concept and its theory fail to define or explain living systems and that, because of the extreme language of [[self-referential]]ity it uses without any external reference, it is really an attempt to give substantiation to Maturana's radical [[constructivist epistemology|constructivist]] or [[solipsistic]] [[epistemology]],<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Swenson R |year=1992 |title=Autocatakinetics, Yes—Autopoiesis, No: Steps Toward a Unified Theory of Evolutionary Ordering |journal=International Journal of General Systems |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=207–208 |doi=10.1080/03081079208945072}}</ref> or what [[Danilo Zolo]]<ref>{{Cite journal | vauthors = Kenny V, Gardner G |year=1988 |title=The constructions of self-organizing systems |journal=The Irish Journal of Psychology |volume=9 |pages=1–24 |issue=1 |doi=10.1080/03033910.1988.10557704}}</ref><ref name="Wolfe">{{cite book |last=Wolfe |first=Cary | name-list-style = vanc |title=Critical environments: postmodern theory and the pragmatics of the "outside" |publisher=University of Minnesota Press |year=1998 |pages=62–3 |isbn=978-0-8166-3019-6 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tBQSBBWVg2cC&pg=PT85&lpg=PT85&dq=Zolo+Autopoiesis#v=onepage}}</ref> has called instead a "desolate theology". An example is the assertion by Maturana and Varela that "We do not see what we do not see and what we do not see does not exist".<ref>{{cite book | vauthors = Maturana H, Varela F | date = 1988 | title = The Tree of Knowledge. | series = New Science Library | publisher = Shambhala Publications | location = Boston | page = 242 }}</ref> The autopoietic model, said Rod Swenson,<ref>{{Cite journal | vauthors = Swenson R |year=1992 |title=Galileo, Babel, and Autopoiesis (It's Turtles All The Way Down) |journal=International Journal of General Systems |volume=21 |pages=267–269 |issue=2 |doi=10.1080/03081079208945080}}</ref> is "miraculously decoupled from the physical world by its progenitors&nbsp;... (and thus) grounded on a solipsistic foundation that flies in the face of both common sense and scientific knowledge".

== See also ==

== See also ==