Mirrors Mirrored: Is That All There Is?

Recursive-hierarchical systems are multi-level systems that constitute their systemic closure through recursion. Their unique systemic nature has been ignored for years, causing confusion about their activity. In semiotics, for example, the logic of signification has fallen prey to the post-modernists’ “hall of mirrors,” which fails to grasp the logic of in-between that underlies recursive-hierarchical systems. My aim in this paper is to illustrate the logic of in-between by “deconstructing” the post-modernists’ hall of mirrors and the phenomenon of mirroring. 1. WEAVER’S BLIND SPOT In 1948, Warren Weaver, one of the proud fathers of information theory, drew a typological distinction between two kinds of systems, which he discussed in terms of problems (Weaver 1948). Weaver differentiated between problems of organized simplicity and disorganized complexity. Systems with organized simplicity consist of few elements, the behavior of which is determined by simple mathematical rules. That is, the value of a particular variable is usually a function of one or two other variables. Newton’s laws are the best example of this kind of system. Problems of disorganized complexity involve systems with a large number of components that behave individually in a disorganized, erratic fashion. As a whole, however, the system possesses certain orderly and analyzable average properties. The behavior of gas particles as studied by statistical mechanics falls under the rubric of “disorganized complexity.” These two types of systems have been studied with great success. Weaver, however, also identified a third kind of system, which he regarded as the promise of the future. These systems of “organized complexity” involve a moderate number of components “which are interrelated into an organic whole” and work in a bottom-up fashion to create macro-level order. The human body as a multicellular organism is