Yesterday we held a new meeting in order to read and discuss the book by the German Sociologist, Niklas Luhmann: "Trust".
This book produced an interesting debate because we found it is very connected with the scenario analysis we are currently carrying out. Because of this, we will show here some of the most interesting conclusions we reached:
In the more simple analysis, Luhmann is proposing two elements: environment and system. If system wants to understand and aprehend environment, we (as a part of the system) need to simplify environment, because it is very complex (this scheme is very simple, but is the core in the Luhmann's theory). But in a wide sense, we find more element, like familiarity.
Familiarity is the concept that most interested us: in this sense, scenarios about outbreaks, epidemics or bioterrorist attacks; are getting us acquainted with the elements of these scenarios (masks, vaccines, war, and a whole imaginary related with them) in order to know previously some of their elements, and thus, reduce uncertainty.
But what if scenarios are not reducing uncertainty, but amplifying it? That is, familiarity does not have to be less complex: familiarity can be complex; it is a way to achieve continuity between what we already know and the uncertain future.
Another interesting question is about the concept "event". In a first moment, we were discussing about what does it means: It is an excepcional event? it is whatever action that is never repeated? Swen was telling us that an event is produced at the same time that a state. State is that continuity, that "status" that we already know. So, in this sense, we always know our present, even our predictable future: I know that next month I will go to the cinema as I do every month, but each time I go to the cinema it happens new things, I am not the same: here we have events.
This idea is related with the work of Deleuze in his book "Difference and Repetition", what is repeated is the difference, not repetition.
