Janus (6 page)

 

 

The holon seems to have filled a genuine need, for it is gradually finding
its way into the terminology of various branches of science, from biology
to communication theory. It was particularly gratifying to discover that
it has also insinuated itself into French: in Professor Raymond Ruyer's
much discussed book
La Gnose de Princeton
^[12]
there is a chapter
entitled: 'Les accolades domaniales et les holons' -- with a footnote
which says: 'If I am not mistaken, the word originated with Koestler.'
New words are like parvenus: once their origin is forgotten, they have
made it.

 

 

Unfortunately, the term 'hierarchy' itself is rather unattractive and
often provokes a strong emotional resistance. It is loaded with military
and ecclesiastic associations, or evokes the 'pecking hierarchy' of the
barnyard, and thus conveys the impression of a rigid, authoritarian
structure, whereas in the present theory a hierarchy consists of
autonomous, self-governing holons endowed with varying degrees of
flexibility and freedom. Encouraged by the friendly reception of the
holon, I shall occasionally use the terms 'holarchic' and 'holarchy',
but without undue insistence.

 

 

 

6

 

 

We have seen that biological holons, from organisms down to organelles,
are self-regulating entities which manifest both the independent properties
of wholes and the dependent properties of parts. This is the first of the
general characteristics of all types of holarchies to be retained; we may
call it the Janus principle. In social hierarchies it is self-evident:
every social holon -- individual, family, clan, tribe, nation, etc. --
is a coherent whole relative to its constituent parts, yet at the same
time part of a larger social entity. A society without holarchic structuring
would be as chaotic as the random motions of gas molecules colliding and
rebounding in all directions.*

 

* However, the situation is somewhat obscured by the fact that complex
societies are structured by several interlocking hierarchies --
see below, section 12.

 

 

Not quite as obvious at first glance is the hierarchic organization of our
skilled activities. The skill of driving a motor-car does not consist in
the conscious activation of individual muscles by the driver's brain, but
in the triggering of sub-routines like accelerating, braking, steering,
changing gears, etc., each of which represents a quasi-autonomous pattern
of activities -- a behavioural holon which is so self-reliant that once
you have mastered the skill of driving a particular car, you can drive
any car.

 

 

Or, take the skill of communicating ideas by speech. The sequence of
operations starts at the apex of the hierarchy with the intention of
conveying the idea or message. But that idea is as often as not of a
pre-verbal nature; it may be a visual image, a feeling, a vague impression.
We are familiar with the frustrating experience of knowing what we want
to say, but not knowing how to express it; and this refers not only to
the search for the right word, but preceding that, to the structuring of
the intended message and arranging it in a sequential order; processing
it according to the laws of grammar and syntax; and lastly, activating
coordinated patterns of muscle contractions in the tongue and vocal
chords. Thus speaking involves the stepwise concretization, elaboration
and articulation of originally inarticulate mental contents. Although
these operations follow each other very fast and to a large extent
automatically, so that we are not consciously aware of them, they
nevertheless require a succession of different activities on different
levels of the mental hierarchy. And each of these levels has its own laws:
the laws of enunciation, the rules of grammar and syntax, the canons of
semantics, etc.

 

 

From the listener's point of view the sequence of operations is reversed.
It starts at the lowest level -- the perceptual skills of recognizing
phonemes (speech sounds) in the air-vibrations reaching the ear-drums,
amalgamating them into morphemes (syllables, prefixes, etc.) and so forth,
through words and sentences, finally reconstituting the speaker's message
at the apex of the hierarchy.

 

 

Let us note that nowhere on the upward or downward journey through
the linguistic holarchy do we encounter hard and indivisible 'atoms of
language'. Each of the entities on various levels -- phonemes, morphemes,
words, sentences -- is a whoJe relative to its parts, and a subordinate
part of a more complex entity on the next higher level. For instance,
a morpheme like /men/ is a linguistic holon which can be put to many
uses -- menace, mental, mention, mentor, etc.; and which particular
meaning it will assume depends on the context on the higher level.

 

 

Psycholinguists use the branching tree as a convenient model for this
step-by-step process of spelling out an implicit thought in explicit
terms, of converting the potentialities of an amorphous idea into the
actual motion-patterns of the vocal chords. This remarkable process has
been compared to ontogenesis -- the development of the embryo; first,
there is the fertilized egg, which contains all the potentialities
defining the finished product, the 'idea', as it were, of the future
individual: these potentials are then 'spelt out' in successive stages
of differentiation. It may also be compared to the process by which a
military action is carried out: the order 'Eighth Army will advance in
the direction of Tobruk', issued from the apex of the hierarchy by the
general in command is concretized, articulated and spelt out in more
detail at each of the successive lower echelons.

 

 

Generally speaking, the performance of any purposeful action, whether
instinctive, like the nest-building of birds, or acquired as most human
skills are, follows the same pattern of spelling out a general intent by
the stepwise activation or triggering of functional holons -- sub-routines
-- on successively lower levels of the hierarchy. This rule is universally
applicable to all types of 'output hierarchies', regardless whether the
'output' is a human baby, a sentence spoken in English, the playing
of a piano sonata or the action of tying one's shoelaces. (For input
hierarchies, as we shall see
later
, the reverse
sequence holds.)

 

 

 

7

 

 

The next point to emphasize is that every level in a hierarchy of any
type is governed by a set of fixed,
invariant rules
, which account for
the coherence, stability, and the specific structure and function of its
constituent holons. Thus in the language hierarchy we found on successive
levels the rules which govern the activities of the vocal chords, the
laws of grammar and above them the whole semantic hierarchy concerned
with meaning. The codes which govern the behaviour of
social
holons,
and lend them coherence, are written and unwritten laws, traditions,
belief -- systems, fashions. The development of the
embryo
is governed
by the 'genetic code'. Turning to
instinctive activities
, the web which
the spider weaves, the nest which the blue tit builds, and the courting
ceremony of the greylag goose all conform to fixed, species-specific
patterns, produced according to certain 'rules of the game'. In
symbolic
operations
, the holons are rule-governed cognitive structures variously
called 'frames of reference', 'associative contexts', 'universes of
discourse', 'algorithms', etc., each with its specific 'grammar' or
canon. We thus arrive at a tentative definition: the term 'holon' may
be applied to any structural or functional sub-system in a biological,
social or cognitive hierarchy, which manifests rule-governed behaviour
and/or structural Gestalt-constancy.* Thus organelles and homologous
organs are evolutionary holons; morphogenetic fields are ontogenetic
holons; the ethologist's 'fixed action-patterns' and the sub-routines
of acquired skills are behavioural holons; phonemes, morphemes, words,
phrases are linguistic holons; individuals, families, tribes, nations
are social holons. **

 

* The 'or' is necessary to include configurations in symbolic
hierarchies -- which do not manifest 'behaviour' in the usual sense.
** Various authors have pointed to certain affinities between the
concept of the holon and Ralph Gerard's 'org'. Thus D. Wilson
in Hierarchical Structures: 'Koestler (1967) elects to
designate these "Janus-faced" entities by the term holon
. . . We note that Gerard uses the term org to designate the
same concept (Gerard, 1957).' This of course amounts to a veiled
hint at plagiarism. The two quotations from Gerard that follow
indicate the similarities and differences between his org
and the holon (my italics): 'Those material systems
or entities which are individuals at a given level but are composed
of subordinate units, lower level orgs'. [13]  The limitation to
'material systems' is made more explicit in the second quotation,
where he defines the org as 'that sub-class of systems
composed of material systems, in which matter enters into the
picture; this excludes formal systems, for example.' [14]  Thus
the term 'org' cannot be applied to behavioural or linguistic
or cognitive hierarchies where the concept of the holon proved
especially useful. Orgs, as defined by Gerard, represent a
sub-category of holons confined to material systems.

 

 

8

 

 

The set of fixed rules which govern a holon's structure or function we shall
call its
code
or
canon
. However, let us note at once that while the canon
imposes constraints* and controls on the holon's activities, it does not
exhaust its degrees of freedom, but leaves room for more or less flexible
strategies, guided by the contingencies of the environment. This distinction
between
fixed (invariant) codes
and
flexible (variable) strategies
may
sound at first a little abstract, but it is fundamental to all purposeful
behaviour; a few examples will illustrate what is meant.

 

* 'Constraint' is a rather unhappy scientific term (reminiscent of
the strait-jacket) which refers to the rules which govern organized
activity.

 

The common spider's web-making activities are controlled by a fixed
inherited canon (which prescribes that the radial threads should always
bisect the laterals at equal angles, thus forming a regular polygon);
but the spider is free to suspend his web from three, four or more
points of attachment -- to choose his strategy according to the lie of
the land. Other instinctive activities -- birds building nests, bees
constructing their hives, silkworms spinning their cocoons -- all have
this dual characteristic of conforming to an
invariant code
or rule --
book which contains the blueprint of the finished product, but using
amazingly
varied strategies
to achieve it.

 

 

Passing from the instinctive activities of the humble spider to sophisticated
human skills like playing chess, we again find a code of fixed rules which
define the
permissible
moves, but the choice of the
actual
move
is left to the player, whose strategy is guided by the environment --
the distribution of the chessmen on the board.
Speech
, as we saw,
is governed by various canons on various levels, from semantics through
grammar down to phonology, but on each of these levels the speaker has
a vast variety of strategic choices: from the selection and ordering
of the material to be conveyed, through the formulation of paragraphs
and sentences, the choice of metaphors and adjectives, right down to
enunciation -- the selective emphasis placed on individual vowels. Similar
considerations apply to the pianist improvising variations on a theme. The
fixed 'rule of the game' in this case is the given melodic pattern, but he
has almost infinite scope for the strategic choices in phasing, rhythm,
tempo or transposition into a different key.* A lawyer's activities are
very different from a pianist's but the lawyer, too, operates within
fixed rules laid down by statute and precedent, while he disposes of a
vast range of strategies in interpreting and applying the law.

 

* Incidentally, transposition of a musical theme into a different key
on the piano, where the sequence of finger movements is totally
different, amounts to a complete refutation of the behaviourists'
chain-response theory.

 

 

9

 

 

In ontogenesis -- the development of the embryo -- the distinction
between 'rules' and 'strategies' is at first sight less obvious, and
requires a slightly longer explanation.

 

 

The apex of the hierarchy in this case is the fertilized egg; the axis
of the inverted tree represents time: and the holons on successive lower
levels represent successive stages in the differentiation of tissues into
organs. The growth of the embryo from a shapeless blob to a 'roughed in'
form and through various stages of increasing articulation has been compared
to the way in which a sculptor carves a figure out of a block of wood --
or, as already mentioned, to the 'spelling out' of an amorphous idea
into articulate phonemes.

 

 

The 'idea' to be spelt out in ontogeny is contained in the genetic code,
housed in the double helix of nucleic acid strands in the chromosomes.
It takes fifty-six generations of cells to produce a human being out of
a single, fertilized egg-cell. The cells in the growing embryo are
all of identical origin, and carry the same set of chromosomes, i.e.,
the same hereditary dispositions. In spite of this, they develop into
such diverse products as muscle cells, kidney cells, brain cells,
toe-nails. How can they do this if they are all governed by the same
set of laws, by the same hereditary canon?