The purpose of this paper is to suggest a more central role for reflexive artistic practices in a clarified research agenda for second-order cybernetics (SOC). This is offered as a way to assist the field in the further development of its theoretical/methodological “core” and, subsequently, enhance its impact on the world.,The argument begins by reviewing Karl Muller’s account of the failure of SOC to emerge as a mainstream endeavor. Then, Muller’s account is recontextualized within recent developments in SOC that are traced through the Design Cybernetics movement inspired by Ranulph Glanville. This alternate narrative frames a supposedly moribund period as a phase of continuing refinement of the field’s focus upon its “proper object of study,” namely, the observer’s mentation of/about their mentation. The implications of this renewed focus are then positioned within Larry Richard’s vision of the cybernetician, not as “scientist” per se but rather as a “craftsperson in and with time” capable of productively varying the dynamics of their daily interactions. Having centered widespread capacity building for this “craft” as a proposed research agenda for a new phase of SOC, the paper concludes by pointing to the unique and necessary role to be played by the arts in this endeavor. Personal reflections upon the author’s own artistic and theoretical activities are included throughout.,The development and application of artistic methods for the enhancement of individual capacity for second-order observation is consistent with the purpose of SOC, namely, “to explain the observer to himself.” Therefore, it is in the field’s interest to more fulsomely embrace non-scientific, arts-based forms of research.,In a truly reflexive/recursive fashion, the very idea that first-person, arts-based narratives are seen, from a mainstream scientific point of view, as an insufficiently rigorous form of research is, itself, a research limitation. This highlights, perhaps ironically, the need for cybernetics to continue to pursue its own independent definitions and standards of research beyond the boundaries of mainstream science rather than limiting its own modes of inquiry in the name of “scientific legitimacy.”,A general uptake of the view presented here would expand the horizon of what might be considered legitimate, rigorous and valuable research in the field.,The view presented here implies that many valuable contributions that SOC can make to society take place beyond the constraints of academic publication and within the realm of personal growth and social development.,The very clearly defined and “refocused” vision of SOC in this paper can be of substantial utility in developing a more robust, distinctive and concrete research agenda across this field.

中文翻译：

---

关于艺术在二阶控制论新阶段中的作用的提案

本文的目的是在明确的二阶控制论 (SOC) 研究议程中提出反思性艺术实践的更核心作用。这是作为帮助该领域进一步发展其理论/方法“核心”的一种方式，并随后增强其对世界的影响。,该论点首先回顾了 Karl Muller 对 SOC 失败的描述作为一个主流的努力。然后，Muller 的描述在 SOC 的最新发展中重新背景化，这些发展是通过受 Ranulph Glanville 启发的设计控制论运动进行追踪的。这种交替的叙述将一个所谓的垂死时期构建为一个持续完善该领域对其“适当研究对象”的关注的阶段，即观察者对他们的心理的/关于他们的心理。这种重新关注的含义随后被定位在拉里·理查德对控制论家的看法中，本身不是“科学家”，而是“时间里的工匠”，能够有效地改变他们日常互动的动态。本文将这种“工艺”的广泛能力建设作为 SOC 新阶段的拟议研究议程集中，最后指出了艺术在这一努力中将发挥的独特和必要的作用。贯穿作者自身艺术和理论活动的个人反思。,艺术方法的发展和应用，以提高个人二阶观察能力与SOC的宗旨是一致的，即“向自己解释观察者” 。” 所以，更充分地接受非科学的、以艺术为基础的研究形式符合该领域的利益。,以一种真正反思/递归的方式，从主流科学角度看待第一人称、以艺术为基础的叙事的想法看来，作为一种不够严谨的研究形式，其本身就是一种研究局限。这或许具有讽刺意味，这凸显了控制论需要继续追求自己独立的定义和研究标准，超越主流科学的界限，而不是以“科学合法性”的名义限制自己的探究模式。这里提出的观点将扩大该领域可能被认为是合法、严谨和有价值的研究的视野。