Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Ethics of Functional Differentiation: Reclaiming Morality in Niklas Luhmann’s Social Systems Theory

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Niklas Luhmann held a skeptical view of the role of morality in the modern society. The present paper reassesses this skepticism in view of his early work showing the regime of functional differentiation to be supported by fundamental human rights. Building on this argument, the paper advocates a more positive view of morality which is shown to be related to the sustainability of social systems in their encompassing societal and natural environment. This view is warranted by the overarching Luhmannian theme of the precariousness of system–environment relations. If this view is accepted, Luhmann’s work on fundamental human rights can be read as an illustration of moral problems caused by the overexpansion tendencies of the political system. This argument is shown to connect up with the ideas of Buchanan and Rawls, as well as to fit in with the Luhmannian construct of the dilemma of structure and function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agafonow, A. (2015). Value creation, value capture, and value devolution: Where do social enterprises stand? Administration & Society, 47(8), 1038–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brans, M., & Rossbach, S. (1997). The autopoiesis of administrative systems: Niklas Luhmann on public administration and public policy. Public Administration, 75, 417–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, G., & Buchanan, J. M. (2000). The reason of rules: Constitutional political economy. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (2000). The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and leviathan. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duska, R. (2007). Contemporary reflections on business ethics. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enderle, G. (2016). How can business ethics strengthen the social cohesion of a society? Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3196-5.

  • Etzioni, A. (2016). Apple: Good business, poor citizen? Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3233-4.

  • Felicetti, A. (2016). A deliberative case for democracy in firms. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3212-9.

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times, September, 13:33.

  • Gensicke, D. (2008). Luhmann. Stuttgart: Reclam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentile, G. C., Wetzel, R., & Wolf, P. (2015). The non-sense of organizational morality: Processing corporate social responsibility between formal and informal organizational structures. Journal of Global Responsibility, 6(1), 19–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graber, C. B., & Teubner, G. (1998). Art and money: Constitutional rights in the private sphere? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 18(1), 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1985). The theory of communicative action. Volume 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hielscher, S., Pies, I., Valentinov, V., & Chatalova, L. (2016). Rationalizing the GMO debate: The ordonomic approach to addressing agricultural myths. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. doi:10.3390/ijerph13050476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horster, D. (2012). Ethik. In O. Jahraus, A. Nassehi, M. Grizelj, I. Saake, C. Kirchmeier, & J. Müller (Eds.), Luhmann Handbuch: Leben – Werk – Wirkung (pp. 336–340). Stuttgart et al: Verlag J.B.Metzler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchmeier, C. (2012). Moral. In O. Jahraus, A. Nassehi, M. Grizelj, I. Saake, C. Kirchmeier, & J. Müller (Eds.), Luhmann Handbuch: Leben—Werk—Wirkung (pp. 105–107). Stuttgart: J.B.Metzler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneer, G., & Nassehi, A. (2000). Niklas Luhmanns Theorie sozialer Systeme. Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1965). Grundrechte als Institution: ein Beitrag zur politischen Soziologie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1981). Politische Theorie im Wohlfahrtsstaat. München et al.: Günter Olzog Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1990). Essays on self-reference. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1991). Paradigm Lost: On the ethical reflection of morality. Thesis Eleven, 29, 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1993a). Gesellschaftsstruktur und Semantik (Vol. 3). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1993b). The code of the moral. Cardozo Law Review, 14, 995–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1999 [1968]). Zweckbegriff und Systemrationalität. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

  • Luhmann, N. (2002). Theories of distinction: Redescribing the descriptions of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2012). The Theory of Society (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2013). Introduction to systems theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neckel, S., & Wolf, J. (1994). The fascination of amorality: Luhmann’s theory of morality and its resonances among German intellectuals. Theory, Culture & Society, 11(2), 69–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pies, I. (2009). Moral als Heuristik. Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pies, I., Beckmann, M., & Hielscher, S. (2014). The political role of the business firm: an ordonomic reconceptualization of an Aristotelian idea. Business and Society, 53(2), 226–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, B. (2016). Sweatshop regulation: Tradeoffs and welfare judgements. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3227-2.

  • Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reese-Schäfer, W. (1999). Niklas Luhmann zur Einführung. Hamburg: Junius.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röhl, K. F. (1987). Rechtssoziologie: ein Lehrbuch. Köln: Heymann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S. (2013). Common values? Fifty-two cases of value semantics copying on corporate websites. Human Systems Management, 32, 249–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S. (2014). The things that go without saying: on performative differences between business value communication and communication on business values. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 15, 175–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S. (2015). Free economy! On 3628800 alternatives of and to capitalism. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 27, 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S., Clark, C., & Berkel, J. (2017). The fashionable functions reloaded. An updated Google Ngram view of trends in functional differentiation. In A. Mesquita (ed.), Research Paradigms and Contemporary Perspectives on Human-Technology Interaction. IGI-Global: Hershey, forthcoming. Retrieved from https://steffenroth.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/16-06-21-fashionable-functions-reloaded.pdf.

  • Schimank, U. (2009). Die Moderne: eine funktional differenzierte kapitalistische Gesellschaft. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 3, 327–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, L. W. (2009). Grundlagen der soziologischen Theorie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S., & Valentinov, V. (2017). The neglect of society in the theory of the firm: A systems theory perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics. doi:10.1093/cje/bew072.

  • Tool, R. (2001). The discretionary economy: A normative theory of political economy. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentinov, V. (2014a). The complexity-sustainability trade-off in Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(1), 14–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valentinov, V. (2014b). K. William Kapp’s theory of social costs: A Luhmannian interpretation. Ecological Economics, 97(1), 28–33.

  • Valentinov, V. (2015a). The Rawlsian critique of utilitarianism: A Luhmannian interpretation. Journal of Business Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2786-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentinov, V. (2015b). From equilibrium to autopoiesis: A Luhmannian reading of Veblenian evolutionary economics. Economic Systems, 39(1), 143–155.

  • Valentinov, V. (2015c). Kenneth Boulding’s theories of evolutionary economics and organizational change: A reconstruction. Journal of Economic Issues, 49(1), 71–88.

  • Valentinov, V. (2015d). Demand, supply, and sustainability: Reflections on Kenneth Boulding’s evolutionary economics. Society and Natural Resources, 28(11), 1216–1232.

  • Valentinov, V., & Chatalova, L. (2016). Institutional economics and social dilemmas: A systems theory perspective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 33(1), 138–149.

  • Valentinov, V., Hielscher, S., & Pies, I. (2016). Emergence: A systems theory’s challenge to ethics. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 29(6), 597–610.

  • Valentinov, V. (2017). Wiener and Luhmann on feedback: From complexity to sustainability. Kybernetes. doi:10.1108/K-11-2016-0317.

  • Van Assche, K., & Verschraegen, G. (2008). The limits of planning: Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory and the analysis of planning and planning ambitions. Planning Theory, 7(3), 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verschraegen, G. (2002). Human rights and modern society: A sociological analysis from the perspective of systems theory. Journal of Law and Society, 29(2), 258–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verschraegen, G. (2011). Hybrid constitutionalism, fundamental rights and the state. Rechtsfilosofie & Rechtstheorie, 40(3), 216–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Groddeck, V. (2011a). Rethinking the role of value communication in business corporations from a sociological perspective: Why organisations need value-based semantics to cope with societal and organisational fuzziness. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Groddeck, V. (2011b). The function of dysfunctions: The paradox of value-based leadership communication. European Journal of International Management, 5(1), 30–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, S. E. (2009). The complexity of complexity theory: An innovative analysis. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 11(4), 26–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, S. E., & Valentinov, V. (2016a). A limit to our thinking and some unanticipated moral consequences: A science of conceptual systems perspective with some potential solutions. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 30(2), 103–116.

  • Wallis, S., & Valentinov, V. (2016b). The imperviance of conceptual systems: Cognitive and moral aspects. Kybernetes, 45(9), 1437–1451.

  • Wallis, S., & Valentinov, V. (2016c). What is sustainable theory? A Luhmannian perspective on the science of conceptual systems. Foundations of Science. doi:10.1007/s10699-016-9496-5.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies, Theodor-Lieser-Str.2, 06120, Halle (Saale), Germany

    Vladislav Valentinov

Authors
  1. Vladislav Valentinov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladislav Valentinov.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Valentinov, V. The Ethics of Functional Differentiation: Reclaiming Morality in Niklas Luhmann’s Social Systems Theory. J Bus Ethics 155, 105–114 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3521-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3521-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation