Distinctions and Closure

Discrimination between a class of phenomena and the complement of that class. (PC)
A distinction splits the perceived world in two parts, "That" and "This, or "environment" or "system", or "us" and "Them" (IESC, EA)
It is the very fundamental act of system theory, the very act of
Distinctions coexists with purposes. (IESC)
Certainly, it is the most fundamental act of system theory, the very act of defining the system presently of interst, of distinguishing it from its environment (EA)

Relations:

	autopoietic system
	consensual distinction
	domain
	observer
	observer_community.htm
	self/non-self
	Spencer-Brown's Law of form

Encyclopedia Autopoietica "Unity distinction ... is not an abstract notion of purely conceptual validity for descriptive or analytical purposes, but is an operative notion referring to the process through which a unity becomes asserted or defined: the conditions that specify a unity determine its phenomenology." (Varela, 1979, p. 31; cf. Maturana & Varela, 1980, p. 96) The two senses in which this term is employed both refer to this process. They differ in that one (1.) refers to the process by which a unity is defined by an observer, while the other (2.) invokes a unity's self-distinction through the topological effect(s) of its organizational closure. 1. The act or process by which an observer recognizes a unity. Paralleling Spencer Brown (1969), Maturana and Varela use the term "distinction" to denote -- "...the pointing to a unity by performing an operation which defines its boundaries and separates it from a background." (Maturana, 1975, p. 325) Varela (1979a, p. 84) explains: "A distinction splits the world into two parts, 'that' and 'this', or 'environment' and 'system', or 'us' and 'them', etc. ..Certainly, it is the most fundamental act of system theory, the very act of defining the system presently of interest, of distinguishing it from its environment." This parallels in spirit the statements ofBateson (Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity, New York: Bantam, 1988, p. 29): "...(P)erception operates only upon difference. All receipt of information is necessarily the receipt of news of difference..." Varela differentiates this sense of the term from 2. (below) by labeling it conceptual (1979, p. 30). Distinction effects a complementary recognition of both unity and background. Through distinction, the observer "...specifies a unity as an entity distinct from a background and abackground as the domain in which an entity is distinguished. An operation of distinction, however, is also a prescription of a procedure which, if carried out, severs a unity from a background, regardless of the procedure of distinction and regardless of whether the procedure is carried out by an observer or by another entity." (Maturana & Varela, 1980, p. xxii) Distinction constrains the domain of discourse, because the act of distinguishing specifies (even if only implicitly) both something referred to and the context in which it is manifest. Because a unity is brought forth only through distinction, "...each time we refer to a unity in our descriptions, we are implying the operation of distinction that defines it and makes it possible." (Maturana & Varela, 1992, p. 40) 2. The act or process by which a unity effects or asserts its own separability from its ambience or background. This sense of "distinction" highlights the manner in which an autonomous / autopoietic system establishes, as the topological manifestation of its organizational closure, a literal or functional boundary delineating its extent with respect to its ambience. Varela differentiates this sense of the term from 1. above by labeling it physical (e.g., when realized in the physical space). (1979, pp. 30-31)Cf. criterion of distinction, unity "A distinction is constructed by the observer in interaction with the system. As such, a distinction is always to a certain degree subjective, depending on the goalthe observer has in mind while modeling the system, but is not arbitrary, because not all distinctions will allow the observer to find coherence betweenobservations performed on the system. Since all phenomena in the universe are by definition different, the number of potential distinctions is infinite. Arepresentation of (part of) the universe is necessarily finite, and, hence, the number of distinctions an observer will make will be infinitely smaller than the total number of distinctions he or she could make" (1990a, p. 427) Heylighen

http://www.imprint.co.uk/thesaurus/distinction.htm