such conceptualisations. However, the physical artefacts and the social element of
technology cannot be examined as a single unit while doing justice to the
complexity of both aspects. Our focus here is on the social reality surrounding
technology use, but the artefacts are increasingly becoming entwined with the
social dimension, to the point where these two become impossible to distinguish,
for example in augmented reality or artificial intelligence applications. One way of
reconciling this difference between the physical and the social is to understand
technology through Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory, which has gained
popularity in science and technology studies.
96 Actor-network theory considers
physical objects as parts of social networks and attributes agency to both human
and non-human actors. Thus, the role of technological artefacts could be
considered through such networks that participate in social meaning creation.
However, this simultaneous cohesion of the social dimension surrounding use
of technology and the increasing distinction between social and technological
elements is still under way, which suggests that we are talking about an emergent
social system. The emerging social system can be found in the communicative
social interactions, where the context of using ICT creates meaning and this
use relays communication as a communicative act. This emergent social nature
related to technological communication can be addressed as the system of use of
ICT, for lack of a better label, to separate it from the non-communicative
technology.
This conceptualisation portrays the use of ICT as an emerging social system
which is functionally differentiating from other subsystems to form its own
distinctive autopoiesis through communication. This way of understanding ICT
explains why the earlier forms of technology have not constituted a similarly
extensive crisis within society.
97 It simultaneously places this study and consequences of new dispute resolution technology within the context of new media.
Also, this enables us to address the communicative element of technology without resorting to descriptions of pilot projects or policy objectives. The emergent
nature of this new social system illustrates why the use of ICT also calls for
reactions within the legal system. The social system enters the legal system
through structural couplings and is used in operations within the boundaries of
law. At the same time, the physical elements of technology, the non-communicative
side, may enter the legal system as simple brute facts of a legal case (e.g. in
contractual disputes over delivery of technology) but these facts are not operations
in the meaning of social systems. The technological side is left with the role of a
bystander in the legal system, but the social side of technology accumulates a more
pronounced role as another functionally differentiated social system that links with
the legal system through its cognitive openness.
The emergence of a new social system requires the development of systemspecific coding that grounds all communication around the system’s symbolically
generalised medium and thus creates the boundaries between the system and its
environment. What would be this medium and code for the use of ICT? In his
interpretation of technology as a sui generis autopoetic system, Reichel suggests
distinction between work/fail as the code.
98 Luhmann, in turn, suggests that the
Understanding law and technology 49
technology cannot be examined as a single unit while doing justice to the
complexity of both aspects. Our focus here is on the social reality surrounding
technology use, but the artefacts are increasingly becoming entwined with the
social dimension, to the point where these two become impossible to distinguish,
for example in augmented reality or artificial intelligence applications. One way of
reconciling this difference between the physical and the social is to understand
technology through Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory, which has gained
popularity in science and technology studies.
96 Actor-network theory considers
physical objects as parts of social networks and attributes agency to both human
and non-human actors. Thus, the role of technological artefacts could be
considered through such networks that participate in social meaning creation.
However, this simultaneous cohesion of the social dimension surrounding use
of technology and the increasing distinction between social and technological
elements is still under way, which suggests that we are talking about an emergent
social system. The emerging social system can be found in the communicative
social interactions, where the context of using ICT creates meaning and this
use relays communication as a communicative act. This emergent social nature
related to technological communication can be addressed as the system of use of
ICT, for lack of a better label, to separate it from the non-communicative
technology.
This conceptualisation portrays the use of ICT as an emerging social system
which is functionally differentiating from other subsystems to form its own
distinctive autopoiesis through communication. This way of understanding ICT
explains why the earlier forms of technology have not constituted a similarly
extensive crisis within society.
97 It simultaneously places this study and consequences of new dispute resolution technology within the context of new media.
Also, this enables us to address the communicative element of technology without resorting to descriptions of pilot projects or policy objectives. The emergent
nature of this new social system illustrates why the use of ICT also calls for
reactions within the legal system. The social system enters the legal system
through structural couplings and is used in operations within the boundaries of
law. At the same time, the physical elements of technology, the non-communicative
side, may enter the legal system as simple brute facts of a legal case (e.g. in
contractual disputes over delivery of technology) but these facts are not operations
in the meaning of social systems. The technological side is left with the role of a
bystander in the legal system, but the social side of technology accumulates a more
pronounced role as another functionally differentiated social system that links with
the legal system through its cognitive openness.
The emergence of a new social system requires the development of systemspecific coding that grounds all communication around the system’s symbolically
generalised medium and thus creates the boundaries between the system and its
environment. What would be this medium and code for the use of ICT? In his
interpretation of technology as a sui generis autopoetic system, Reichel suggests
distinction between work/fail as the code.
98 Luhmann, in turn, suggests that the
Understanding law and technology 49