You are on page 1of 8

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

The Theory of Meta- that if any work from a meta-systems

perspective exists then it will be rare and
Systemic Markets probably difficult to find within the literature.
In other fields occasionally meta-systemic
approaches to subjects are found, but it is very
CHAPTER 02 rare. So this assumption that economics is
system theory driven and concerns almost
Markets as Meta-systems exclusively restricted economies is what
allows us some confidence in starting from a
Meta-systems Theory and the Structure of
clean slate. This study will take the form of an
Markets : An Explanation of Speculative
exploration of the theory of markets based on
Bubbles, their Bursting and other Strange, yet
the meta-system theory viewpoint. We will
Dangerous, Market Dynamics
start by establishing a strong theory from the
meta-systemic viewpoint and develop a
hypothesis as to what a market is from that
viewpoint, and then we will search the
economic literature for confirmation or
disconfirmation, that the discipline has a
Kent D. Palmer, Ph.D. systemic viewpoint that it is imposing on the
P.O. Box 1632 phenomena of markets, and that it has missed
Orange CA 92856 USA or misrepresented the possibility of a meta-
714-633-9508 systemic view of the phenomena. Then we would like to argue that a meta-systemic view
point is a more natural and insightful way to
Copyright 2008 K.D. Palmer. approach the subject which has been entirely
All Rights Reserved. Not for distribution. missed not just by the Economists but also the
Started 08.09.30; Version 0.3; 08.10.02; BUB02a03.doc Political, Social and Psychological Sciences.
Edited 08.10.15 Our view is based on a radical critique of Systems Theory which extends it in a new and
hither to unthought direction. We call that
direction Meta-systems Theory. Meta-systems
Keywords: Market Dynamics, Speculative theory is the inverse dual of Systems Theory.
Bubbles, Bull and Bear Markets, Market We use the term ‘meta’ in the sense of beyond.
Theory, Meta-systems Theory Here the dual of the System is considered what
is beyond or outside of the system. Meta-
Theory of Meta-systems systems theory is different from the normal
idea that a system has a boundary and that
In this paper I will attempt to establish the what ever is beyond the system is non-system.
broad outlines of Meta-systems Theory so that Meta-systems theory posits that there is an
we can use that to try to develop a theory of organization to what is beyond the system that
markets based on it. Details of Meta-systems is different from the system itself. In other
theory will be left for later essays in this series words when we step beyond the boundary of
and also details of the application of the theory the system itself, then we enter a different
to markets will also be developed later. In organization of things which is not just the
other words we will see how far we can go negation of the system organization but has its
attempting to understand markets using meta- own essential organization. In order to
systems theory as it exists now. We take it for understand this it is necessary to understand
granted that almost all the work done in that each higher schema is de-emergent with
academia on markets are from the point of respect to the next adjacent lower schema, and
view of a systems perspective on them, and so there is an de-emergent difference between

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

the system and the meta-system. It is possible within the meta-system of the highway and
to produce a recursive hierarchy of each street meta-system. But we are systems within
schema in the series, so that we can have sub- the Automobile. Look at the interface between
systems, systems, and super-systems (so called ourselves and the Automobile, which offer to
‘system of systems’) in an indefinite series. It the driver the interface with the Automobile
is therefore possible to have sub-meta-systems, System. In many instances the interface is
meta-systems, and super-meta-systems in a oriented toward making the Automobile more
similar recursive series. But because systems comfortable, and convenient in many ways.
and meta-systems are inverse duals of each Look how different the interface is between the
other they are also nested alternatively like human and the Automobile and between the
Russian dolls where the systems are like the automobile and the road. The super-system in
dolls and the spaces between the dolls are like this case is the Road and Highway
meta-systems. Systems fit like niches into the Transportation System. But the Automobile
meta-systems. So when we look at the system does not interface with the whole of the Road
from the point of view of the sub-system, what Transportation System, but only the part of the
the sub-system sees is the meta-system that is road, the niche it occupies, within the overall
the interface with the next higher system. The Road Transportation System. The key point
next higher system is emergent, but the space here is that the interface of the human inside
within the next higher system into which the the automobile is very different from the
sub-system fits is de-emergent. The meta- interface of the automobile to the road. And in
system is the interface that allows the sub- general it is this interface which
system to fit into the system. The same is the accommodates the subsystem into the system,
case at the next higher level where systems are or the system into the supersystem, which is
part of a meta-system which is de-emergent, the meta-system. The meta-system of the
but beyond that there may be the emergent roadways is very different from the meta-
super-system that acts as a system of systems. system of the interior of the automobile. They
When we look at the doubly nested hierarchy have two completely different organizations,
our attention is drawn to the emergent which is different from the organization of
thresholds of organization because they are sub-system of the human organism, and the
foregrounded, but our attention is drawn away system of the automobile, or the super-system
from the backgrounded thresholds of de- of the road transportation system. The internal
emergence between the emergent layers of the architectures of the human being as an
systems, i.e. we do not notice the meta-systems organism, the automobile design, and the
that are the environment within which the transportation system design are very different
systems operate within the next higher system from each other. There is a recursive nesting of
threshold of emergent organization. Meta- the emergent system properties in each case.
systems naturally hide themselves because But this is dependent on the de-emergent meta-
they are the supporting background to the system properties and their organization at
appearance of the emergent layers of the each level which is especially designed to
recursive system. But the key point is that the accommodate the next lower level in the
de-emergent recursive layers with their hierarchy and its needs. Human System
different organization from that of the system Interface Design is used to produce optimal
are just as necessary as the emergent accommodations between the technical system
organization of system the itself. The meta- and the human being. Urban planning and
system makes room for, offers niches, and Civil Engineering is used to produce optimal
offers resources for the sub-systems within the accommodations between the parts of the
system, or the system within the system of Roadway Transportation System which is part
systems (super-system). of Local and State government operations.
How you design a transportation system is
Let us take an example that we are all familiar completely different from how you design an
with. The Automobile we drive is a system automobile. And this is very different from

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

how nature designed a human organism. This distinction between them.

example should give some idea of the nature of
meta-systemic interfaces within nested A system and a meta-system are inverse duals
systems, and how the meta-systems themselves of each other. We engineer and design both
are nested between the emergent system layers. systems and meta-systems. However, the meta-
The meta-system layers are de-emergent system design is always de-emphasized and
because in each case the totality of effects of a difficult to pin down no matter how crucial its
given emergent system layer is not unified at interface is with the system. This is because we
the interface. Notice how when you look at the just naturally see systems and naturally look
automobile interface with the driver and through meta-systems without seeing them.
passengers that the various interface One way to understand this
components are scattered around within the phenomenologically is to think of the system
interior of the automobile. The same is true of as a gestalt while the meta-system is the
the automobile when it interfaces with the background of the gestalt. Since the gestalt is
components of the road transportation system, both figure (form) and ground, then the gestalt
the various components of that interface, like is something that appears on a deeper ground
stoplights, signs, lines on the road, curbs, etc of the meta-system for which the gestalt is the
are scattered around the landscape that the road new equivalent of the figure. We call this
you are driving is built upon. The interface deeper ground of the meta-system a ‘proto-
design of different automobiles is very gestalt.’ We have no standard name for this
different and that has to do with the placement even though it is an omnipresent phenomena.
of the interface devices and their functionality We talk about gestalts in psychology all the
in controlling the automobile or offering time and understand that everything we see is a
services or accommodation to the passengers. figure on a background. But what is seldom
Similarly the external design of the look of the discussed is that there is a deeper background
automobiles is designed to be taken in at a on which all the gestalts appear. Something
glance. It’s interface features are spares and has to determine the order in which we look at
limited to egress and ingress as well as the gestalts. That something by which we take
servicing. The design of the exterior is done in in our whole environment in a blink1 is the
such a way that the vision of the whole is proto-gestalt. The proto-gestalt has an
emphasized . If an automobile hits a pedestrian implicate order as discussed by Bohm in
or another automobile then the full causal force Wholeness and the Implicate Order. It also
of the emergent system comes into play. But if relates to our ‘tacit knowledge’ rather than our
we sit in a car in normal operation then the explicit knowledge as discussed by Michael
interface elements within the car do not come Polanyi2. Sanders3 discusses the concept of
into play all at once but are dispersed and indwelling as the key to understanding tacit
activated at different times in different knowledge. And this is precisely right because
circumstances. Similarly when the automobile we ourselves are systems indwelling in meta-
is within the Road Transportation System systems as environments and ecologies, but
environment it does not make use of all the also in markets and within various forms of
elements of that interface (lights, signs, lines, media. But we also project systems as gestalts
curbs, etc.) at the same time. One way that we on the deeper backgrounds of the proto-
see the entire road system coming into play gestalts within our lifeworld. We are dwelling
simultaneously is in Gridlock and in Traffic in the meta-systemic environments we project
Jams which may be brought on by a variety of as the backgrounds for the systemic gestalts we
circumstances like for instance accidents. But
the key point is that a meta-system interface is 1
dispersed while the emergent effects of a 2
system is usually focused. This difference 3
Sanders, Andy F. Michael Polanyi's Post-Critical
between the way that meta-system and system Epistemology: A Reconstruction of Some Aspects of
are organized is key to understanding the "Tacit Knowing". Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988.

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

see on those backgrounds. In this circumstance changing location, both of these examples of
of indwelling in meta-systemic environments meta-systemic things can bring you the
we understand though tacit knowledge the information or the goods right to your door, or
implicate orders of those habitats, and we even deliver it inside your house. The same is
develop our own habitus4 though which we true of the Environment or the Ecosystem, you
routinely or habitually deal with things in those are within them right where you are without
environments. having to move from one location to another.
All examples of meta-systems are like this,
The way to think about the meta-system from a they describe ubiquitous resources that are
perceptual point of view is how things look delivered where you are without having to
from a particular point in the environment necessarily change your location. A market,
from that point to the horizon, if we do not the corner shop, brings goods near your home
move. The whole panorama from a given point and offers them to you for purchase. A market
in the environment is the meta-system. Once is a way to offer up goods or services that are
we add movement, so that we can look back at resources that can be bought and sold normally
the starting point from a different point then though a medium of exchange like a currency
we have moved out of the Meta-system into being used as the basis for the transactions
the Domain schema. It is this deeper horizon within the market. Notice we use the term
around the configuration system or the medium for the money that makes the
stationary dynamic system that we call the transactions possible. But what is normally
meta-system. In a sense the meta-system takes offered in a market is some commodity or
the system boundary and projects it onto the resource that is needed or desired. But many
furthest horizon that is visible from the times we want to be informed buyers, and thus
standpoint of the system without moving. We we need information to be delivered to us in
speak of this as the X-scape, whether it be a order to make choices within the market of
landscape, seascape or some other type of what to buy or what to sell. And so in many
scape. In English it is the word ‘scape’ that is ways what the market does is that it takes the
the closest fit for the term meta-system. But environment and brings it to us in a usable
unfortunately the term ‘scape’ normally needs form. The resources from the environment
a qualifier. Thus we will call it the Open- were transformed into this usable form by
scape, where we leave open the qualifier of the labor. Hopefully it is beginning to become
scape. But sometimes we will use the term clear how the terms ‘environment,’
‘Scape’ on its own even though this is a non- ‘ecosystem,’ ‘media,’ and ‘market’ are all part
standard usage. The meta-system is the open- of the same meta-system or open-scape around
scape around the system. The terms the agent who consumes media, consumes
environment and ecosystem do not really products, and lives within an environment
describe it completely because these are whose resources we need in order to us to live
overarching abstractions that relate to our in our niches in the social political economic
place in nature, or the places of other species ecosystem as we experience it in our lifeworld.
in nature. The environment is all the various
Open-scapes that open up around us in nature. If we understand that there is a higher level
The ecosystem is the set of niches for different concept of the meta-system which the market,
species in nature. Media are information feeds the ecosystem, and media are all examples,
that open up within our environment. The then we can begin to use this higher level
market is the trade system that brings us what concept to understand these various
we need without our having to procure each phenomena under the same rubric. If we have a
item ourselves. Notice you can participate in theory of what a meta-system is then we have
trade without moving, and you can participate the beginning of a theory of what a market is,
in the media without moving in terms of or the media, or an ecosystem. Otherwise these
all look like disparate unrelated phenomena
Bourdieu, Pierre, Outline of a Theory of Practice, 1972 from our normal point of view in our tradition.

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

A meta-system is not unified like a system, and the discontinuities played out based on the
it is not totalized either. In fact, it is the topology of the control space. The meta-
opposite of unified and totalized, it is de- system is a marriage of the response space
unified and de-totalized. This is clear when called the arena and the control space which is
one looks at the horizon beyond every system outside the arena. The surface of the boundary
and one notices the variety that normally is the division between these two spaces. The
resides there. That variety is not unified under origin point in the arena can serve as the zero
a single plan, or organization, but may have point of a coordinate system for a metric that
multiple orthogonal plans, or organizations, covers the arena. But this coordinate system
operating simultaneously. The horizon of a does not reach beyond the boundary or the
meta-system is not a hard boundary like that of horizon that encompasses the arena, and thus
the system that forms a meniscus that seals the the meta-system has two parts which are
system and gives it a definite outer skin that isolated from each other. But Systems appear
defines its boundaries in spacetime. The within the area, live out their lifecycles, and
horizon or boundary of the meta-system is interact with each other before they vanish at
merely as far as you can see from the stance of the sink. What is beyond the arena is a
the system within the landscape. It is an phasespace which in catastrophe theory is the
indefinite boundary instead of a definite control space. And that phasespace is of a
boundary as in the System. We can understand higher dimensionality than the arena and
the meta-system by reversing system movements in the control space are mapped
characteristics. This is one example of such a though topological transformations into the
reversal from a definite to an indefinite response space. The phasespace where the
boundary. The meta-system is made up of control surface exists is non-local with respect
complementarities. It is a de-unified and de- to the response space. It is a virtual realm
totalized field if such complementarities. The rather than an actual realm. Thus many of the
main thing to understand about the meta- ideas of Deleuze apply to this relation between
system is its fourfold structure. The major the phasespace beyond the arena and the
complementarities are between Source, Origin systems in the area themselves. This is
(Sink), Boundary (Horizon), and Arena. These described very will be De Landa5.
are the four structural parts of the meta-system.
The arena is the spacetime environment within When we think about the Meta-system as the
which systems appear within the meta-system. panorama of the horizon from a particular
Those systems come into the arena at the place in the landscape, then this virtual realm
origin and they leave at the sink. Within that is what is beyond the horizon that we can see.
arena the systems themselves normally have If we are not moving, then things come and go
anti-system pairs. Many different systems and from this mystical realm beyond the horizon to
anti-systems can interact within the arena. us, but we cannot move the horizon itself.
What is beyond the arena is the area outside its However, phenomenologically we know that
boundary or horizon. There in that exterior there is plenty happening in that realm that
there is a source where the systems and anti- effects the meta-system that we can see when
system templates exist. That source is normally we look out to the horizon. In a sense we can
thought of as a singularity. There may be many think about the fact that early humans probably
singularities in the field beyond the boundary tended not to travel very far from their place of
which is like a virtual phasespace. There may birth throughout their lives except in the case
be also discontinuities there, as well as positive of migrations. So for the most part the wider
feedback vortices in both the positive and world beyond the vicinity of their village was a
negative directions. A good model of this is mysterious realm beyond their ken where
Catastrophe Theory of Rene Thom. In cosmic events came to effect them
Catastrophe Theory there is a control space
with a surface which has a higher dimensional 5
De Landa, Manuel. Intensive Science and Virtual
than the response space within which we see Philosophy. Transversals. London: Continuum, 2002.

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

occasionally. But there was always a reminder were probably fashioned out of the interface
that the wider world was there in the cyclical between our local environment and the wider
movements of the starts and planets nightly. environment beyond the horizon of our local
Thus for early humans this mid-range environment, i.e. the global environment. And
panoramic background, this deeper if we understand that in terms of meta-games
background, had developed into a particular then we understand that what ever game we
layer in our understanding of our place in the are playing might come from somewhere that
world which did not go away but became generates games of the type we are engaged in.
submerged in consciousness as we learned Writing an Artificial Intelligence program that
more about the world, but when we return to generates chess like games and then plays
phenomenological views of our lifeworld we them is much deeper than just writing a
can see that the meta-system layer is still there program that plays chess really well like Deep
and we are still actively projecting it as the Blue from IBM. As Barney Pell says much of
complement to the system. In itself it is the work of that program is based on human
understood as a field of complmentarities as it analysts and so the intelligence is really in the
has been described by Arkady Plotnitsky6. And work of the analyst built into the program and
it lurks in the background as the General not in the program itself. More intelligence is
Economy beyond all our projections of needed to write a program that creates new
Restricted Economies. games and then can play those classes of
games in general rather than a specific game
A game is the archetypal example of a system. like Chess.
And we need to distinguish between the game
and a meta-game7. A meta-system is like a So let us take what we know so far about meta-
meta-game. In the meta-game the program systems and think about markets. First we
generates games and then has tournaments should distinguish between markets and meta-
between players playing the generated games. markets. Meta-markets generate markets for
The template from which the games are agents to trade in. But a given market is an
generated is the source, like an object in object arena for trading agents, and commodities and
oriented programming which has not been currencies of a specific form with specific
instantiated yet. In other words the meta- rules of play. The market has the arena of the
system is an interface to a wider world beyond trading floor traditionally where actual traders
the small area which we know locally, from stand and call out their trades. In that non-
which the small arena we are involved in was virtual market we can see all the aspects we are
generated. Plato says we are like frogs around discussing. There is the trading floor that is the
a pond not aware of the bigger world of which arena. There is the agents that inhabit that
we are part. That bigger world is what the environment trading with each other
Egyptians called the Duat. They saw it as a commodities for a medium of exchange,
world to which they went after they died when money. There are boundaries to that market
they traveled West. The journey across the such as times when you can and cannot trade,
Nile to the West was a metaphorical journey and rules for a trade to legally be within the
between this world and the larger world system which usually attempt to assure
experienced after death, which we now know fairness. But there is a lot of infrastructure and
as Heaven. Many of the ideas of a next life support that makes that trading possible like
the communication infrastructure that allows
Plotnitsky, Arkady. Complementarity: Anti- bids and offers to come to the floor to be
Epistemology After Bohr and Derrida. Durham: Duke traded. So there is a whole horizon of
University Press, 1994. interfaces to other systems that surround the
Pell, Barney. Strategy Generation and Evaluation trading floor. As the trader stands within the
for Meta-Game Playing (Thesis U. Cambridge 1993). trading floor and looks at everything that can be seen to his horizon that is the meta-systemic
tree/p/Pell:Barney.html interface. The complmentarity of the trading

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

transactions is also a sign of the meta-system outside then to you the game is a system.
of the trade. Whatever a meta-system impinges Wittgenstein uses the game metaphor a lot, in
on will have complementarities within it like order to get across his idea of ‘meaning as
those in communication protocols. There is an use.’ This is very similar to the idea of
infrastructure that supports trading, and that Heidegger of the ready-to-hand verses the
can be seen as a system from the point of view present-at-hand modes of being of Dasein8.
of the provider of the trading environment. But When we view the pieces of the game as
from the point of view of the trader it is a ready-to-hand in our play then we have a
meta-system, it is an environment within different relation to the pieces than we do if we
which he does his trades, and outside of which are not playing a game and we see a board on
he cannot trade. The particular trading system display in a shop window. Meaning as use
that is created is only one possibility out of means that the pieces take on their meaning in
many possibilities for arranging for trade, and the way they are used to play the game. Ready-
those possibilities could be generated in the to-hand means that the game forms a totalized
meta-market. The meta-market is always panoply that has a certain practical relation to
trying to come up with new types of markets us as a tool, which we use to play the game
and new kinds of products for trade. And that which is different from merely looking at the
is one of the major ways the financial markets game abstractly and statically as an idea. Both
grow through the proliferation of markets and of these ideas try to distinguish how things
products to trade. But that generation of look when we are indwelling in a meta-system,
possible trading systems, new commodities, rather than when we are looking at things from
new media of exchange all must happen the outside as a system. Markets are different
outside the trading floor of a particular trade from the perspective of the person running the
meta-system. But it shows that there is an market as a whole. To him it is a technological
interface to the virtual environment which is system and a set of rules for access to the
the source of the proliferation of new trading game. The trader or player of the game has a
systems. That innovation cannot occur within a completely different perspective of one
given trading system. A given trading system enveloped by the environment of the game,
is a particular game, and coming up with new who accepts its media, and designate as real
games is different from playing an already the outcomes within the game. What is
established game. But by knowing the meta- confusing is that a market is a real game,
market is there beyond the boundary of the where losses and wins are real outside the
market, we can see how the meta-system has game. It is like the circus in Ancient Rome
more than just a spacetime horizon but also a where the games are life and death contests
horizon to a virtual phasespace where were between gladiators. In the financial market you
new games/markets come from. It is out of this can loose all your money, which is counted as
virtual horizon that emergent events appear to a real catastrophe in the outside world. So the
those within the meta-system. The horizon of market is not a game in that sense. But things
the market is at the same time a spacetime also get confusing when we see a game like
indefinite horizon which is the panorama from Second Life9 where there is virtual money that
the trading floor, and also the virtual horizon then translates out into money in the
with the meta-market/meta-game where a designated as real world. So we can see that it
specific market/game we are engaged in comes is possible for these boundaries between what
from, that by definition must be from beyond is real and what is unreal to become blurred.
the boundary of the given arena. The same is true for other aspects of Being like
Truth, Identity and Presence. Markets as meta-
A game seen from the outside is a system, but systems have a different organization in their
seen from the inside it is a meta-system. If you
are a piece in the game then to you the game is 8
Heidegger’s special term for the human being which
a meta-system. But if you are a player of a means “there-being.”
game controlling all the pieces from the

The Theory of Meta-Systemic Markets -- Kent Palmer

meta-levels10 than systems do. And they defining the meta-levels of Being with respect
control the relations between the aspects of to markets called Pure Markets, Process
Being differently than systems given those Markets, Hyper Markets, Wild Markets and
different meta-level organizations. Thus there Ultra Markets. These are based on the
are essential differences between the system articulations of the meta-levels of Being with
and the meta-system, but in all their respect to the meta-system of the market. Also
characterizes they are complmentarities of we will see how at the various meta-levels the
each other, and part of that complmentarity is aspects of Being differ from each other
the fact that systems are unified and totalized because the meta-levels are emergent. We will
while meta-systems are de-unified and de- contrast the meta-levels of the market as meta-
totalized as a field of complmentarities. The system to the meta-levels of the systems
meta-system is the way that things look from within the market. At each of these levels we
the point of view of the Wizard of Oz. Behind will find differences that make the markets
the curtain is an interface from which the different from systems they contain in essential
Wizard of Oz interfaces with the entirety of Oz ways. And the upshot of this is that we will
to manipulate things behind the scenes. find that only systems can be self-regulating
Dorothy and crew are immersed in the meta- because they have unity and totality while
system but they do not see it from behind the meta-systems do not. Saying that markets are
scenes, just like the audience does not see what self-regulating is a category mistake. It is very
is going on behind the stage during the interesting that this has been the mantra of the
production of a play. But Dorothy comes to see Republicans that has led to de-regulation in our
that there is a meta-system interface there and markets, which has led to bubbles which have
thus wakes up to the behind the scenes goings led to financial crisis. But regulation also
on within Oz. Similarly if traders graduate to views the markets as a system from the point
work for the market themselves then they see of view of government, which can be
the inner workings of the market itself, and externally controlled. We can view a market
how the resources are provided for the traders, from the outside as a system, but this misses
and how access to the market is restricted in the essential nature of the meta-system itself
order for those who run the market to make from the point of view of those within it. So
money from the trades that happen there in the we are not necessarily advocating regulation
form of fees, just as the traders themselves either, but rather the understanding of the
make their money from the fees charged to market as a meta-system, and as essentially
customers who use the market to trade their different from the system. This is a paradigm11
stocks. The market is just one type of meta- or episteme12 shift because meta-systems have
system. There are many different types of been overlooked in our tradition. Until we
meta-systems. But it is an important type of understand meta-systems we will never really
meta-system and one which is ill defined understand the nature of markets in order to
because the broader concept of the meta- come to terms with them and the roles they
system is not well understood that can be a play in our lives. Partially they are out of
basis for defining the difference between these control because we do not have a proper
types. As we define better the meta-system and conceptual apparatus to understand the nature
its characteristics this should allow us to focus of the market as meta-system.
in on the defining elements of the market vis-
a-vis other types of meta-systems, and that
should clarify what a market is. Exploring the
examples should also clarify what the meta-
system is though their similarities.

As we continue in our quest we will be

cf Kuhn Structure of Scientific Revolutions
10 12
‘meta’ here refers to levels of control Foucault, M. The Order of Things