Part Two of this essay focuses on what might be called the third and most recent chapter in the history of self-organization , in which the term has been claimed to denote a paradigm shift or revolution in scientific thinking about complex systems. The developments responsible for this claim began in the late 1960s and came directly out of the physical sciences. They rapidly attracted wide interest and led to yet another redrawing of the boundaries between organisms, machines, and naturally occurring physical systems (such as thunderstorms). In this version of self-organization, organisms are once again set apart from machines precisely because the latter depend on an outside designer, but——in contrast to Kant's ontology——they are now assimilated to patterns in the inorganic world on the grounds that they, too, like many biological phenomena, arise spontaneously.

Over the last quarter century, the term "self-organization" has acquired a currency that, notwithstanding its long history, has been taken to signal a paradigm shift, and perhaps even a scientific revolution, introducing a new Weltanschauungin fields as diverse as mathematics, physics, biology, ecology, cybernetics, economics, sociology, and engineering. But there is a prehistory to this revolution, as to the term itself, with at least two earlier episodes in which the same term was used to signal two other, quite different revolutions. In this paper, I review the pre-history of "self-organization," starting with Immanuel Kant, who first introduced the term, and then turn to the dramatic reframing of the concept by mid-twentieth century engineers. In a subsequent paper, I will review the more recent history of this concept when the term was once again reframed, this time by physicists. My aim will be to situate this latest incarnation of "self-organization" against the backdrop of earlier discussions.