Systemics: Difference between revisions
extention yet |
m Correction |
||
(13 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Systemics''' |
'''Systemics''' is the emerging branch of [[science]] that studies [[holistic]] [[system]]s. It tries to develop logical, mathematical, engineering and philosophical paradigms and frameworks in which physical, technological, biological, social, [[cognitive]] and [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] systems can be studied and developed. Systemics can be considered an alternative name for all research related to [[General Systems Theory]] and [[Systems science]]. |
||
==Introduction== |
== Introduction == |
||
Systems is the [[science]] of [[system]]s. It has been developed by reaction of a tendency in modern science, towards [[reductionist]], immanentist view, according to which knowledge concerning all the parts of a whole would additively entail a complete knowledge of also that whole. Systemics draws methodic attention upon contextuallity making clear the necessity to consider the functionings of the other elements form that system, and furthermore in relation also with the systems from the environment of that system.<ref name = "MMS 02"> Mioara Mugur-Schächter, Alwyn Van der Merwe (2002), ''Quantum Mechanics, Mathematics, Cognition and Action'', 493 pp.</ref> |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | Systemics tends to generalize results obtained in [[cybernetics]], classical [[engineering]] [[systems theory]] and other sciences to derive principles common to many fields, based on [[scientific paradigm]]s. This inclusion of general principles characterizes the philosophy of systems.Systemics also generates many [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] questions, therefore, is closely related to [[contemporary philosophy]], [[intelligence]] research and [[complex systems]]. |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
[[Mario Bunge]] also proposed the term systemics, referring to "the set of theories that focus on the structural characteristics of systems", to replace "general systems theory" in his book on Ontology of systems (1977, p.1). |
|||
== Systemics: Topics == |
|||
Adam Maria Gadomski (1993) proposed the [[holism|holistic]], [[teleology|teleological]] and cognitive point of view on systemics assuming an ''intelligent agent''/[[entity]] as the necessary reference element for any sufficiently complex real-world problem, [http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it/wwwerg26701/Gad-toga.htm (TOGA meta-theory)]. This [[subjective]] "[[closure]]" of the systemic vision of the real world was analyzed later by Hilary Lawson ([[Closure (philosophy)|Closure: a story of everything.]] Routledge, UK, 2001). The essential difference between these two conceptualizations is the TOGA [[pragmatism|pragmatic]] axiom on the [[utility]] of every systemic modeling. It can be expressed as ''no intelligent entity - no problem'' and ''no [[goal]]s - no science''. In such sense TOGA can rather be seen as an approach to a "theory for everything" but not to the "[[theory of everything]]" ([[Stephen Hawking]]). Anyway, the hypotheses on the unification character and the closure of systemics enable to form the following [[proposition]]. |
|||
=== Cognitive and practical motivations === |
|||
Systemics has two related [[motivation]]s, one cognitive and one practical. The cognitive or theoretical rational of systems is, of course, the wish to discover [[similarities]] among systems of all kind despite ther specific differences - e.g. between body temperature control systems and furnace thermostats. The practical motivation for systemics is the need to cope with the hugde and many-sided systems characteristics of [[industrial societies]] - such as communications, networks, factories, hospitals, and armies. This complexity, in particulair the variety of components of such systems, violates the traditional borders among disciplines and calls for a cross-disciplinairy approach.<ref name = "MB 79"/> |
|||
''Every problem can be conceptualized from the perspective of the universal properties of systems''. |
|||
Always more frequently, different systemic points of view are implicitly and explicitly employed in numerous theories, interdisciplinary research and practical problems, such as: [[environmental management]], [[computer science]], [[cultural studies]], [[memetics]], as well as [[systemic medicine]], [[systemic psychology]], [[systemic coaching]]. |
|||
=== Meta language === |
|||
Systemics also generates many [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] questions, therefore, is closely related to [[contemporary philosophy]], [[intelligence]] research and [[complex systems]]. |
|||
Systemics and [[cybernetics]] can be viewed as a [[metalanguage]] of concepts and models for transdisciplinarian use, still now evolving and far from being stabilized. This is the result of a slow process of accretion through inclusion and interconnection of many notions, which came and are still coming from very different disciplines. The process started more than a century ago, but has gathered momentum since 1948 through the pioneering work of [[Norbert Wiener]], [[John von Neumann]], [[Ludwig von Bertalanffy]], [[Heinz von Foerster]] and [[W. Ross Ashby]], among many others.<ref name = "CF 99"> [[Charles François]] (1999), [http://www.uni-klu.ac.at/~gossimit/ifsr/francois/papers/systemics_and_cybernetics_in_a_historical_perspective.pdf Systemics and Cybernetics in a Historical Perspective]. in: ''Systems Research and Behavioral Science'', Vol 16, pp.203-219.</ref> |
|||
For a historical perspective and more detailed discussion related to clasical system properties, see [[Systems theory]]. |
|||
=== Scientific methodology === |
|||
⚫ | |||
The Argentinian-Canadian epistemologist [[Mario Bunge]] developed a very acute critical study of systemics as a scientific methodology, and in a sense philosophy. He debunked some myths concerning abusive holism, but at the same time revindicated the usefulness of systemics, especially in the fourth volume of his '''Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Ontology II. A World of Systems''.<ref name = "CF 99"/> |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
* [[reliability]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
* [[autopoiesis]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
== |
== History == |
||
Untill the [[1940]] every science studies systems of some kind, and every species of systems was studied separately. Since that time a number of specialists joined efforts to launch various cross-disciplinary ventures, such as [[operations research]] and [[cybernetics]]. They suggested that a unified approach to problems in various fields was possible. The discipline that purpots to develop such unified approach is often called "[[general systems theory]]". Paradoxically enoug, this is not a single theory but a whole set of theories - automata theorey, lineair systems theory, control theory, network theory, general Lagrangian dynamics, etc. - unified by a philosophical framework. [[Mario Bunge]] in [[1979]] proposed to call this set systemics, referring to "the set of theories that focus on the structural characteristics of systems".<ref name = "MB 79"> [[Mario Bunge]] (1979). ''A world of systems''. Dordrecht ; Boston, Reidel.</ref> |
|||
⚫ | |||
The term Systemics is used by J.K. Feibleman in his ''Foundations of Empiricismin'' (1962) to name a domain of [[finite]] [[ontology]]. Systemics was a third domain beside categorematics and axiomatics.<ref> James Kern Feibleman (1962), ''Foundations of Empiricismin'', M. Nijhoff.</ref> |
|||
== Applications of systemics == |
|||
;Systemics of learning <ref> Robert E. Young (1992), ''Critical Theory and Classroom Talk'', 65 pp.</ref><ref> Richard A. Lesh, Eric Hamilton, James J. Kaput (2007), ''Foundations for the Future in Mathematics Education'', 245 pp.</ref> |
|||
In the [[1990]]s Robert E. Young developed an systemics for [[learning]] and [[communication]]. He saw systemics as an action-oriented pragmatics. Utterances are construed as meaningful deeds of special kind whose menings are interpretively created by hearers by reference both to the words (lexicon) and structure of words (grammer) to the social situation, and to more general background knowledge of culture. This is precisely [[Habermas]]' view. In systematics, speech and writing related context of social situation and cultural background in several ways. There is said to be a "field" relation and a "mode" relation of all meaning or messages.<ref> Robert E. Young (1996), ''Intercultural Communication: Pragmatics, Genealogy, Deconstruction'', 214 pp.</ref> |
|||
;Other applications |
|||
* Marketing systemics<ref> Wroe Alderson (1965), ''Dynamic Marketing Behavior: A Functionalist Theory of Marketing'', 383 pp.</ref><ref> Wroe Alderson, Ben Wooliscroft, Robert D. Tamilia, Stanley J. Shapiro (2006), ''A Twenty-First Century Guide to Aldersonian Marketing Thought'', 581 pp.</ref> |
|||
== Criticism == |
|||
In 2002 to Mugur-Schächter it looks though systems - the science of systems - were failing to obtain the place which it seemed to have a right to claim in the unraveling of the paradigms which define the general orientations of the various modern sciences. An element of explaination might be that, though the work developed inside the framework of systemics have produced concepts which, here and there, have been seminal, other such concepts aroused resistance.<ref name = "MMS 02"/> |
|||
⚫ | |||
* [[Autopoiesis]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
* [[Reliability]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
== References == |
|||
<references/> |
|||
== Further reading == |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
* [http://www.isss.org/taste.html A Taste of Systemics] By [[Bela H. Banathy]] |
* [http://www.isss.org/taste.html A Taste of Systemics] By [[Bela H. Banathy]] |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
* [http://www.waset.org/iccis07/ International Conference on Cybernetics, Informatics, and Systemics, ICCIS 2007] |
* [http://www.waset.org/iccis07/ International Conference on Cybernetics, Informatics, and Systemics, ICCIS 2007] |
||
* [http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/SCI/Home.asp Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics] |
* [http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/SCI/Home.asp Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics] |
||
Line 44: | Line 61: | ||
[[Category:Systems theory]] |
[[Category:Systems theory]] |
||
[[Category:Systems science]] |
|||
{{Sci-stub}} |
{{Sci-stub}} |
Revision as of 23:27, 25 September 2007
Systemics is the emerging branch of science that studies holistic systems. It tries to develop logical, mathematical, engineering and philosophical paradigms and frameworks in which physical, technological, biological, social, cognitive and metaphysical systems can be studied and developed. Systemics can be considered an alternative name for all research related to General Systems Theory and Systems science.
Introduction
Systems is the science of systems. It has been developed by reaction of a tendency in modern science, towards reductionist, immanentist view, according to which knowledge concerning all the parts of a whole would additively entail a complete knowledge of also that whole. Systemics draws methodic attention upon contextuallity making clear the necessity to consider the functionings of the other elements form that system, and furthermore in relation also with the systems from the environment of that system.[1]
Systemics tends to generalize results obtained in cybernetics, classical engineering systems theory and other sciences to derive principles common to many fields, based on scientific paradigms. This inclusion of general principles characterizes the philosophy of systems.Systemics also generates many metaphysical questions, therefore, is closely related to contemporary philosophy, intelligence research and complex systems.
Charles François, editor of the International Encyclopedia of Cybernetics and Systems, in the 1990s suggested that "Systemics" be used to avoid the familiar and ambiguious terms "systems thinking," "systems science," and "general systems theory."
Systemics: Topics
Cognitive and practical motivations
Systemics has two related motivations, one cognitive and one practical. The cognitive or theoretical rational of systems is, of course, the wish to discover similarities among systems of all kind despite ther specific differences - e.g. between body temperature control systems and furnace thermostats. The practical motivation for systemics is the need to cope with the hugde and many-sided systems characteristics of industrial societies - such as communications, networks, factories, hospitals, and armies. This complexity, in particulair the variety of components of such systems, violates the traditional borders among disciplines and calls for a cross-disciplinairy approach.[2]
Meta language
Systemics and cybernetics can be viewed as a metalanguage of concepts and models for transdisciplinarian use, still now evolving and far from being stabilized. This is the result of a slow process of accretion through inclusion and interconnection of many notions, which came and are still coming from very different disciplines. The process started more than a century ago, but has gathered momentum since 1948 through the pioneering work of Norbert Wiener, John von Neumann, Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Heinz von Foerster and W. Ross Ashby, among many others.[3]
Scientific methodology
The Argentinian-Canadian epistemologist Mario Bunge developed a very acute critical study of systemics as a scientific methodology, and in a sense philosophy. He debunked some myths concerning abusive holism, but at the same time revindicated the usefulness of systemics, especially in the fourth volume of his 'Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Ontology II. A World of Systems.[3]
History
Untill the 1940 every science studies systems of some kind, and every species of systems was studied separately. Since that time a number of specialists joined efforts to launch various cross-disciplinary ventures, such as operations research and cybernetics. They suggested that a unified approach to problems in various fields was possible. The discipline that purpots to develop such unified approach is often called "general systems theory". Paradoxically enoug, this is not a single theory but a whole set of theories - automata theorey, lineair systems theory, control theory, network theory, general Lagrangian dynamics, etc. - unified by a philosophical framework. Mario Bunge in 1979 proposed to call this set systemics, referring to "the set of theories that focus on the structural characteristics of systems".[2]
The term Systemics is used by J.K. Feibleman in his Foundations of Empiricismin (1962) to name a domain of finite ontology. Systemics was a third domain beside categorematics and axiomatics.[4]
Applications of systemics
In the 1990s Robert E. Young developed an systemics for learning and communication. He saw systemics as an action-oriented pragmatics. Utterances are construed as meaningful deeds of special kind whose menings are interpretively created by hearers by reference both to the words (lexicon) and structure of words (grammer) to the social situation, and to more general background knowledge of culture. This is precisely Habermas' view. In systematics, speech and writing related context of social situation and cultural background in several ways. There is said to be a "field" relation and a "mode" relation of all meaning or messages.[7]
- Other applications
Criticism
In 2002 to Mugur-Schächter it looks though systems - the science of systems - were failing to obtain the place which it seemed to have a right to claim in the unraveling of the paradigms which define the general orientations of the various modern sciences. An element of explaination might be that, though the work developed inside the framework of systemics have produced concepts which, here and there, have been seminal, other such concepts aroused resistance.[1]
See also
- Autopoiesis
- Dynamic system
- Meta-knowledge
- Meta-system
- Meta-theory
- Relativism
- Reliability
- System engineering
- Scientific paradigm
- Socio-cognitive
References
- ^ a b Mioara Mugur-Schächter, Alwyn Van der Merwe (2002), Quantum Mechanics, Mathematics, Cognition and Action, 493 pp.
- ^ a b Mario Bunge (1979). A world of systems. Dordrecht ; Boston, Reidel.
- ^ a b Charles François (1999), Systemics and Cybernetics in a Historical Perspective. in: Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol 16, pp.203-219.
- ^ James Kern Feibleman (1962), Foundations of Empiricismin, M. Nijhoff.
- ^ Robert E. Young (1992), Critical Theory and Classroom Talk, 65 pp.
- ^ Richard A. Lesh, Eric Hamilton, James J. Kaput (2007), Foundations for the Future in Mathematics Education, 245 pp.
- ^ Robert E. Young (1996), Intercultural Communication: Pragmatics, Genealogy, Deconstruction, 214 pp.
- ^ Wroe Alderson (1965), Dynamic Marketing Behavior: A Functionalist Theory of Marketing, 383 pp.
- ^ Wroe Alderson, Ben Wooliscroft, Robert D. Tamilia, Stanley J. Shapiro (2006), A Twenty-First Century Guide to Aldersonian Marketing Thought, 581 pp.
Further reading
- Mario Bunge (1979), A world of systems. Dordrecht ; Boston, Reidel.
- Charles François (1999), Systemics and Cybernetics in a Historical Perspective. in: Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Vol 16, pp.203-219.
- Watson, D. E., G. E. Schwartz, L. G. S. Russek (1998), The Theory of Enformed Systems - A Paradigm of Organization and Holistic Systems
- Donald E. Watson (2005), Systemics: The Most Basic Science.