"A new approach towards the unity of science" (Ludwig von Bertalanffy).
"A new paradigm of contemporary scientific thought" (Ervin Laszlo).
"From the atom to the galaxy, we live in a world of systems" (Ludwig von Bertalanffy).
The Concept of System
The word "system" comes from the Greek "systema", which means "union of things in an organized manner". It is composed of "syn" (together) and "histemi" (to establish). The suffix "ma" indicates "result" (such as axiom, theorem, morpheme, etc.).
The concept of system is the most universal concept that exists, if we except the concept of "Being". However, because of this universality, it is ambiguous. Its various meanings have been incorporated into our everyday language. In general, we consider an organization as a system, such as a living organism, a factory, a community, a family, a social group, etc. We speak of political, social, monetary, fiscal, health, information, operational, philosophical, ecological, nervous, circulatory, digestive, electrical, educational, defense, etc. systems. In a colloquial way we also say that we have a system to solve a problem or to achieve a goal. There is no standard definition or conception of a system.
Here are some definitions of system:
"A system is a set of interrelated elements" (Ludwig von Bertalanffy).
"A system is a set of parts working toward a common goal" (Jay Forrester).
"Systems are structures that function as a whole, due to the relationships between their parts" (Anatol Rapoport).
"A system is defined as any set of variables that the observer selects from those available in the real machine" (William Ross Ashby).
"A group of interacting and interdependent items that form a unified whole" (Webster's Dictionary).
"A set of rules or principles on a subject rationally linked together" and "A set of things that are related to each other in an orderly fashion and contribute to a certain object" (RAE Dictionary).
System is different from set. A set is a collection of elements, without horizontal relationships between them. There is only a vertical relation of belonging of each element to the set.
A structured set is a set with some kind of horizontal (static) relationship between the elements, as for example, the mathematical concept of group, which has an internal operation that associates to every two elements of the group a third element of the same group. According to Bertalanffy's (generic) definition, a structured set is a system. But, in general, a system is considered to be dynamic.
A system is a structured set of dynamic type whose elements interact with each other and that can present properties that are not present in the elements nor in their relationships. These are "emergent" properties, such that the system has an identity that transcends its elements and their relationships.
The concept of system goes back, in Western civilization, to the ancient Greeks, such as Aristotle and Heraclitus, who formulated great general systemic principles: "The whole is more than the sum of its parts" (Aristotle. Metaphysics), "Everything flows, everything is in continuous motion" (Heraclitus). In Eastern civilization, the most ancient and universal (or general) system is the I Ching [see Appendix].
Hegel adopted a general systemic principle in his work "Phenomenology of Spirit": "Everything is related to everything".
The questions
With respect to the concept of system several questions may be raised:
Is there an absolute or universal system that is the foundation of all other particular systems?
Are there characteristics common to all systems?
Are there concrete and abstract systems?
Is a science a system? Is mathematics a system?
Do systems need a special language or is mathematics enough?
Is a universal language possible to formalize all kinds of systems?
Characteristics of systems
Totality.
A system is a totality (a car, a house, a nation, etc.) and which has a goal. It is a set of elements that functions as a whole. A system is understood in a global, synthetic, total way. A system is not understandable by analyzing its individual components, and the parts cannot be understood in isolation or independently, without considering that they are part of something higher, the whole. Nothing can be understood in isolation, because everything is part of a system.
Alternative terms to "system" have been suggested to refer to an interrelated whole. The most significant and popular has been "holon". One speaks of "holistic thinking" or "thinking with holons". Holons are parts that contain the pattern of relationships with the whole.
Synergy.
In a system, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. There are emergent properties that are not found in the component elements. For example, water has properties that its components (hydrogen and oxygen) do not have.
Interdependence.
A system is a network of dynamic relationships between its elements. The parts of a system are interdependent, they are dynamically interrelated through processes of mutual interaction.
Hierarchy.
In any system there are usually levels of organization, especially in living systems. A system is composed of subsystems.
Types of systems.
Systems can be: static or dynamic, open or closed (depending on whether or not they exchange matter, energy or information with the environment), active or passive, concrete (tangible) or abstract (intangible), evolutionary (living) or non-evolutionary (mechanical), reversible or non-reversible, regulated or unregulated, natural or artificial, real or imaginary, flat (with only one level) or non-flat (with several levels).
Structure.
Sometimes a static structure is considered as a system, with its subsystems. For example, a building has a structure consisting of floors, rooms, and so on. There are subsystems of water, electricity, etc. A tree has a root, trunk, branches and leaves.
Synthetic consciousness.
The concept of system is closely linked to synthetic consciousness. Thanks to it we perceive totalities and objectives.
General Systems Theory
Formulated by the biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy in the 1930s, General Systems Theory (GST) is an integrative approach based on the generic aspects, correspondences, parallelisms and isomorphisms common to all sciences, including analogies between natural (organisms) and artificial (machines) systems.
The integrating concept of the theory is that of "general system": a set of elements interrelated with each other and with the environment, contemplated as a whole, working to achieve a common goal and exhibiting properties that the individual elements do not have. This
This definition is valid for all types of systems: a cell, a society or a galaxy. The theory is called "general" because it studies systems, regardless of whether they are physical, biological, social or psychological systems.
Bertalanffy's research program sought to answer the central question of biology: what is life? He did not succeed in answering this key question, but his research provided a number of important insights that shaped his theory.
The main objectives of GST are:
Develop a theory based on general concepts, general laws and a general language for modeling all types of systems.
To provide a general, superior and transdisciplinary view of all particular disciplines.
To promote the unity of science through the search for general principles and unifying methodologies.
Open system
GST is based on the concept of "open system". With Bertalanffy a new epistemological era begins by distinguishing between open and closed systems. The concept of open system is Bertalanffy's major contribution.
Definition.
An open system is a system that exchanges matter, energy or information with the environment. In this way, it communicates directly with the environment and indirectly with other systems. Living systems are open systems. A social group is also an open system. The most general system that exists is that of an open system, that is, one that can interrelate with the environment. In general, in an open system, the boundary between system and environment is blurred.
A closed system is a particular case of the open one: when the interaction with the environment is zero. A closed system tends to a greater indifferentiation of its elements and to the greatest possible disorder, until a uniform distribution is reached. Physics deals with closed systems. A closed physical system is governed by the second law of thermodynamics (the law of entropy), established by Sadi Carnot: every isolated physical system tends towards increasing disorder, towards greater entropy. Entropy is a measure of the disorder of the system.
Evolution.
An open system constantly evolves and tends towards the highest possible internal order, increasing its level of complexity, organization and differentiation. An open biological system follows Darwin's theory of evolution, and evolves from disorder to order.
Adaptation.
An open system has the capacity to adapt to the environment and to self-organize. This adaptation produces a dynamic equilibrium, in which the opposites between stability and work (or effort) are harmonized, following the principle of maximum economy. An open system maintains its own identity in relation to the environment.
Teleology.
An open system has a teleological or finalistic behavior, i.e. it is goal-oriented. The purpose (or goal) of a system can be multiple. In turn an objective may have sub-objectives. An objective may simply be to maintain its equilibrium state. (The term "teleological" was created by Norbert Wiener, the founder of Cybernetics).
Organicity.
An open system is organic in nature. An action that produces a change in one of the units of the system can produce changes in the other units. The system always reacts globally, holistically. The more profound the change in one of the units, the greater the impact on the whole system.
Feedback.
Life is the manifestation of an open system and where the concept of feedback is essential. In an open system, causality is not linear or unidirectional, but circular: A causes B, B causes C, C causes A.
Activity.
An open system is active. In contrast, a closed system is reactive. An organism is not a passive mechanism that reacts to environmental stimuli, but an autonomous active system. The functions of an open system depend only on its structure.
Hierarchy.
Open systems are hierarchically structured. There are systems within systems. For example, in biology there are cells, tissues, organs, organisms, colonies, societies. etc.
The union of mind and life.
From the GST point of view, life and mind are manifestations of the same set of deep systemic principles, representing the dynamics of organization. Mind is an essential property of living systems. "Mind is the essence of being alive" (Gegory Bateson).
Characteristics of the GST
General theory.
GST is a general theory, a meta-theory (theory of theories) about the complex systems of nature, science and society, a theory based on the principles common to all systems. It is an abstract theory starting from the abstract concept of "system" and it is also a theory of knowledge.
Universal science.
GST claims to be the universal science, unseating physics as the "mother science" of all sciences. It does not seek analogies, isomorphisms or superficial correspondences, but the deep aspects of all things, the concepts, patterns or categories presented by all the systems of all sciences. It is a meta-science, the science of totality, the "skeleton" of science.
GST claims to be the science of the whole, a discipline of disciplines, the deep science underlying all surface manifestations, the essence common to all. A science with its own language, its own laws and its own methods. Systemic laws manifest themselves as analogies or logical homologies between laws that belong to different phenomena or that appear in different disciplines.
According to the positivist (of the Vienna Circle) Rudolf Carnap [2012], the unity of science is guaranteed by the fact that all sentences in science can ultimately be expressed by means of the language of physics. Therefore, the language of physics is the universal language of science. Bertalanffy replied to Carnap: "The unity of science is based, not on a utopian reduction of all sciences to physics and chemistry, but by the structural uniformities of the different levels of reality" [Bertalanffy, 1976].
Humanism.
GST has humanistic characteristics due to the search for generic, basic and simplifying concepts that bring science closer to normal man and allow him a greater understanding of the phenomena by contemplating them from a general point of view.
Overcoming dualisms.
GST attempts to overcome dualisms: between mechanicism and vitalism, between reductionism and holism, between the analytic and the synthetic (or holistic), between the quantitative and the qualitative, between the superficial and the deep, between the general and the particular, between determinism and teleology (behavior oriented to an end), etc.
This overcoming of dualisms is carried out by GST by emphasizing holism rather than analysis, integration over differentiation, unity over diversity, general over particular, for the general must be considered first and then the particular.
Bertalanffy considered as precedents for this overcoming of dualisms, among others, the philosophy of Leibniz (for his search for a universal language based on general principles), the philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa (for his coincidence of opposites, coincidence oppositorum) and the dialectics of Marx and Hegel.
Consciousness.
GST promotes a general or global consciousness of the essential unity of all that exists and the interconnectedness of all things. It is consciousness also that unites the opposites, the two modes of consciousness (synthetic and analytical).
Universal paradigm.
GST is intended to be a universal paradigm, a new integrative vision of the world. The world is seen, not as a mechanical and deterministic system, but as a large organized system. The paradigm of GST is synthetic and integrative, in contrast to the analytical, rationalistic, reductionist and mechanistic paradigm of classical science, based on deterministic causal relationships. The latter approach is represented by the philosophy of Descartes' Discourse of Method: to study any complex phenomenon or system by decomposing it into as many simple and independent elements as possible.
Philosophy.
GST is a generic philosophy. According to Bertalanffy, one can speak of a systems philosophy, since every far-reaching scientific theory has metaphysical aspects. GST is concerned with the perennial problems of philosophy, to which it tries to provide its own answers.
General model.
A general system is a conceptual model of the common characteristics of all phenomena and entities. The use of models constitutes the general method of science and that of cognition. Our own view of the world is a model.
Transdisciplinarity.
GST is a discipline that tries to find common properties, isomorphisms and analogies in different systems that occur at all levels of reality. The concepts, models and principles relating to systems are transdisciplinary in nature, with a common vocabulary and common concepts. At a high level of abstraction, isomorphisms, analogies and correspondences are found. For all these reasons, GST points the way to the unification of scientific knowledge.
Bertalanffy's dream was to build a universal language for science based on a system of interrelated concepts powerful enough to enable interdisciplinary communication.
Systemic properties.
There are concepts such as information, control, feedback, stability, etc. that were born in certain specific technological fields but have a much broader significance, as they are interdisciplinary in nature. These concepts are called "systemic properties".
Formal language.
GST aims to rely on a formal language or metalanguage, but recognizes that the current mathematics is not fully satisfactory because GST should not be constrained by the conceptual model imposed by mathematics. In fact, there are systemic problems whose treatment requires concepts hitherto non-existent in mathematics. "It is necessary to search for a gestalt-type mathematics, in which the notion of relation, rather than quantity, is fundamental" [Bertalanffy, 1979].
Universalism.
GST is a manifesto of universalism, a way to overcome the fragmentation of knowledge, the search for essence, for unity in diversity.
GST basics
Equifinality.
A system can reach the same final state from different initial conditions and by different paths.
Equipotentiality.
It is the possibility of obtaining different states starting from the same initial situation.
Homeostasis (or morphostasis).
It is the dynamic equilibrium between an open system and its environment. Systems have a tendency to adapt in order to reach a balance between the internal and the external (the environment). Homeostasis − from the Greek "homo", similar, and "stasis", stability− is the characteristic of a system, usually a living organism, that regulates the internal environment in order to maintain a stable and constant condition.
The concept of homeostasis was introduced in physiology in 1932 by Walter Bradford Cannon to study the relative stability of certain physiological variables. For example, mammalian body temperature is constant in the face of changing environmental temperature. William Ross Ashby generalized this concept by applying it to cybernetic systems in general. It was initially applied in biology but, since the concept is general, GST and other sciences have also adopted this term.
Morphogenesis.
It is contrary to homeostasis. It is the force or tendency that produces changes in the system. This concept was introduced by Magoroh Maruyama, who stated that living beings depend for their survival on two processes: 1) Morphostasis, the negative feedback that tends to stabilize it; 2) Morphogenesis, the positive or amplifying feedback. These two processes balance each other.
Feedback.
It is an output of the system that becomes input, thus closing the cycle and creating a circular causality. Circularity is a form or approach to consciousness because it unites opposites (input and output).
There are two types of feedback: positive and negative. Negative feedback corresponds to that of an adaptive and convergent behavior with an aim or objective, which is the state of equilibrium. It activates the internal mechanisms (homeostatic) of the system to maintain its steady state. For example, the driver of a car on a road is an example of negative feedback, since the driver corrects the state of the car at all times according to the environment. Another example is that of a thermostat.
Positive feedback moves it away from the equilibrium state, growing divergence. For example, a snowball falling down a slope. With positive feedback the growth mechanisms (morphogenesis) for change are activated.
Entropy.
It is a meta-magnitude: it measures the level of disorder of a system (although it really measures the variation of disorder). The greater the disorder, the greater the entropy. As entropy increases, systems break down into simpler components. Closed systems seek equilibrium, the most neutral, the undifferentiated, the maximum disorder.
Entropy is a concept introduced by Rudolf Clausius in the 19th century. In a closed system, entropy always increases: dS > 0. In an open system dS = dSi + dSe, where dSi is the increase in internal entropy and dSe is the increase (positive or negative) in external entropy due to communication with the environment.
Neguentropy (or negative entropy) measures the degree of order of a system. Information is a measure of the order of a system. When information increases, entropy decreases, i.e., order, neguentropy, increases.
Heuristics.
Heuristics, which combine reason and intuition, the particular and the general, are used to deal with the complexity of a system.
Autopoiesis
"Autopoiesis" −from the Greek "auto" (self) and "poiesis" (creation or production)− is a neologism created in 1971 by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela (who describe it in their work "The Tree of Knowledge") to explain the organization of biological systems as self-referent beings. Self-reference is a type of autonomy. A living being is capable of self-regeneration through a circular, self-referential or reentrant organization. An autopoietic system continuously produces itself using resources from the environment, such that producer and product, doing and being, subject and object, are the same thing.
Autopoiesis can be considered a paradigm shift in general open systems theory.
James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis is that the Earth is an autopoietic system, a living organism, which has the ability to regulate itself and create itself.
The concept of autopoiesis has been the subject of controversy and debate. This concept was born in biology but has been adopted by other sciences.
Autopoiesis is the capacity of any living organism to produce itself, to constitute by itself its own identity and to produce its own relationships with its environment. Autopoietic systems are structurally closed (they are self-referent systems), but functionally open with their environment.
Living beings are self-referent autonomous beings. Not every autonomous entity is a living entity. Self-reference is a type of autonomy and is what characterizes living beings. Living systems are simultaneously autonomous systems and dependent on the environment.
The theory of autopoiesis, although it relies on cybernetic theory, contributes two important concepts:
Structural coupling.
It refers to the capacity of a living being to evolve, to restructure itself, to constantly change its structure in a flexible and congruent way with the modifications of the environment. Its structural dynamics, its possible structural changes are predetermined. There is structural determinism: what happens to the living being depends on its structure. This circular structural coupling, of constant dialogue being-environment, occurs at multiple levels. "Autopoietic systems have neither inputs nor outputs. They can be perturbed by independent events and undergo internal structural changes that compensate for these perturbations" [Maturana & Varela, 1980].
Operational closure.
Living beings are closed systems from an operational or functional point of view. In order for life to be possible, it is necessary for the living being to close itself, to close itself to the environment, in such a way that, in the face of the dynamics of the environment, its functionality, its identity, its autonomy, its totality, remain unchanged. Operational closure is due precisely to its self-referential quality. The nervous system of the living being has operational closure. "The circularity of living and social systems is indeed Ariadne's thread that allows us to understand their capacity for autonomy" (Francisco Varela).
That is, living beings are structurally open and functionally closed.
Organization is the essence of life. It is the set of possible relationships of the autopoietic processes of an organism. It is its autopoietic "space", its space of freedom.
The structure is the accidental of life. It is the selection, at each moment, of organized wholes to sustain functionality.
When a perturbation occurs in the environment, a "structural coupling" takes place which, maintaining the organization, leads to structural changes for the reestablishment of the homostatic equilibrium.
There are 3 types or orders of autopoietic systems: 1) cells; 2) organisms (cellular aggregates), which have a nervous system; 3) aggregates of organisms (families, societies, colonies, beehives, etc.), whose main characteristic is not their components (organisms), but the relationships between them. According to Maturana and Varela [1980], the establishment of an autopoietic system is not a gradual process; a system is either autopoietic or it is not.
At a fundamental level, the goal of an autonomous or autopoietic system is survival, i.e., the maintenance of its essential organization. And there are subsidiary goals such as: maintaining its temperature, eating, etc. that contribute to its survival.
Artificial systems, such as a thermostat or an autopilot, are apparently autonomous, but they are not really autonomous as their primary objective is implemented by their designers. These systems are said to be "allopoietic". Their function is to produce something other than itself.
Self-reproduction can be considered as a special case of autopoiesis, where the self-produced components are not used to regenerate the system, but to form a copy of it.
The concept of autopoiesis has overflowed the boundaries of biology to be applied in other domains such as sociology, anthropology, psychotherapy, etc., having become a worldview, an important concept for investigating reality and for modeling many types of systems. For example, the sociologist Niklas Luhman [1996] has applied it to the study of societies in contexts of contingency and risk. Luhman's claim is to create a super-theory applicable to all social phenomena. His current work is considered one of the most important theoretical studies produced in the field of sociology. Highlights are:
Society is an autopoietic system, that is, it is autonomous and functions thanks to the production of its own components. It is autonomous, not only at the structural level, but also at the level of control of the organization of its structures.
Socialization is possible because an emergent form, a new order of reality, emerges: a closed (autopoietic) network of communication. Communications take place within the system. Society is an operationally closed and self-referential network of communication.
Communication is the structural coupling and makes us maintain social organization. Civilization is the consequence of communication.
Social systems are structurally determined systems.
Human beings are beings dependent on the emergent network of a higher type, which is society.
However, Varela rejected that autopoietic concepts could be applied to social systems, restricting it exclusively to biological systems.
Hierarchy of systems
Economist Kenneth Boulding wrote in 1956 an influential article entitled "The General Theory of Systems: The Skeleton of Science" [Boulding, 1956], in which he posited a classification of systems into a 9-level hierarchy:
Static structure. Or frame of reference.
Simple dynamic system. It is mechanical or clockwork, with predetermined, deterministic motions.
Cybernetic or equilibrium system. It has a control mechanism that self-regulates it to maintain its equilibrium.
Open or self-structured, self-reproducing system. It is the level of the cell, where life begins to differentiate.
Genetic-associative system. Plants.
Animal system. They have mobility, teleological behavior and self-awareness.
Human system. An individual being with consciousness and linguistic and symbolic capacity.
Social organizations.
Transcendental or absolute system.
Systemic thinking
Bertalanffy was the introducer of systems thinking. There is currently no clearly established body of knowledge on this subject. It encompasses a wide variety of principles, theories, methods and techniques. And the diversity of systems is reflected in the diversity of terms: systems engineering, systems theory, systems analysis, and so on. Nevertheless, we can say that systems thinking is a cognitive process that has the following characteristics:
It contemplates reality under the concept of system, that is, in terms of processes, connections, relationships and interactions that make up a unit or totality.
It considers that all systems have certain common principles, which are studied by systemics.
The essence of everything lies not in the concrete (matter) but in the abstract (the immaterial), in the patterns and processes in which matter is involved. The emphasis is on organization, not substance.
It seeks to understand the whole (the system) and its parts (the subsystems), the relationships between the parts and the whole, and the relationship between the whole and its context or environment (the supersystem). Systemic thinking is thinking in relationships, interconnections, processes, hierarchies, etc.
It considers everything interconnected and interdependent. It is the maxim "Everything is interconnected with everything".
Uses analysis and synthesis. It is holistic and reductionist at the same time. Holism only considers the synthesis, the global, the global patterns. Reductionism only considers the analysis of the parts.
It considers the opposites as complementary and interdependent of a superior unity. It transcends holism and reductionism, the analytical and the synthetic, the general and the particular, the superficial and the profound. Opposites coexist in harmonious equilibrium, both forming part of a unity.
As opposed to fragmentary thinking, systemic thinking considers totalities. Fragmentary thinking becomes systemic when we recover the awareness that the totality always precedes the parts. It is a Copernican vision that considers first the central (or deep) and then the peripheral (or superficial).
As opposed to competitive thinking, it is cooperative. Competitive becomes cooperative when we discover that everything shares in the deep the same nature, the same being.
As opposed to passive and reactive behavior, it is active, with the capacity for initiative.
Simplifies models because it integrates the parts and the whole in the same conceptual framework. Complexity arises when trying to integrate ideas that are mutually exclusive in a reductionist frame of thought.
It is of great importance for solving global problems. The great challenge of systems thinking is to understand the world as a single system, as a universal system.
There have been several criticisms of systems thinking, including the following:
It is too general. It uses intuitive, diffuse, vague, and at the same time obvious, common-sense concepts that contribute nothing.
The concepts are little or not at all formalized, without an integrating theoretical framework. Therefore, it cannot be considered as a formal discipline.
It is associated with control, totalitarianism and manipulation of knowledge, by promoting "single thinking".
It pretends to be holistic, but paradoxically, it is reductionist, as it reduces everything to just a few concepts.
According to some, systems thinking constitutes a danger to the edifice of science, a regression to dark ages because it includes meta-scientific notions that were previously considered alien to science. It is precisely to avoid this that a formalized and consistent language, such as that used in the analytical sciences, is required.
Systems philosophy
Systems Philosophy is a doctrine created by Ervin Laszlo in 1972 described in his book "Introduction to Systems Philosophy". It is a derivation, generalization or philosophical foundation of GST:
It tries to clarify the concepts and their relationships used in GST and in Systemics in general.
It is a form of systems thinking. According to Laszlo, "systemism" is the best possible synthetic philosophy. Its aim is to create a root or universal paradigm (or metaphor).
It tries to be a realistic, practical type of philosophy by applying the concepts and methods of GST.
There is an ultimate, underlying reality that is ordered, intelligible and analyzable in terms of great principles that are both scientific and philosophical in nature. Science and philosophy can describe that reality under a systemic perspective. This conception is the most efficient from which all particular theories can be developed. Any other approach is less efficient. The challenge is to find those principles that ground science and philosophy.
Laszlo is a philosopher of science, founder of the Club of Budapest and co-founder of the "General Evolutionary Research Group", an initiative for a better world.
Systems philosophy was already contemplated by Bertalanffy, who divided systems into 3 categories, from greater to lesser depth: 1) Systems philosophy; 2) Systems theory; 3) Technological systems. Bertalanffy's GST is a meeting point between philosophy, science and technology.
Theory of General Evolution
Laszlo is also the author of the Theory of General Evolution, a sort of crossover or junction between the GST and the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution.
Neo-Darwinism, also called "synthetic theory of evolution, is the synthesis of classical Darwinism with modern genetic theory. According to neo-Darwinism, evolution is produced by two fundamental causes: 1) Genetic variability, which takes place at the micro level, the genotype, through mutations and genetic recombinations produced at random within a population; 2) Natural selection, which takes place at the macro level, the phenotype.
Today, most evolutionary biologists accept neo-Darwinism as the true and complete theory of evolution. Richard Dawkins is the major proponent and popularizer of neo-Darwinism.
Laszlo divides the systems of the world into three classes: 1) Systems that are in equilibrium; 2) Systems that are close to equilibrium; 3) Nonlinear systems that are far from thermodynamic equilibrium. Laszlo focuses on the latter, which he calls "third state", which are open systems, such as living and social systems. These systems are capable of "importing" energy across their boundaries with the environment, increasing their complexity and their internal organization. These systems are always on the border of chaos. They are self-creative, autopoietic systems, systems that produce themselves. Through this creativity, the system can jump to a new higher state of higher order, but also out of equilibrium.
Evolution progresses by sudden jumps that give rise to subspecies (or variants of species). These leaps occur at bifurcation points, moving away from chaos and accessing higher order, higher organization and complexity.
The key factor of evolution is "convergence": the tendency of third state systems to form cooperative hypercycles. This explains why high levels of complexity are reached in a short time.
Evolution is directional, not teleological. It is directed toward states far from equilibrium, where life and intelligence are.
Human societies are third-state systems. They evolve, they are autopoietic. Convergence (cooperation, in short), plays a key role in the formation of social structures, from tribes to nations to international organizations. When these societies decline, they may bifurcate into chaos or into a new, higher social form.
The bifurcation has two alternatives: 1) Increasing fragmentation and confrontation to plunge into chaos; 2) Leap to a new systemic and cooperative world order.
From GST to Systemics
Although the concept of system is ancient, the concept of general system and the ideas of GST are relatively recent. In the second half of the 20th century it was consolidated as a science, thanks mainly to Bertalanffy's ideas. In the face of increasing specialization in science by forming specialized fields, Bertalanffy pushed for the unity of science. GST emerged from the field of biology, with Bertalanffy's work. The concept of organism was the germ of GST, trying to integrate or overcome the dualism "mechanism - vitalism".
The "general system" paradigm had a biological origin (through Bertalanffy), but was also enriched by Gestalt psychology and consolidated by information theory and cybernetics.
Gestalt psychology is a stream of modern psychology, which emerged in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century. The term "Gestalt" first introduced by Christian von Ehrenfels has no unique translation, although it is generally understood as "form", "figure" "structure" or "configuration". Gestalt psychology uses a holistic approach to understand the processes of perception and cognition. One does not perceive parts but "totalities" (gestalten). Perception is more an active than a passive process. The observer perceives according to the "glasses" through which he contemplates reality. The gestalt conception that "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" became the great systemic principle, a principle that had already been formulated by Aristotle in his Metaphysics.
In the establishment of GST as a science collaborated, besides Bertalanffy, mainly: Anatol Rapoport (psychomathematician), Kenneth E. Boulding (economist), William Ross Ashby (neurologist), Margaret Mead (cultural anthropologist), Heinz von Foerster (scientist and cyberneticist) and Gregory Bateson (the anthropologist, social scientist, linguist and cyberneticist).
Bertalanffy introduced the ideas of GST in the 1930s, but his first paper on this subject was published in 1945 (after the Second Great War), in German. In the 1950s he published two papers in English [1950, 1951]. The full details of his theory appeared in his 1968 work "The General Theory of Systems" [Bertalanffy, 1976].
At the AAAS meeting (The American Association for the Advancement of Science) in 1956 in Palo Alto (California), between Kenneth Boulding (economist), Anatol Rapoport (biomathematician), Ralph Gerard (neurophysiologist), James Grier Miller (biologist) and Ludwig von Bertalanffy himself (biologist), they founded the Society for General Systems Research (SGSR), with 3 objectives: 1) To search for generic theoretical models, common to the different fields of science; 2) To minimize effort by avoiding repeating theoretical studies of different fields; 3) To promote the unity of science.
Subsequently, in 1988, the SGSR became a division of AAAS and changed its name: International Society for Systems Sciences (ISSS) , the world organization for systems sciences. Given the diversity of topics to be addressed, the ISSS has created several research areas, the GIS (General Investigation Systems). For example, area number 3 is called "Spirituality and Systems".
Systemics
Today, GST has been generalized to constitute the domain of "Systemics", the science of systems. Since everything can be considered a system, since nothing is isolated, Systemics has the claim to be the universal science.
The disciplines that handle generic concepts are considered to be particular sciences, disciplines or domains of Systemics. In addition to Bertalannfy's original GST, there are the following:
Cybernetics, the science of control and communication in animal and machine, created in 1942 by Norbert Wiener. He introduced the important concepts of feedback, self-regulation, self-organization and teleology.
Information and Communication Theory, initially created in 1948 by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver.
System Dynamics.
It was created in the late 1950s by Jay Forrester, at the Sloan School of Management at MIT. Forrester's first article was "Industrial Dynamics", published in the journal "Harvard Business Review" in 1958. It is a theory based on circular type structures with delays between the actions of some elements on others.
Synergetics.
It is an interdisciplinary science that explains the formation and self-organization of patterns and structures in open systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium.
Living Systems Theory.
Created by James Grier Miller in 1978, with the publication of his magnum opus (1102 pages), it is a subdomain of GST. Miller attempted to formalize the concept of "life". He identified 8 hierarchical levels and 20 subsystems.
The general systemic paradigm has experienced a great boom with the development of complexity sciences, among which the following stand out:
Chaos Theory,
A science that looks for laws and underlying order where there is apparently only randomness. It deals with certain types of dynamical systems that are very sensitive to variations in initial conditions. Small variations in these initial conditions can imply large differences in future behavior. This happens even though these systems are deterministic, i.e., their behavior is completely determined from their initial conditions. The first discoverer of chaotic systems was the meteorologist Edward Lorenz, in 1960 when working on a weather prediction problem. He formulated what is called the "butterfly effect" with his famous sentence: "Can the flapping of a butterfly in Brazil cause a tornado in Texas?
Catastrophe Theory.
Put forward in the late 1950's by the French mathematician René Thom, this theory studies the behavior of structurally stable systems to manifest discontinuity (sudden changes in behavior can occur, divergence (tendency of small divergences to create large divergences) and hysteresis (the state depends on its previous history, but if the behaviors are reversed, they then lead to no return to the initial situation).
The Theory of Dissipative Structures, by Ilya Prigogine.
It is based on emergent properties of complex systems, far from equilibrium, which bear analogies with living systems or are bridges between chaos (disorganized system) and life (organized system).
The theory of Complex Adaptive Systems, CAS).
CASs are complex systems in which their interconnected elements have the ability to learn from experience and adapt. The term "CAS" was coined at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI), an interdisciplinary institute founded by Murray Gell-Mann, John H. Holland and others. CAS models are evolutionary. CAS theory unites the ideas of GST with those of "generalized Darwinism", as it believes that Darwinian principles of evolution help explain many complex phenomena.
Fields related to Systemics are:
Artificial intelligence.
Artificial life.
The theory of cellular automata and self-reproducing systems, by John von Neumann.
Neural network theory.
Systems Engineering. It is an interdisciplinary domain for the development and implementation of systems.
[game theory, created in 1944 by John von Neumann.
[network theory (Rapoport).
Organization and management theory.
Decision theory. It analyzes rational choices within human organizations in every situation and their consequences.
Hypercycle theory.
MENTAL, a Language for Systemics
Systemics has not been fully developed. What we know as Systemics are only the first foundations of a theory that will someday be a complete theory.
According to Bertalanffy, all the abstract notions of GST can only be implemented in mathematical language, but he recognized that with the linear and analytic mathematics of his time it was impossible to formalize his theory. That mathematics should be renewed with generic or universal concepts that would allow connecting theory and practice. For this reason, because it does not have a generic or universal formal language, GST is more a philosophy than a science.
At present there is still no language capable of interrelating everything with everything, a general language that serves to formalize all kinds of systems. Mathematics is useless because it is not a language. And computer science is a linguistic Babel, without the generic concepts necessary for Systemics.
We can consider that MENTAL is the solution, the ideal language for Systemics according to the following aspects:
System.
MENTAL is a system. The elements of the system are the primary archetypes. The relations between the elements are the primary archetypes themselves. Lexical semantics is the same as structural semantics. The true relationships (the deepest ones) are the linguistic ones. MENTAL is the relationalizer of everything. MENTAL is a meta-system or universal system because primitives are in all things. All systems are manifestations of a universal system, so the boundaries between the different fields of Systemics are diluted.
Systemic thinking.
Never better said "systems thinking" in the case of MENTAL because the mind is a system and MENTAL is a language of consciousness, the foundation of the mind. But MENTAL goes beyond systemic thinking: it is a universal, archetypal and philosophical thinking.
Generalization.
MENTAL is the universal language of science that Bertalanffy dreamed of, a system-language based on a set of interrelated generic concepts underlying all sciences.
Abstraction.
The level of abstraction in MENTAL is maximum, so the language can be applied to any system. Maximum abstraction implies maximum conceptual simplicity. Reality, at the deep level, is abstract. At the deep level everything is interrelated. The unity of science must be based on abstraction, on universal principles of maximum abstraction.
Consciousness.
Life, mind and matter are manifestations of consciousness. Life, mind and matter are always united. Life cannot be formalized. The most we can reach is to identify the primary archetypes. The deep systemic principles (of which Bertalanffy spoke) are the primary archetypes, which manifest themselves at all levels.
Integration with the environment.
MENTAL contemplates an environment (the abstract space) in which expressions "live". The boundary between system and environment is blurred.
Union of opposites.
MENTAL integrates the opposites: holism and reductionism, the quanitative and the qualitative, etc. This union of opposites is the basis of consciousness. With MENTAL we return to the spirit of Heraclitus, to the harmony of opposites.
Knowledge structure.
According to Laszlo [1972], Bertalanffy was the first to recognize that the process of organization of scientific knowledge could be as important as the knowledge itself. But according to the philosophy of MENTAL, the general structure of scientific knowledge is much more important than any particular scientific knowledge, for all scientific knowledge is based on the common general structure.
Transdisciplinarity.
MENTAL is a transdisciplinary language.
Philosophy.
MENTAL is an analytical and synthetic philosophy. And it transcends the concept of system. Primary archetypes are philosophical categories and the foundation of science. Archetypes unite science and philosophy. MENTAL is a return to "natural philosophy", which is how science was called in antiquity.
According to Lazlo, there is an ultimate, underlying reality that is ordered, intelligible, analyzable in terms of great principles that are both scientific and philosophical in nature. That ultimate reality is the primary archetypes, the principles that Laszlo sought to ground science and philosophy.
MENTAL covers the 3 categories that Bertalanffy defined: 1) philosophy (the primary archetypes, the great principles); 2) the formal theory of how those archetypes manifest and relate; 3) the particular applications.
Relations.
MENTAL clarifies and identifies the true nature of Systemics by concretizing the different possible relationships that can be established between the elements of a system, externally and internally: sharing of elements, cause-effect relationships, etc.
Universality.
MENTAL goes beyond natural or social systems. It is a language of possible systems, real or virtual. It is a universal paradigm. Systemics is the science of systems but it is not a theory of everything, a universal theory. MENTAL does claim to be a theory of everything as it is based on primary archetypes common to mind and nature.
MENTAL is the realization of Laszlo's dream of creating a universal paradigm based on principles common to science and philosophy.
In conclusion, MENTAL is a universal system or meta-system that allows to formalize all kinds of particular systems. MENTAL is a universal philosophy, a universal language and the foundation of Systemics.
Addendum
Systemics in the organizational field
It is in the organizational field that Systemics has achieved its greatest successes. Organizations are complex evolving goal-oriented dynamic social systems. They contain multiple interrelationships and interconnections between groups and individuals, structures and processes that are the engine of evolution. One of the pioneers of organizational systemics was Bogdanov with his Tectology.
Tectology is a philosophical theory invented by the Russian physician, economist and philosopher Alexander Bogdanov, which is considered a precursor of GST. The aim of Tectology was the unification of physics, biology and social sciences, as Bogdanov considered them as systems of relations. His 3-volume treatise Tectology, completed in the early 1920s, anticipated many ideas of GST and cybernetics. Tectology was the first attempt in the history of science to attempt to formalize the principles of organization operating in all kinds of systems (living and non-living) and to create a universal science of organization.
There are indications that Bertalanffy and Wiener may have read the German translation of 1928. At the time, Bogdanov's ideas were ignored as a threat to dialectical materialism, but his ideas were rediscovered in the 1970s. (Dialectical materialism is a philosophical current that considers matter to be the substratum of all reality and the cognizability of the world to be based on material nature). Bertalanffy makes no mention of Bogdanov in his works.
Systemics in social systems
Niklas Luhmann elaborated a universalistic theory of social systems, providing a new and original vision. He applied systems theory, specifically the concept of autopoiesis, as a generic paradigm, as a bridge between nature and society. He also drew on George Spencer-Brown's calculus of distinctions and his concepts of re-entry and the mark, the operational unit of distinction and indication [see Applications - Mathematics - The Laws of Form].
System and environment form an indissoluble unit.
There are no elements without relational entailment or relations without elements.
The element is an irreducible unit of the system.
People are not part of society, but are the environment of the social system.
Social evolution is a continuous process of systemic differentiation of 3 types: segmental, stratificational and functional. The segmentary is a diversification of levels in a system without configuring subsystems. The stratification (or hierarchical) is based on social inequalities. The functional is the one that predominates in modern society, where there are closed circles or subsystems that develop specific functions, and where no subsystem has priority over the others (polycentric society).
A social system is the result of a selective process of the multiplicity of possibilities, facts and circumstances that arise in reality. This selection reduces complexity and is contingent. Complexity refers to the set of possibilities that can develop. Contingency refers to the existence of multiple available alternatives.
Systemics and psychology
Systemic psychology is a branch of psychology that studies human behavior based on the system concept. The human person as an active system, not as a reactive system. Groups and individuals are considered homeostatic systems.
Systemic psychology is a reaction to behaviorism, which is a superficial psychology based only on external observable behavior. It is based on the work of Gregory Bateson, Humberto Maturana and Roger Baker, among others.
Gordon Willard Allport published in 1961 a classic book on personality as a system. "Personality is a system contained in a matrix of sociocultural systems. It is an 'inner structure' embedded in and interacting with 'outer structures'" [Allport, 1961]. Karl Augustus Menninger, in 1963, created a system of psychiatry based on GST. GST has also been applied to family therapy, the family as a system.
The theory of dissipative structures, by Ilya Prigogine
Prigogine −Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977− conducted theoretical research in the field of thermodynamics, a field he expanded with the study of chaos, systems far from equilibrium, irreversible processes and the creation of the concept of "dissipative structure". The study of irreversible processes led him to study the nature of time and the evolution of the universe. His research transcended the physical-chemical field into philosophy, sociology and psychology: perception and the construction of reality.
Dissipative structures are formed in conditions far removed from equilibrium. They arise from chaos and constitute a new state of matter, a bridge between matter and life. They are called "dissipative structures" because "they present structure and coherence and their maintenance implies a dissipation of energy" [Prigogine, 1983].
In complex systems far from equilibrium, small changes can produce new organized structures, which are irreversible. These structures are dissipative because they dissipate energy in the form of heat.
Far from equilibrium, dissipative structures can evolve into forms of increasing complexity. The further away from equilibrium a system is, the greater its complexity and nonlinearity.
[Certainty is a worldview or paradigm that has been overcome. Becoming is not linear, it is not predictable, there is uncertainty, the future is open to the possible and the probable, there is no single direction in the construction of reality. There are bifurcations towards creativity (towards new organized structures), towards chaos, towards fluctuating structures, etc.
Dissipative structures are the order subsequent to chaos, as a consequence of a process of self-organization. Instability and chaos are the constructive bases of order. Disorder is creative. Chaos is at the origin of life and intelligence.
Living beings are dissipative structures, far from equilibrium, self-organized and adaptable to the environment, which maintain the same structure despite the incessant change of components. They are complex adaptive systems.
Dissipative structures far from equilibrium do not follow any universal laws. Close to equilibrium and universal patterns and laws. As we move away from it, we move from the universal to the particular, towards richness and variety. These characteristics are precisely those of life.
It is impossible to apprehend all of reality because we live in an open and constantly evolving universe.
Bibliography
Allport, Gordon Willard. Pattern and Growth in Personality. Harcourt College Pub., 1961.
Bertoglio, Oscar Johanen. Introducción a la Teoría General de Sistemas. Editorial Limusa, México, 1982.
Boulding, Kenneth E. General Systems Theory. The Skeleton of Science. Management Science, vol. 2. pp. 197-208, Abril 1956. Disponible en Internet.
Bunge, Mario. Matter and Mind. Springer, 2010.
Capra, Fritjof. La trama de la vida. Una nueva perspectiva de los sistemas vivos. Anagrama, 2012.
Carnap, Rudolf. The Unity of Science (1934). Routledge (reissue edition), 2012.
Ceberio, Marcelo R.; Watzlawick, Paul. La construcción del universo. Conceptos introductorios y reflexiones sobre epistemología, conscructivismo y pensamiento sistémico. Herder, 2006.
Johansen Bertoglio, Oscar. Introducción a la teoría general de sistemas. Limusa, 1982.
Laszlo, Ervin. The Systems View of the World. A Holistic Vision for Our Time. Hampton Press, 1996.
Laszlo, Ervin. Evolución. La gran síntesis. Espasa Libros, 1988.
Laszlo, Ervin. La gran bifurcación. Gedisa, 1990.
Laszlo, Ervin. Hacia una filosofía de sistemas. Universidad de Valencia. Servicio de Publicaciones, 1981.
Laszlo, Ervin. Introduction to Systems Philosophy. Toward a New Paradigm of Contemporary Thought. Harper Torchbooks, 1973.
Laszlo, Ervin. The Systems View of the World. The Natural Philosophy of the New Developments in the Sciences. George Braziller, 1995.
Laszlo, Ervin. Tú puedes cambiar el mundo. Nowtilus, 2004.
Laszlo, Ervin. The Chaos Point. The World at the Crossroads. Hampton Roads Publishing, 2006.
Laszlo, Ervin. The Inner Limits of Mankind. Heretical Reflections on Today's Values, Culture and Politics. Oneworld Publications, 1989.
Morin, Edgar. From the concept of system to the paradigm of complexity. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 15(4), pp, 371-385, 1992.
Morin, Edgar. El método 1. La naturaleza de la naturaleza. Cátedra, 1986.
Morin, Edgar. El método 2. La vida de la vida. Cátedra, 1983.
Morin, Edgar. El método 3. El conocimiento del conocimiento. Cátedra, 1988.
Morin, Edgar. Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Gedisa, 1995.
Prigogine, Ilya. ¿Tan sólo una ilusión? Tusquets, 1983.
Prigogine, Ilya. El fin de las certidumbres. Taurus, 1996.
Senge, Peter M. La Quinta Disciplina. Granica, 1993.
Senge, Peter M. La Quinta Disciplina en la Práctica. Granica, 1995.
Skyttner, Lars. General Systems Theory. World Scientific Publishing Co., 2001.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. Teoría general de los sistemas. Fundamentos, desarrollo, aplicaciones. Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1976.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. Perspectivas en la teoría general de sistemas. Alianza Universidad, 1979.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig; Ashby, W. Ross; Weinberg, G. M; y otros. Tendencias en la teoría general de sistemas. Alianza Universidad, 1978.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. The Theory of Open Systems in Physics and Biology. Science, vol. 3, pp. 21-29, 1950.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. General Systems Theory. A New Approach to Unity of Science. Human Biology, vol. 23, pp. 303-361, 1951.
Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. An Outline of General Systems Theory. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 134-165, Agosto 1950. Disponible en Internet.
