Relationships among conceptual, abstracted, and concrete systems

Abstract

General systems theory must by definition encompass a variety of fields. One challenge for general systems theory is to achieve generality without superficiality and without sacrificing the diversity of the systems studied. This can be accomplished through the construction of taxonomies of systems. This paper uses principles of systems philosophy, the process of substruction, and the notion of isomorphism among systems to generate a taxonomy and to analyze the relationships among various types. Emphasis is upon the relationships among abstracted, conceptual, and concrete systems, but other types are also discussed. The substruction identifies two dimensions—the conceptual/empirical/model dimension, and the object/variable dimension. When combined these two dimensions yield a six-celled typology. The original three types can be recognized within this typology, thus enabling us clearly to distinguish them and to recognize the basis for relationships among types. The abstracted type has been the most troublesome, figuring in most cases of confusion. Thus, particular attention is given to its role. Specifically, abstracted systems are shown to be R-systems having variables as their basic units, while concrete systems are Q-systems, having objects such as organisms as their basic units. Thus, Q-systems can be living systems at various levels such as the organism, group, organization, or society. R-systems can also be derived from living systems of various levels as long as the system units are characteristics of objects at a given level. For example, at the societal level, characteristics of whole societies could be used for R-analysis. The reverse relationship between abstracted and concrete systems which was previously established verbally in the literature is established statistically.