Abstract
Usual reductionism considers systemic, acquired properties as non-systemic, possessed properties. We consider here the non-systemic usages of systems, misunderstood as non-interacting virtual objects or devices, and the misunderstanding between non-complex (first Systemics) and complex systems (second Systemics) as another form of reductionism. This reductionism leads to inappropriate and ineffective approaches, particularly dealing with complex systems such as socioeconomic systems, whose complexity is often misunderstood and neglected. However, this reductionism should be distinguished from mixed usages of systemic approaches suitable to deal with multiple, dynamic, temporary, and partial systemic natures of phenomena related to complex systems. We consider that we should move from the well-defined, often simplistic, world of Systemics to Quasi-Systemics, which is intended as constructionist Systemics, always in progress, non-ideological, multiple, contradiction-tolerant, incomplete, and in its turn emergent. Rather than recommending a pragmatic attitude, we mention two approaches, one methodological approach called Logical Openness and another, the Meta-Structure approach, which is suitable to more formally deal with such multiple aspects and—based on mesoscopic representations—suitable to represent quasiness.
Highlights
The concept of a system proposed by the General System Theory (GST) [1] was introduced by Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901–1972)
An interesting case considering the problem of using multiple systemic and non-systemic approaches is given by the DYnamic uSAge of Models (DYSAM) when the same problem or phenomenon can be represented in different ways and modelled using different approaches
In this article we presented some comments about the possible reductionist usages of systems when confusing systems of first and second Systemics and making non-systemic usages of systems, reduced to non-interacting virtual objects or devices
Summary
The concept of a system proposed by the General System Theory (GST) [1] was introduced by Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901–1972). In this regard, we distinguish among multi-, inter-, and trans-disciplinary aspects as a methodological framework, avoiding useless and dangerous confusions that may lead to inappropriate approaches. We mention Logical Openness and the Meta-Structural approach, which are suitable to methodologically deal with and model the emerging structural dynamics of complex systems. Systemics: always in progress, non-ideological, multiple, contradiction-tolerant, incomplete, and in its turn emergent
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.