since I posted most of the links from the Systems Studio newsletter last month… here’s this months’ newsletter. A lot of rich reading here 🙂
|
|
|
|
Author Archives: antlerboy - Benjamin P Taylor
Inheritance Is Moving Beyond Genetics and Epigenetics
Via Complexity ExplorerHeredity Beyond the Gene
What you pass on to your kids isn’t always in your genetic code.
The idea that genes encode all the heritable features of living things has been a fundamental tenet of genetics and evolutionary biology for many years, but this assumption has always coexisted uncomfortably with the messy findings of empirical research. The complications have multiplied exponentially in recent years under the weight of new discoveries.
Classical genetics draws a fundamental distinction between the “genotype” (that is, the set of genes that an individual carries and can pass on to its descendants) and the “phenotype” (that is, the transient body that bears the stamp of the environments and experiences that it has encountered but whose features cannot be transmitted to offspring). Only those traits that are genetically determined are assumed to be heritable—that is, capable of being transmitted to offspring—because inheritance occurs exclusively through the transmission of genes. Yet, in violation of the genotype/phenotype dichotomy, lines of genetically identical animals and plants have been shown to harbor heritable variation and respond to natural selection.
Conversely, genes currently fail to account for resemblance among relatives in some complex traits and diseases—a problem dubbed the “missing heritability.”1 But, while an individual’s own genotype doesn’t seem to account for some of its features, parental genes have been found to affect traits in offspring that don’t inherit those genes. Moreover, studies on plants, insects, rodents, and other organisms show that an individual’s environment and experiences during its lifetime—diet, temperature, parasites, social interactions—can influence the features of its descendants, and research on our own species suggests that we are no different in this respect. Some of these findings clearly fit the definition of “inheritance of acquired traits”—a phenomenon that, according to a famous analogy from before the Google era, is as implausible as a telegram sent from Beijing in Chinese arriving in London already translated into English. But today such phenomena are regularly reported in scientific journals. And just as the Internet and instant translation have revolutionized communication, discoveries in molecular biology are upending notions about what can and cannot be transmitted across generations.
Biologists are now faced with the monumental challenge of making sense of a rapidly growing menagerie of discoveries that violate deeply ingrained ideas. One can get a sense of the growing dissonance between theory and evidence by perusing a recent review of such studies and then reading the introductory chapter from any undergraduate biology textbook. Something is clearly missing from the conventional concept of heredity, which asserts that inheritance is mediated exclusively by genes and denies the possibility that some effects of environment and experience can be transmitted to descendants.
continues in headline link
Information theory, predictability and the emergence of complex life – Luís F. Seoane, Ricard V. Solé
Abstract
Despite the obvious advantage of simple life forms capable of fast replication, different levels of cognitive complexity have been achieved by living systems in terms of their potential to cope with environmental uncertainty. Against the inevitable cost associated with detecting environmental cues and responding to them in adaptive ways, we conjecture that the potential for predicting the environment can overcome the expenses associated with maintaining costly, complex structures. We present a minimal formal model grounded in information theory and selection, in which successive generations of agents are mapped into transmitters and receivers of a coded message. Our agents are guessing machines and their capacity to deal with environments of different complexity defines the conditions to sustain more complex agents.
SCiO spring open meeting – 23 April 2018, Manchester
Monday 23rd April 2018
Booking required – https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/scio-open-meeting-spring-2018-manchester-all-welcome-tickets-43781605962
Manchester Business School, Room G13D, Sackville Street, Manchester, M1 3WE
The next SCiO open meeting is on Monday 23rd April 2018, at the Manchester Business School.
Note that this is again in a different building and room as MBS are undergoing major construction work – this time we are in Sackville Street. Please use the postcode and see the map on the Eventbrite site to find it.
Please book via Eventbrite: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/scio-open-meeting-spring-2018-manchester-all-welcome-tickets-43781605962 to avoid disappointment. Booking is £20. All are welcome.
· 09:30 – 10:00 will be an introduction to the viable system model
· The full day will start at 10:00
An open meeting where a series of presentations of general interest regarding systems practice will be given – this will include ‘craft’ and active sessions, as well as introductions to theory.
Session 1: Peter Miles; Demosophia – Collective Intelligence through Structured Dialogue
John Warfield and Aleco Christakis developed the field of Interactive Management in the US in the 1980s, and Christakis subsequently evolved it into the methodology Structured Dialogic Design. In its various forms (and under different names) it has been widely applied across the globe in enabling groups to tackle wicked problems and complex challenges, but is not well known in the UK. This presentation will outline the methodology, it’s provenance, and the current state of practice.
Session 2: Alexandra Stubbings; Adaptive Organisation Design – organising with stakeholders in mind
As companies increasingly need to collaborate to deliver large projects, and as the world of work gets evermore complex with short-term contracts and the ‘gig economy’, it is getting harder to structure organisations that are fit for purpose and adaptive to changing needs. In this session Alexandra will share with us her experience and some of the ideas and tools she has developed to work systemically in organisation design and think about questions like: How do you create effective multi-party teams and partnerships that fully take stakeholders’ priorities into account? How do you engage well across organisational boundaries? How do you ensure accountability in these multi-party teams?
Session 3: Ian Glossop; STREAMS – Systems Thinking, Real Enterprise Architecture and Management Science
This presentation will outline the STREAMS ideas and Philosophy. STREAMS is a set of ideas about how to build and manage an Enterprise based on a common, rigorous STREAMS Philosophy. It leads to methodologies, methods and techniques for building, managing, evolving and innovating Enterprises that can be applied in practice but, like an Engineering approach, its methods are grounded in rigorous research and understanding.
Common to the three main strands, or tributaries, of STREAMS is the Use of Models: conceptual models of a variety of descriptions and characteristics ranging from highly complex mathematical models informed by volumes of quantitative data grounded in empirical observation and measurement to simple qualitative models expressing some simple truth. The purpose of the models is to guide Decision Making.
STREAMS is a set of ideas that are both transdisciplinary and integrative of theory and practice. It is “Trans-disciplinary” in the sense that it eclectically draws on ideas, theories, principles and methods from a range of academic disciplines – deliberately paying no heed to the traditional divisions in universities – or similar academic institutions. It is “Integrative” in the sense that is seeks to blend these ideas into a coherent, well-founded theoretical framework – but also incorporate empirically grounded and proven ideas and practices from Practice, not just academic theory. STREAMS is not intended to be an academic exercise in the social science but theoretically-sound ideas and methods for practitioners in engineering enterprises.
Session 4:Parag Gogate: Using Lego® Serious Play® for problem framing and solving
This will be an interactive workshop session where Parag will introduce the science behind the Lego® Serious Play® methodology and guide the group working on a real world problem.
The Lego® Serious Play® methodology is an innovative, experimental process designed to enhance innovation and business performance. It is based on research which shows that this kind of hands-on, minds-on learning produces a deeper, more meaningful understanding of the world and its possibilities, the Lego® Serious Play® methodology deepens the reflection process and supports an effective dialogue – for everyone in the organisation. It taps into the human ability to imagine, to describe and make sense of the issues at hand, to initiate change and improvement, and even to create something radically new.
The OR Society: OR60 Annual Conference
OR60 ‘Anniversary’ Conference
Organisational research society
11 – 13 SEPTEMBER 2018
Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster. LA1 4YW UK
Planning for OR60, our next OR Society Annual Conference, taking place at Lancaster University, is underway.
Lancaster University was established by Royal Charter in 1964, one of seven new universities created in the 1960s. Operational Research was one of the founding departments, the first in the country. The first professor was Pat Rivett, President of the OR Society at the time of his appointment. So, it is particularly significant that the conference returns to Lancaster to celebrate the Diamond anniversary.
The campus buildings are arranged around a central walkway known as the Spine, which is connected to a central plaza, named Alexandra Square in honour of its first chancellor, Princess Alexandra. The accommodation and conference venues are all within 100 yards of each other.
The University is set in 560 acres of stunning woodland which includes, we are told, 290 species of plants! Less than three miles away lies the historic city of Lancaster, with a medieval castle, Georgian architecture and much more to marvel at. Williamson Park, one of the city’s best kept secrets, contains a stunning ornate butterfly house. For those who fancy travelling a little further, England’s largest National Park, the Lake District is less than one hour away by car.
Location – http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/contact-and-getting-here/maps-and-travel/
I post this specifically because there’s a systems thinking stream:
OR60 Stream – Systems Thinking
Stream Organisers
| Gerald Midgley (more information) Email: G.R.Midgley@hull.ac.uk |
 |
| Giles Hindle (more information) Email: giles.hindle@hull.ac.uk |
 |
| Angela Espinosa (more information) Email: A.Espinosa@hull.ac.uk |
 |
Stream Definition
Many OR and Systems practitioners share a common interest in systemic intervention to address highly complex organizational, social and environmental problems. This stream provides a fantastic opportunity to bring people from both the OR and Systems communities together to learn from one another, so both can be enriched. We welcome the widest possible diversity of practitioners and academics, whichever tradition of systems thinking or systemic OR you come from. We encourage the submission of abstracts discussing applications of systems thinking; methodological innovations; theoretical contributions; thoughts on the diversity, impacts and ethics of systemic OR practice; and reflections on the past, present and future of the relationship between Systems Thinking and OR. In addition to the usual paper presentations, the stream will start with a workshop where everyone can participate in learning from one another and collectively defining Systems Thinking for OR practice. The stream will also end with a second workshop to discuss future directions, and we will facilitate small, collaborative groups in defining new research agendas that matter for both Systems/OR as a field of practice, and for systemic improvement in our wider society.
Bios
Gerald Midgley
Gerald Midgley is Professor of Systems Thinking in the Business School, University of Hull, UK. He also holds Adjunct Professorships at the University of Queensland, Australia; Mälardalen University, Sweden; the University of Canterbury, New Zealand; and Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. He has held research leadership roles in both academia and government OR, having spent ten years as Director of the Centre for Systems Studies at Hull, and seven years as a Senior Science Leader in the Institute for Environmental Science and Research (ESR), New Zealand. Gerald has written over 300 papers for academics and practitioners on systems thinking, problem structuring methods, community operational research and conflict management, and has been involved in a wide variety of public sector, community development, technology foresight and resource management projects. He was the 2013/14 President of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, and has written or edited 11 books. These include Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology, and Practice (Kluwer, 2000); Operational Research and Environmental Management: A New Agenda (Operational Research Society, 2001); Systems Thinking, Volumes I-IV (Sage, 2003); Community Operational Research: OR and Systems Thinking for Community Development (Kluwer, 2004); and Forensic DNA Evidence on Trial: Science and Uncertainty in the Courtroom (Emergent, 2011). In 2017, he contracted with Routledge for a book series on systems thinking for practitioners.
Giles Hindle
Dr Giles Hindle is a Senior Lecturer at Hull University Business School and an Associate Fellow at Warwick Business School. Prior posts include Assistant Professor at Warwick Business School, Senior Consultant for Tribal Consulting PLC and Business Consultant for Lancaster University’s Institute for Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development. Giles has conducted consultancy and research projects for a wide range of organisations including Research Councils UK, the Food Standards Authority, National Public Health Service of Wales, NHS Scottish Executive, County Councils Network, Secta Health Group, Countryside Agency, Department for Transport, DHSSPS in Northern Ireland, Business Link, Network Rail, Tornado Wire Ltd, and many others. He is a member of the OR Society’s Analytics Network. His current research is focussed on strategic thinking, business analytics, business modelling, spatial modelling and service innovation.
Angela Espinosa
Angela was born in Bogota, Colombia and graduated as a computer and systems engineer in 1981, and got a PhD on Organisational Cybernetics from Aston Business School, UK in 1995. She worked as an Information Systems Manager, in private and public enterprises, and as the Director of the Secretariat of Information and Systems of the Colombian President’s Office (1990 – 1992). From 1993 to 2002, she taught systems and cybernetics in the Engineering Faculty in Los Andes University; and provided consultancy for both private and public organisations. Since 2002 she has been researching and teaching at the Centre of Systems Studies from Hull University Business School, where she is now a Reader in Cybernetics. Since 2009 she has been an invited fellow at Los Andes Business School, El Rosario Business School and La Sabana Business School in Colombia, as well as an invited fellow in Australia, Cuba, Oman, and Mexico. She has focused her post doctoral research on the application of organizational cybernetics to support organisational and societal self -transformations towards improved viability and sustainability on businesses, communities and networks. She has published extensively the results of this research, mostly in research monographs, and in systems, cybernetics, complexity and operational research journals.
OR60 Stream – Systems Thinking
Stream Organisers
| Gerald Midgley (more information) Email: G.R.Midgley@hull.ac.uk |
|
| Giles Hindle (more information) Email: giles.hindle@hull.ac.uk |
|
| Angela Espinosa (more information) Email: A.Espinosa@hull.ac.uk |
|
Stream Definition
Many OR and Systems practitioners share a common interest in systemic intervention to address highly complex organizational, social and environmental problems. This stream provides a fantastic opportunity to bring people from both the OR and Systems communities together to learn from one another, so both can be enriched. We welcome the widest possible diversity of practitioners and academics, whichever tradition of systems thinking or systemic OR you come from. We encourage the submission of abstracts discussing applications of systems thinking; methodological innovations; theoretical contributions; thoughts on the diversity, impacts and ethics of systemic OR practice; and reflections on the past, present and future of the relationship between Systems Thinking and OR. In addition to the usual paper presentations, the stream will start with a workshop where everyone can participate in learning from one another and collectively defining Systems Thinking for OR practice. The stream will also end with a second workshop to discuss future directions, and we will facilitate small, collaborative groups in defining new research agendas that matter for both Systems/OR as a field of practice, and for systemic improvement in our wider society.
Bios
Gerald Midgley
Gerald Midgley is Professor of Systems Thinking in the Business School, University of Hull, UK. He also holds Adjunct Professorships at the University of Queensland, Australia; Mälardalen University, Sweden; the University of Canterbury, New Zealand; and Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. He has held research leadership roles in both academia and government OR, having spent ten years as Director of the Centre for Systems Studies at Hull, and seven years as a Senior Science Leader in the Institute for Environmental Science and Research (ESR), New Zealand. Gerald has written over 300 papers for academics and practitioners on systems thinking, problem structuring methods, community operational research and conflict management, and has been involved in a wide variety of public sector, community development, technology foresight and resource management projects. He was the 2013/14 President of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, and has written or edited 11 books. These include Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology, and Practice (Kluwer, 2000); Operational Research and Environmental Management: A New Agenda (Operational Research Society, 2001); Systems Thinking, Volumes I-IV (Sage, 2003); Community Operational Research: OR and Systems Thinking for Community Development (Kluwer, 2004); and Forensic DNA Evidence on Trial: Science and Uncertainty in the Courtroom (Emergent, 2011). In 2017, he contracted with Routledge for a book series on systems thinking for practitioners.
Giles Hindle
Dr Giles Hindle is a Senior Lecturer at Hull University Business School and an Associate Fellow at Warwick Business School. Prior posts include Assistant Professor at Warwick Business School, Senior Consultant for Tribal Consulting PLC and Business Consultant for Lancaster University’s Institute for Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development. Giles has conducted consultancy and research projects for a wide range of organisations including Research Councils UK, the Food Standards Authority, National Public Health Service of Wales, NHS Scottish Executive, County Councils Network, Secta Health Group, Countryside Agency, Department for Transport, DHSSPS in Northern Ireland, Business Link, Network Rail, Tornado Wire Ltd, and many others. He is a member of the OR Society’s Analytics Network. His current research is focussed on strategic thinking, business analytics, business modelling, spatial modelling and service innovation.
Angela Espinosa
Angela was born in Bogota, Colombia and graduated as a computer and systems engineer in 1981, and got a PhD on Organisational Cybernetics from Aston Business School, UK in 1995. She worked as an Information Systems Manager, in private and public enterprises, and as the Director of the Secretariat of Information and Systems of the Colombian President’s Office (1990 – 1992). From 1993 to 2002, she taught systems and cybernetics in the Engineering Faculty in Los Andes University; and provided consultancy for both private and public organisations. Since 2002 she has been researching and teaching at the Centre of Systems Studies from Hull University Business School, where she is now a Reader in Cybernetics. Since 2009 she has been an invited fellow at Los Andes Business School, El Rosario Business School and La Sabana Business School in Colombia, as well as an invited fellow in Australia, Cuba, Oman, and Mexico. She has focused her post doctoral research on the application of organizational cybernetics to support organisational and societal self -transformations towards improved viability and sustainability on businesses, communities and networks. She has published extensively the results of this research, mostly in research monographs, and in systems, cybernetics, complexity and operational research journals.
Duality, dualism, duelling and Brexit – Ray Ison and Ed Straw
Taking this opportunity to rethink a part of government crucial to a fair and dynamic society would be good politics. Whitehall is no more capable of doing this than Brussels.
Light can be treated as both a wave and a particle depending on the experiment we, as observers, use to examine its behaviour. This apparent paradox was described for many years as the ‘wave–particle dualism’, implying that they were incompatible and irreconcilable phenomena.
Dualism describes antagonistic or negating opposites: mind/matter, objective/subjective, Brexit/Remain. Two concepts form a dualism when they belong to the same logical level and at that level are perceived as opposites. The logic behind this dialectic is negation. Negation takes a proposition p to another proposition not-p. Not-p is interpreted intuitively as being true when p is false, and false when p is true. This fuels pugilistic media interviews and adversarial politics. Modern duels are fought with dualisms.This fuels pugilistic media interviews and adversarial politics. Modern duels are fought with dualisms.
Such dualistic thinking is a product of the prevailing objectivist Cartesian world view, with its orthodox logic, under which we are still brought up. In science, it was not until it was recognized that phenomena we observe in ‘nature’ are not independent of our acts of observing them, that this wave/particle paradox was resolved by appreciating that their behaviours are in fact complementary and constitute a duality rather than a dualism. Taken together they do not negate each other but create a unity or a coherent whole.
‘It seems as though we must use sometimes the one theory and sometimes the other, while at times we may use either. We are faced with a new kind of difficulty. We have two contradictory pictures of reality; separately neither of them fully explains the phenomena of light, but together they do.’ Albert Einstein
Reframing conceptual pairs as dualities rather than dualisms stimulates relational thinking and practice. Following this logic the following pairs need not be understood as self-negating but expressions of key elements or concepts in a relational dynamic in which the whole is different to the parts: control – autonomy; constraint – freedom; environment – system; social world – biophysical world; yin – yang. When recognized as pairs participating in a relational dynamic, the operational possibilities open up and may be greater, more rewarding and exciting.
[Continues… and delves into “Brexit” at headline link]
Hard, Soft…or Laminated? from Squire to the Giants
[A romp through a historic narrative of hard, soft, and combined systems theories – and then another ‘bit’ of and perspective on systems thinking in the comments. Squire to the Giants is on of the excellent blogs that arose at least partially from the cult-like excitement of John Seddon’s Vanguard lean approach and the branding of it as ‘systems thinking’, and has always sought to give a rich overview of the systems thinking universe (hence the ‘Giants’) – recommended].
This post is about something that I find very interesting – Systems Thinking as applied to organisations, and society – and about whether there are two different ‘factions’….or not. I’ve had versio…
Holobiont – definition from wikipedia
From Aidan Ward’s excellent blog on Medium at https://medium.com/@aidan.ward.antelope
Holobionts are assemblages of different species that form ecological units. Lynn Margulis proposed that any physical association between individuals of different species for significant portions of their life history is a symbiosis. All participants in the symbiosis are bionts, and therefore the resulting assemblage was first coined a holobiont by Lynn Margulis in 1991 in the book Symbiosis as a Source of Evolutionary Innovation.[1] Holo is derived from the Ancient Greek word ὅλος (hólos) for “whole”. The entire assemblage of genomes in the holobiont is termed a hologenome.
Contents
[hide]
History[edit]
In 1992, David Mindell subsequently used the word holobiont in a BioSystems article in general reference to host-microbe symbioses.[2] This was followed in 1993 by its use in another BioSystems article by R. Jorgensen.[3] The word rested dormant for about a decade. Forest Rohwer, Victor Seguritan, Farooq Azam, and Nancy Knowlton adopted the term in a figure legend to describe the complex relationships between various microbes and coral in 2002.[4] In this system, the zooxanthellaedetermine the light level required by the coral holobiont and a complicated web involving the Bacteria, Archaea and fungi recycles its nitrogen. The word holobiont has been increasingly used since then, with its next appearance in 2005.[5] It has been popularized by the hologenome concept.[6] All macrobes, animals and plants, are today deemed holobionts consisting of the host plus its entire microbial community,[7][8][9][10] and these associations can be transient or stable.[11][12][13]
Relationship to viromes and microbiomes[edit]
Holobionts are traditionally divided into three major divisions: 1) viruses, 2) unicellular microbes and 3) the macrobial host. Collectively, the viruses make up the viromeand microbes make up the microbiome. There is no specific terminology for other multicellular organisms associated with the holobiont other than symbiont. The collective genomic DNA and RNA of a holobiont is called a hologenome.
Versus hologenome[edit]
Holobionts are considered multipartite ecological entities, whereas hologenomes are multigenomic entities that encode holobiont phenotypes. Here, the word hologenome follows a conceptual continuum from words such as chromosome and genome. The terms are therefore structural definitions relating to host-microbial assemblages and their genomes.
Versus superorganism[edit]
Superorganisms are organisms consisting of many individuals and was first applied to the eusocial insects (Wheeler 1928).[14] An ant colony is a superorganism. Holobionts are assemblages of many different species. Each ant is an individual holobiont consisting of the ant, fungi, bacteria, etc. However, ″superorganism″ has also been used as a synonym for ″holobiont″[15].
See also
VSM training for Armenian farmers – YouTube video – Nareg Karekinian
Via Patrick Hoverstadt on LinkedIn – who says:
For all those who still believe the old myth that VSM is difficult to get across, this is from Nareg Karekinian training farmers in Armenia to use VSM on an agricultural development project.
The Boundary Triage: A Systemic Leadership Tool
Our Theory of Change « The Berkana Institute
Theory of Change
The two loops model has been a fundamental piece of The Berkana Institute’s theory of change. As one system culminates and starts to collapse, isolated alternatives slowly begin to arise and give way to the new. In this video Deborah Frieze, Berkana’s former co-president, explains the two loops theory and speaks about the way that our work to name, connect, nourish and illuminate has fit into this model. She also identifies some of the different roles we might play to hospice the dying system, usher in the alternative system and make clear the choice between the two.
We believe that no universal solution exists for the challenges of this time: increased poverty and disease, failing large-scale systems, ecological degradation. But widespread impact does become possible when people working at the local level are able to learn from one another, practice together and share learning with communities everywhere. We have observed that large-scale change emerges when local actions get connected globally while preserving their deeply local culture, flavor and form. And we have called this trans-local learning.
[Another explanation in more words at https://medium.com/@brittneebond/two-loops-model-9a3d52c7da4e ]
Two Loops Model
Exploring how systems change.
The Two Loops by Margaret Wheatley and the Berkana Institute has shaped the way I work with organizations. I’ll share my notes here on the model so you guys can keep passing it on.
Today we are living with the strong remnants of what’s called the Newtonian world view -> a mechanistic view.
Basically, if something breaks in our societal systems, we separate it into parts, analyze them, find the faulty part and switch it out for a better one. Except that doesn’t work. Rarely does it result in the kind of change leaders hope for. Instead, they were confronted by 8 new problems caused by their initial solution (and the initial solution might also be back and bigger this time.)
We can’t plan to avoid these consequences because we can’t see all the connections below the service.
When we take a step back, we realize we’re tugging at webs of relationships that are seldom visible… but always there.
In the last 100 years, we’ve progressed to realize a couple key points:
- Our world view is constantly changing
- Our world is quite adept to change
- Living things operate differently than mechanical things
This mechanistic world view doesn’t work because:
Humans don’t function like machines.
That’s why we should now look at a new systems model called Two Loops.
It tells the story of how systems dies and new systems emerge constantly. It works on all levels and isn’t linear. As systems ascend and become more the more dominant system, they become more powerful and entrenched.
Using the fossil fuel economy as an example:
- Oil was discovered
- We found we could use it as an energy source
- Over time the world economy was structured around fossil fuels
At the top of their game, life was great! The money was rolling in and the economy was booming. The people who hold this system up and fight to protect it are called stewards. They are comfortable in an established system. Stewards try to maintain the system as best they can for what they feel is the greater good of the system they are serving. (They are keeping it stable for the rest of us.)
All systems eventually begin to teeter and start to lose their significance. They enter hospice when they start to decline and are on their way to death. (We can only live off fossil fuels until it kills our climate or we run out of them.)
An interesting movement happens right at the peak of every system: some people drop out. (They realize as a fact that fossil fuels are a limited resource.) These pioneers walk out to start a new system. These pioneers look at the way things are, the deeply held beliefs that underpin the current system, and see that another way is possible.
This is a radical act; they are leaving the comfort of an established system at it’s peak and going alone to start a new one.
Ok, so now you have a bunch of divergents alone at the beginning of the new loop. It can be a really lonely time (picture scientists in their basements working on solar panels). What do they need to do to build this new system? To create a new movement? They need to find each other.
THey need to name themselves. They need to be able to google themselves (renewable energy, green economy, etc.)
Now we know what we are- next we need to connect with each other. We need to build a network and build social capital.
Once connection happens on a regular basis and is centered around progressive action, it becomes a community of practice. This includes failing forward together and upwards as the new system continues to emerge and build. It’s also a place to nourish the system so it can keep growing. New systems need: time, space, money, expertise and skill building.
Once the new system is on the upward swing, it hits an illumination stage (fossil fuel cars will be banned by 2040 in most European countries). This is where we tell the success stories to inspire the people in the old system to come over and transition into a new way of living. When, how and to whom we illuminate is a careful dance. Timing is everything.
BCSSS | Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
The Center
The Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science (BCSSS) is an Austrian independent research institute, internationally acknowledged as an ambassador for the systems science heritage and present state-of-the-art applied systems research.
The Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science focuses on the Foundations of Systems Science, exploring and explaining the nature of the world, and Systems Design, understanding and deploying change in this world.
The objective of the BCSSS is to inspire the development of systems science by fostering systems research and supporting systems thinking. Given the global challenges of today, systems science is needed more than ever.
In particular, it revisits the General Systems Theory (GST) as founded by Ludwig von Bertalanffy and others in order to reassess it in the light of today’s global challenges and to illuminate the course of development systems science has taken since.
- We execute and support use-inspired basic research projectsfocusing on the foundations of systems science, systems design and complexity management towards systemic sustainable innovative solutions.
- We support the next generation of systems researchers with scholarships and awards.
- We administrate the archive of Ludwig von Bertalanffy and other collections which are of interest to the systems movement and open the heritage to the public.
- We execute and support international scientific forums like the European Meetings on Cybernetics and Systems Research (EMCSR) to foster global networks between researchers and practitioners.
- We disseminate systems knowledge by executing and supporting lectures and workshops.
- We disseminate systems knowledge by publishingthe book series Systems in co-operation with systems engineers and the Open Access Journal Systema: connecting matter, life, culture and technology.
The association by Austrian law is an active member of the International Federation for Systems Research (IFSR), the largest umbrella organization in the field of systems science.
[this is the front page, click through headline link to find more. I found this through Gene Bellinger, who posted the link to Maria Lenzi and Helene Finidori’s Systems Science and Pattern Literacy group on linkedin:
http://www.bcsss.org/research/fields-and-groups/systems-science-and-pattern-literacy/%5D
Von Clausewitz’s Center of Gravity concept
Sjon van ’t Hof is always worth reading, and this is no exception.
And its possible relevance to systems thinking
Von Clausewitz, the seminal 19th century Prussian military theorist, famously wrote that war is merely “the continuation of policy [with the addition of] other means” (mit Einmischung anderer Mitteln). This suggests that war is essentially about politics. Clausewitz also spoke of the so-called trinity in war of people, army and government, suggesting that Clausewitz’ ideas mainly apply to nation states, a concept that itself is now under attack because of the rise of non-trinitarian wars involving non-state fighters as in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Mali. The question is of course whether these countries were fully developed nation states (well, probably not) in the first place, and whether the nation state as a concept is in decline as suggested by current theorists such as Van Creveld. Clausewitz also used a second trinity – passion, chance, and reason – for his analysis…
View original post 1,266 more words
Helene Finidori – survey: Mapping the Landscape of Patterns Across Domains
23 February at 18:26
Patterns can be found in many domains of research and praxis: design, systems and complexity science, cognitive psychology and neuroscience, linguistics, architecture, computer science, information technology, artificial intelligence, engineering, environmental sciences, biology, education, mathematics and many more…
Researchers and practitioners in these domains have different understandings and approaches to patterns. Yet, could some coherence be found across domains?
I have just finalized a survey with the research group Systems Science and Pattern Literacy at the Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science.
Patterns it seems to me are not very central and acknowledged in systems science / systems thinking, or are they?
We will welcome the insights of this community on your understanding of patterns and their role in your activity.
Here’s the link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MappingPatternsLandscape
Thanks 🙂
Mapping the Landscape of Patterns Across Domains Survey
4E Cognition Group | Embodied, Embedded, Extended, Enactive
Research group website.
We are an interdisciplinary group of researchers united by a shared interest in recent approaches to cognitive science, often known as “4E cognition” to refer to their emphasis on embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive cognition.
Our research group is officially hosted by the Research Institute for Applied Mathematics and Systems (IIMAS) in the main campus of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) in the southern parts of Mexico City.
We also have ties with the Centre for Complexity Sciences (C3), also at UNAM.
COORDINATOR
Tom Froese – http://froese.wordpress.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS
Enactivism
March 15, 2018 – March 17, 2018, Memphis
http://www.ummoss.org/enactivism18.html
4EC & Mental Disorder
April 5, 2018 – April 6, 2018, Exeter
https://www.joelkrueger.com/4e-conference
Reconceiving Cog.
June 27, 2018 – June 29 Antwerp, Belgium
ALIFE 2018
July 23, 2018 – July 27, 2018, Tokyo, Japan
Movement: Brain, Body, Cognition
July 27, 2018 – July 29, 2018, Harvard Medical School
https://movementis.com
Systems Community of Inquiry 
You must be logged in to post a comment.