Understanding and investigating relationality in the capability approach John Owens,Vikki A. Entwistle,Luke K. Craven,Ina Conradie
Understanding and investigating relationality in the capability approach – Owens – – Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour – Wiley Online Library
Category Archives: Discussion
A view or perspective on the world
Boundary Objects: A Field Guide – Sveta Stoytcheva
Alan Watts – Being in the Way – Ep. 2 – Dropping Out From Karma – Be Here Now Network 2021
Alan Watts – Being in the Way – Ep. 2 – Dropping Out From Karma
Alan Watts – Being in the Way – Ep. 2 – Dropping Out From Karma – Be Here Now Network 2021
We need a bit of Watts or Ram Dass here every now and again, I’m contractually obliged or you’ll think I’ve gone straight 😉
This struck me (especially the Daoist part) as particularly systems-y.
Please note I have spare you the very exciteable conversation between Jordan Peterson and John Vervaeke – not becuase I didn’t get a lot of good notes out of it (the robust organisations model as a metaphor for good team capabilities and an explanation for the evolution of personality types?), but becuase if I am shouting ‘just shut up and let him talk!’ multiple times at JBP, I can only imagine the reaction it would get in the groups…
Power & Systems Change: A Conversation between Anna Birney & Adam Kahane | Forum for the Future
book at:
Power & Systems Change: A Conversation between Anna Birney & Adam Kahane | Forum for the Future
Power & Systems Change: A Conversation between Anna Birney & Adam Kahane
Join the conversation – book your free ticket.
Date: 9 September 2021
Time: 16:00 – 17:00 BST | 17:00 – 18:00 CEST | 08:00 – 9:00 PT | 11:00 – 12:00 ET
Power is an increasingly prominent question for systems change practitioners and yet it is often difficult to engage with or to fully understand.
As consciously powerful actors in the field, Anna Birney (School of System Change) and Adam Kahane (Reos Partners) speak to the importance of acknowledging and being aware of your own power as a facilitator, and the dynamics of relationships, participation and how that contributes to transformation.
This webinar will be a conversation between the two based on their experience and reflections, inviting others into the inquiry on power and its role in systems change.
New Report: Bridging the fields of feminist and systems practice | Tatiana Fraser and Juniper Glass (2020)
New Report: Bridging the fields of feminist and systems practice 29 October 2020 We are happy to share a new report by PhiLab member Juniper Glass. She has co-authored a new piece based on 3 years of working with feminist organizations across Canada.
New Report: Bridging the fields of feminist and systems practice | Philab
full pdf: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a0b2bbb80bd5e8ae706c73c/t/5f62b391191e4255845d66f6/1600304027998/Gender_Ecosystems+_Final.pdf
Ecofeminism and Systems Thinking – 1st Edition – Anne Stephens (2015)
Ecofeminism and Systems Thinking By Anne Stephens Copyright Year 2013 Paperback £31.99
Ecofeminism and Systems Thinking – 1st Edition – Anne Stephens – Rout
Ecofeminism and Systems Thinking
By
Anne Stephens
full pdf: https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/28213/1/28213_Stephens_2.pdf
ISBN 9781138952829Published September 18, 2015 by Routledge144 Pages 10 B/W Illustrations
Format Paperback Hardback VitalSource eBook Quantity SAVE ~ £8.00was £39.99GBP£31.99 Add to Cart Add to Wish List
Prices & shipping based on shipping country
Skip Product MenuBook DescriptionTable of ContentsAuthor(s)
Book Description
This book brings together two vitally important strands of 20th-century thinking to establish a set of simple and elegant principles for planning, project design and evaluation. It explains the backgrounds of cultural ecofeminism and critical systems thinking, and what we find when they are systematically compared. Both theories share a range of concepts, have a strong social justice ethic, and challenge the legacy of modernity. The book takes theory into practice. The value of the emergent principles of feminist-systems thinking are described and demonstrated through four chapters of case studies in community development settings. The principles can be used to influence project design and outcomes across a range of disciplines including project management, policy, health, education, and community development. This book has much to offer practitioners who seek to create more socially just and equitable project and research outcomes.
Table of Contents
Part A 1. Introduction 2. Ecofeminism and Systems Theory 3. Comparing and Contrasting Ecofeminism and Systems Thinking 4. Principles of Feminist-Systems Thinking. Part B 5. Case Study 1: Exploring FST Principles in Community Development: The Carrot on a Stick Early Health Intervention Program 6. Case Study 2: The Yarrabah Kinship Gardens 7. Case Study 3: Evaluating Changes: Community Awareness Growth and Change 8. Case Study 4: Greening the Economy: Mapping and Identifying Ways to Transform a Regional Economy 9. Drawing Conclusions and the Value of the Feminist-Systems Thinking Framework
Author(s)
Biography
Anne Stephens is a Senior Researcher with The Cairns Institute at James Cook University.
Can ‘Approach X’ be used to tackle Wicked Problems?
An invitationto examine claims of design and planning approaches
to effectively ‘solve’ wicked problems.
Thorbjørn Mann 2021
(This post is the first part of several attempts to explore the question, in comments or further posts)
The question whether certain design and planning approaches can be used to ‘solve’ or ‘tackle’ wicked problems [1] is an issue raised anew with each new ‘approach’ being brought out on the market. Such claims have been made for widely popular ‘thinking’ ways — ‘systems thinking, ‘design thinking’, ‘holistic thinking’, ‘sociocracy’ and Pattern Language [2], for example:
The question may have to be restated somewhat. Of course every such approach ‘can’ be used to try to address wicked problems. If we only have one tool, that will be the one we will, indeed must use. But the real question is about the validity or plausibility of claims that an approach will reliably be effective
View original post 2,038 more words
What might Coordinated System-Wide Climate Emergency Activity look like?
Context
As we know, the response to the climate change emergency is such a ferociously complicated system problem that no-one can solve it on their own; all must play a part. But the disparate nature of different organisations and the very many different things that need to happen can mean that we end up (potentially) pulling in different directions and confusing the general public who are less close to the whole thing.
I wanted to paint a vision of what coordinated action could look like, to provoke discussion.
Let’s Suppose…
That in a place, let’s call it Snorbenden, the multiple active community groups, local employers who cared about this, the council, other public institutions, decided that they would coordinate their various activities, for a year, around a theme of air quality. I’ve just taken air quality as an example, but the rationale could run along the lines of:
- It’s important…
View original post 1,142 more words
What is work? What’s your definition?
It’s a deeply cybernetic concept – and it’s incredibly useful to realise this.
Work is:
>> ‘effort, to a purpose, using judgement and discretion, within boundaries, over time’. <<
(This is based on two definitions by Elliott Jacques, given with citations below).
This formal definition turns out to be deeply cybernetic, and very helpful in thinking about this engagement. It relates to the ideas of ‘purpose’, ‘the situation’, and ‘sensemaking’.
Critical elements here are:
Purpose.
A fundamental and powerful idea. The intent to achieve something.
Purpose depends on context, framing, understanding, level of thinking and much more. The purpose and the context must…
View original post 408 more words
New Books Network | Martin Reynolds and Sue Holwell, “Systems Approaches to Making Change: A Practical Guide” (2020)
Martin Reynolds and Sue Holwell (Retired) Jul 27, 2021 Systems Approaches to Making Change: A Practical Guide SPRINGER 2020
New Books Network | Martin Reynolds and Sue Holwell, “Systems…
Creative Systemic Research, Susu Nousala + Jelena Sucic (ST-ON 2021-02-08) – Coevolving Innovations
source:
Creative Systemic Research, Susu Nousala + Jelena Sucic (ST-ON 2021-02-08) – Coevolving Innovations
Creative Systemic Research, Susu Nousala + Jelena Sucic (ST-ON 2021-02-08)
July 26, 2021 daviding
The Creative Systemic Research Platform (CSRP) Institute, led by Susu Nousala and Jelena Sucic, is distinctive in approaching systemic design from a bottom-up, longitudinal perspective. The co-presidents were able to join us in conversation at a Systems Thinking Ontario session, remotely from Finland and Switzerland, at a significant time disadvantage.
continues in source:
Creative Systemic Research, Susu Nousala + Jelena Sucic (ST-ON 2021-02-08) – Coevolving Innovations
Leydesdorff L. (2021) Social Order: Continuously Reconstructed in Terms of Expectations. Constructivist Foundations 16(3): 372–374
Social Order: Continuously Reconstructed in Terms of Expectations Loet Leydesdorff
Leydesdorff L. (2021) Social Order: Continuously Reconstructed in Terms of Expectations. Constructivist Foundations 16(3): 372–374
Sillitto, Dori et al – a series of papers on defining ‘system’
What is a System? An Ontological Framework (2017)
What is a System? An Ontological Framework D. Dori, H. Sillitto Published 2017 Computer Science Syst. Eng. Over the past decades, the definition of system has eluded researchers and practitioners. We reviewed over 100 definitions of system to understand the variations and establish a framework for a widely acceptable system definition or a family of system definitions. There is much common ground in different families of definitions of system, but there are also important and significant ontological differences. Some differences stem from the variety of belief systems and worldviews, while others have risen within particular communities. Both limit the effectiveness of system communities’ efforts to communicate, collaborate, and learn from others’ experience. We consider three ontological elements: (1) a worldview-based framework for typology of different system types and categories, (2) key system concepts that are fundamental to the various system types and categories, and (3) appropriate language for the target audience. In this work, we establish the ontological framework, list key concepts associated with different types of system, and point to a direction for agreeing on an integrated set of system definitions in a neutral language consistent with the framework. The definitions are compatible with both the realist and constructivist worldviews, covering real (physical, concrete) and conceptual (abstract, logical, informatical) systems, which are both human-made (artificial) and naturally occurring, using language acceptable to a wide target stakeholder audience. The contribution of this paper is setting up an ontologically founded framework of system typologies, providing definitions for system, and identifying the issues involved in achieving a widely accepted definition or family of definitions of system. Collapse
[PDF] What is a System? An Ontological Framework | Semantic Scholar
System Definition, System Worldviews, and Systemness Characteristics (2020)
System Definition, System Worldviews, and Systemness Characteristics D. Dori, H. Sillitto, +6 authors D. Krob Published 2020 Computer Science IEEE Systems Journal The definition and characteristics of system have eluded humans for a very long time, as different people refer to the concept of system in various ways. A set of surveys conducted by us revealed seven distinct worldviews on system. We describe the surveys, analyze their results, and comment on differences between the responses. Based on the outcomes, we offer a comprehensive definition of system that can be accepted by the various worldview holders as an arrangement of parts or elements that together exhibit behavior or meaning that the individual constituents do not. Further, we present a compiled list of systemness characteristics—features that different worldview holders expect any system to exhibit. Then we present and describe the different worldviews on system, compare them with previous system definitions, and map them to five system domains. We conclude that the various system worldviews offer useful perspectives for systems engineers, who should have the flexibility to accept the fact that different worldviews may be appropriate for different situations and be ready to adopt them as necessary. Collapse
[PDF] System Definition, System Worldviews, and Systemness Characteristics | Semantic Scholar
“System”: a Comprehensive Approach (2017)
Defining “System”: a Comprehensive Approach H. Sillitto, D. Dori, +6 authors D. McKinney Published 2017 Sociology Over the past decades, a common definition of the term system has eluded researchers and practitioners alike. We reviewed over 100 current and historical definitions of system in an effort to understand perspectives and to propose the most comprehensive definition of this term. There is much common ground in different families of definition of system, but there are also important and significant differences. Some stem from different belief systems and worldviews, while others are due to a pragmatic desire to establish a clear definition for system within a particular community, disregarding wider considerations. In either case, it limits the effectiveness of various system communities’ efforts to communicate, collaborate, and learn from the experience of other communities. We discovered that by considering a wide typology of systems, Bertalanffy’s General Systems Theory provides a basis for a general, self-consistent sensible framework, capable of accommodating and showing the relationships amongst the variety of different definitions of and belief systems pertaining to system. Emergence, the appearance of a new phenomenon or capability as a result of relation or interaction between objects, is key in differentiating between objects that are systems and those that are not. Hence we propose a family of definitions, related by the common theme of emergence, which is in line with both the realist and constructivist worldviews, and covers real and conceptual systems. We believe this better reflects the current scope of systems engineering and is required to support the aspirations expressed in INCOSE SE Vision 2025. Collapse
Defining “System”: a Comprehensive Approach | Semantic Scholar
An Assessment of the Adequacy of Common Definitions of the Concept of System – Salado and Kulkarni (2021)
An Assessment of the Adequacy of Common Definitions of the Concept of System July 2021 Conference: INCOSE International Symposium 2021 Authors: Alejandro Salado Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Aditya U Kulkarni
(PDF) An Assessment of the Adequacy of Common Definitions of the Concept of System
Just presented at the INCOSE conference. Systems Engineering (very much in its own terms – starting from ‘we restrict ourselves to systems in the world’, defining ’emergence’ in fixed thermodynamic terms etc) goes second order!
Abstract
In all areas of scientific study, definitions are used to describe the meaning of terms. Thus, a good set of definitions aids the scientific process by enabling researchers to communicate in a common language. In this regard, the Systems Engineering community has allocated significant effort to understanding the nature and scope of common definitions of a system. However, less attention has been given to formally examining whether these common definitions of a system are adequate. In this paper, we argue that the common definitions of a system are limited in their ability to adequately define a system’s boundary. Furthermore, we argue that the common definitions of a system rely on context and prior understanding to communicate the boundary of a system. Finally, by using concepts from philosophy and mathematical logic, we show that the common definitions of a system are nominal in their ability to define a system’s boundary.
Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics – Meteyard et al (2012)
Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics Lotte Meteyard 1, Sara Rodriguez Cuadrado, Bahador Bahrami, Gabriella Vigliocco
Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics – PubMed
Cortex
. 2012 Jul;48(7):788-804. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.11.002. Epub 2010 Nov 18.
Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics
Lotte Meteyard 1, Sara Rodriguez Cuadrado, Bahador Bahrami, Gabriella ViglioccoAffiliations expand
- PMID: 21163473
- DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.11.002
Free article
Abstract
Over the last decade, there has been an increasing body of work that explores whether sensory and motor information is a necessary part of semantic representation and processing. This is the embodiment hypothesis. This paper presents a theoretical review of this work that is intended to be useful for researchers in the neurosciences and neuropsychology. Beginning with a historical perspective, relevant theories are placed on a continuum from strongly embodied to completely unembodied representations. Predictions are derived and neuroscientific and neuropsychological evidence that could support different theories is reviewed; finally, criticisms of embodiment are discussed. We conclude that strongly embodied and completely disembodied theories are not supported, and that the remaining theories agree that semantic representation involves some form of convergence zones (Damasio, 1989) and the activation of modal content. For the future, research must carefully define the boundaries of semantic processing and tackle the representation of abstract entities.
Systems Community of Inquiry 
You must be logged in to post a comment.