Denis Noble

A theory of biological relativity: no privileged level of causation

Denis Noble

• PMID: 23386960
• PMCID: PMC3262309
• DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2011.0067

Abstract

Must higher level biological processes always be derivable from lower level data and mechanisms, as assumed by the idea that an organism is completely defined by its genome? Or are higher level properties necessarily also causes of lower level behaviour, involving actions and interactions both ways? This article uses modelling of the heart, and its experimental basis, to show that downward causation is necessary and that this form of causation can be represented as the influences of initial and boundary conditions on the solutions of the differential equations used to represent the lower level processes. These insights are then generalized. A priori, there is no privileged level of causation. The relations between this form of ‘biological relativity’ and forms of relativity in physics are discussed. Biological relativity can be seen as an extension of the relativity principle by avoiding the assumption that there is a privileged scale at which biological functions are determined.

Keywords: biological relativity; cardiac cell model; downward causation; scale relativity.

A theory of biological relativity: no privileged level of causation – PubMed

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23386960/

(can’t find pdf other than

https://sci-hub.se/10.1098/rsfs.2011.0067 )

and

REVIEW article

Front. Physiol., 18 July 2019

Sec. Integrative Physiology

Volume 10 – 2019 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2019.00827

This article is part of the Research TopicMultilevel Organization and Functional Integration in OrganismsView all 15 articles

Biological Relativity Requires Circular Causality but Not Symmetry of Causation: So, Where, What and When Are the Boundaries?

Raymond Noble¹Kazuyo Tasaki²Penelope J. Noble²Denis Noble^2*

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.00827/full

@systemicpractice

Welcome to the Systemic Practice Channel hosted by Everything is Connected Press

Systemic Practice – YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/@systemicpractice

In sociology, action theory is the theory of social action presented by the American theorist Talcott Parsons.

Parsons established action theory to integrate the study of social action and social order with the aspects of macro and micro factors. In other words, he was trying to maintain the scientific rigour of positivism, while acknowledging the necessity of the “subjective dimension” of human action incorporated in hermeneutic types of sociological theorizing. Parsons sees motives as part of our actions. Therefore, he thought that social science must consider ends, purposes and ideals when looking at actions. Parsons placed his discussion within a higher epistemological and explanatory context of systems theory and cybernetics.

Action theory (sociology)7 languagesArticleTalkReadEditView historyToolsFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaPart of a series onSociologyHistoryOutlineIndexshowKey themesshowPerspectivesshowBranchesshowMethodsshowSociologistsshowLists Society portalvteIn sociology, action theory is the theory of social action presented by the American theorist Talcott Parsons.Parsons established action theory to integrate the study of social action and social order with the aspects of macro and micro factors. In other words, he was trying to maintain the scientific rigour of positivism, while acknowledging the necessity of the “subjective dimension” of human action incorporated in hermeneutic types of sociological theorizing. Parsons sees motives as part of our actions. Therefore, he thought that social science must consider ends, purposes and ideals when looking at actions. Parsons placed his discussion within a higher epistemological and explanatory context of systems theory and cybernetics.

Action theory (sociology) – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_theory_(sociology)

John Tower*

• Molecular and Computational Biology Section, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States

[h/t JP de Vooght on Mastodon https://mastodon.social/deck/@jdevoo/112518348760974121 who says News from the biology front line with “selectively advantageous instability” and implications for evolution and aging that will be of interest to org students]

Frontiers | Selectively advantageous instability in biotic and pre-biotic systems and implications for evolution and aging

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fragi.2024.1376060/full

[As Prof Mike Jackson said in comments on LinkedIn, the article references Ramage and Shipp which is “a very reliable guide”]

• January 8, 2024
• 9 Minutes Read

A Brief History of Systems Thinking

[I was lucky enough to go to the launch of this, a nice event – I might write more about it. It cemented in my mind that ‘local systems change’ or ‘place-based systems change’ as they describe it is very specific – funder-and-charity focus, using entirely middle-of-the road, bourgeois approaches, squarely within the Overton window, and based on assumptions that everyone just needs a lot of exposure to niceness and rationality and things will change for the better. Obviously that’s something like damning with faint praise, but I know this kind of approach can be valuable and impactful when yout experience it. I do think there’s a lot of value in ‘start with self, and with understanding’. But I don’t think this is going to change any ‘systems’]

What does it take to change a system?

What does it take to change a system? – Renaisi

Club of Remy

Download8 views 17 May 2024CoR’s second mini-course, Lou Kauffman, “Self-organization and Knot Theory: A missing Link between Cybernetics and the Evolution of Structure.” May 8, 2024 Speed Dating of Ideas Club Of Remy http://www.clubofremy.org

Lou Kauffman: Self-organization and Knot Theory – YouTube

Biophysical Chemistry

Volume 85, Issues 2–3, 15 July 2000, Pages 101-123

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4622(00)00122-8Get rights and content

Abstract

Information has two aspects: a quantity to be called ‘extent’ and a quality which may be termed ‘content’ since it deals with meaning. The latter originates via selective self-organization, which can be described also in quantitative physical terms. A prerequisite is the reproducibility of the informational substrate forming the basis of selection. This paper focuses on selection being the analogue of a physical phase transition. In Section 1 the criteria for phase transitions are formulated. Section 2 introduces the concept of information space and describes information as selected points or regions in this space. In Section 3 selection is analyzed in terms of the criteria for phase transitions, and in Section 4 the concept is confronted with experimental data. The conclusion is reached that information content is generated via selection, which can be described as a phase transition in information space

Natural selection: a phase transition? – ScienceDirect

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301462200001228

Harold Nelson

nelsongroup@berkeley.edu

Harold Nelson leads the collection with an invited essay, Contexts’ first article, that helps place the footers and foundation into the field that has grown from design for complex scale and generations of systems thinking. The fertile ground of the 1960s consciousness revolution, the University of California at Berkeley, and what Nelson refers to as The Berkeley Bubble are central to the ideas in this essay.

Berkeley Bubble | Contexts—The Journal of Systemic Design

https://systemic-design.org/contexts/vol1/harold-nelson/v1001/

[They say:]

What is systems intelligence?

---

Systems intelligence is the ability to understand the world around you through a systemic lens, and to take intelligent action.

This means being aware of the big picture, noticing how things are related, and understanding the the impact of your actions.

It also means being able to join forces with others in harmonious and productive ways.

Systems intelligence is rooted in the principles of systems thinking, but has less focus on methodologies. It has more to do with everyday habits and actions.

It is a way of thinking, a way of working, a way of being.

THE INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS INTELLIGENCE

https://www.ifsi.uk/

• November 2015
• Constructivist Foundations 11(1):42-50

• Gordon Dyer
• Jed Jones
• Gordon Rowland
• Silvia Zweifel

Context: Thirty years ago, members of the systems science community discovered that at their conferences, more was being accomplished in the breaks than in the sessions. Led by Bela H. Banathy, they cancelled the sessions and created a conversation methodology that has proven far more effective. Dozens of conversations have now been held around the world. Problem: At a recent conversation in Linz, Austria, a team devoted its inquiry to the Banathy Conversation Methodology (BCM) itself, asking, in particular, how to develop and spread the methodology further, beyond the systems science community. Method: The team captured key features and benefits of BCM and developed new tools. Results: Described herein are the development of the methodology, its theoretical underpinnings, the methodology itself, heuristics for successful conversations, and an example of how the methodology is spreading. Implications: Ultimately, the hope is to develop the methodology in such ways that communities could apply it to meet significant challenges and co-create their futures.

(PDF) The Banathy Conversation Methodology

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284738114_The_Banathy_Conversation_Methodology

Metcalf G. S. (2015) A constructivist perspective on banathy’s conversation methodology. Constructivist Foundations 11(1): 53–54. http://constructivist.info/11/1/053

Open peer commentary on the article “The Banathy Conversation Methodology” by Gordon Dyer, Jed Jones, Gordon Rowland & Silvia Zweifel. Upshot: This commentary will address the implicit and explicit connections between Banathy’s Conversation Methodology, which is the heart of the process used at the IFSR Conversations held every two years in Austria, and constructivist theories in application.

https://constructivist.info/11/1/053.metcalf

• January 2021

• DOI: 
• 10.33278/SAE-2020.book1.054-057

• Conference: Systems Analysis in Economics – 2020

• Gerald Midgley

A systems theory of marginalization and its implications for systemic interventionJanuary 2021DOI: 10.33278/SAE-2020.book1.054-057Conference: Systems Analysis in Economics – 2020Gerald Midgley

(18) (PDF) A systems theory of marginalization and its implications for systemic intervention

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354980463_A_systems_theory_of_marginalization_and_its_implications_for_systemic_intervention

Houda Boulahbel

Published in

Systems Thinking Made Simple

6 min read

Systems thinking is becoming sexy. Should we be worried? | by Houda Boulahbel | Systems Thinking Made Simple | May, 2024 | Medium

Authors

Ö. Şenalp
G. Midgley

2023

Systems Research and Behavioral Science

Volume | Issue number 40

In this paper, we propose a research agenda to support the recovery of Alexander Bogdanov’s philosophical and systemic thinking that culminated in his magnum opus, Tektology. Our main reason for doing so is to re-address enduring questions about the unity of science and the unity of the systems paradigm. Since the turn of the new millennium, there has been renewed interest in the ideal of the unity of science. General system theory (GST), cybernetics and complexity science are three significant intellectual sources inspiring this renewal. It is not unusual for these ideas to be grouped under the umbrella terms systems science or systems thinking, which are two ways to present a single systems paradigm, and we will explain why its “unity” is both necessary and problematic. Bringing Bogdanov’s work back to address the unity question can help us to progress toward unity in diversity.

In special issue: Resurrecting Bogdanov on the 150th anniversary of his birth.

Persistent Identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/11245.1/f9a4e972-a2b8-4ddc-a5d6-c7d31b61096a

• Systems Research and Behavioral Science – 2023 – Şenalp – Alexander Bogdanov and the question of unity An emerging(Final published version)

https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=f9a4e972-a2b8-4ddc-a5d6-c7d31b61096a

[Title and by-lines given verbatim, for fun…]

This was shared on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/posts/angelamontgomeryphd_systemsthinking-science-business-activity-7196518562612576258-qocy by Angela Montgomery PhD of the Decalogue method (https://stream.syscoi.com/2024/05/15/the-decalogue-short-overview-intelligent-management-lepore-montgomery-siepe/)

My comment:

/please ignore if not in the mood for grumpiness/

I am glad you make the point that your work goes deeper – from what I know it does!

And thank goodness, because – not wishing to be too grumpy – this is advertorial (paid-for) word salad, akin to one of those LinkedIn AI articles – it’s disappointing that Forbes has gone down the route of fleecing consultants and coaches rather than journalism 😦

And so this article, though I don’t doubt many or all of the contributors are good-willed and highly capable people, sort of undermines them, Forbes, the concept of journalism and ‘systems thinking’ at the same time 😦

How To Apply Systems Thinking To Business Leadership

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2024/05/13/how-to-apply-systems-thinking-to-business-leadership/?sh=9b203de5fdc4