September 2004

• Organization Studies 25(7):1233-1254

DOI:10.1177/0170840604046361

William H. Starbuck

• University of Oregon

Years ago, I believed that rationality could manufacture understanding. I lived in physical and social environments that were real and I wanted to understand the social realities. I wanted to create a genuine ‘behavioral science’ based on mathematical models, computer simulation, and systematic experiments. Various experiences over the years have challenged these beliefs. I discovered that rationality can not only be a deceptive tool but a potentially dangerous one, and I learned a few techniques to help me challenge my rational thought. I discovered that research findings have very low reliabilities, that some fields make no discernible progress over many decades, and that societal cultures strongly influence researchers’ judgments about what constitutes useful knowledge. I saw that much that passes for research is merely random noise dressed up in pretentious language. Rather than realities, the social systems I was studying proved to be arbitrary categories created by observers or social conventions. I became an advocate for research that actively attempts to change situations rather than merely to observe what happens spontaneously.

(PDF) Why I Stopped Trying to Understand the Real World

INCOSE Launches the Future for Systems Engineering (FuSE) Initiativeto Deliver the SE Vision 2035

INCOSE Launches the Future for Systems Engineering (FuSE) Initiative to Deliver the SE Vision 2035

2019

Umpleby, Stuart. “How Cybernetics is Contributing to Traditional Disciplines” (Slides) (Video)

2016

Umpleby, Stuart, “Vladimir Lefebvre’s Theory of Two Systems of Ethical Cognition”(Paper) (Slides) (Video)

2014

Umpleby, Stuart, “Second Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods” (Paper) (Slides) (Video)

2013

Umpleby, Stuart. “Second Order Cybernetics Then and Now” (Abstract) (Slides) (Video) (pic1, pic2, pic3, pic4, pic5);  

2012

Umpleby, Stuart, “A Second Expansion of Science” (Slides) (Audio lecture)

2006

Umpleby, Stuart, “Fundamentals and History of Cybernetics:  A Tutorial.”  (Slides 1, 2, 3, 4) (Exercises) (Video)

Lectures on Cybernetics – Stuart Umpleby’s Website

Keynote Speakers

Rodney Irwin, Chief Operating Officer (COO) and a member of the Senior Management Team (SMT) at the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

Ray Ison is Professor of Systems at the Open University and President of the International Federation of Systems Research.

Registration guidelines

The registration fee for the two-day event is £250 including lunch, one evening meal and refreshments. Students/retirees £125. Further donations to the work of the society are gratefully acknowledged.

To book a place please visit this link.

Call for contributions

Papers are invited to contribute to the following streams

Sustainability research- what can systems offer?
Barriers to change – how can systems thinking/practice help overcome them?
Methodologies -evaluating system methods for intervention and transition
Cross disciplinary research -the contribution of Systems to interdisciplinarity
Knowledge Transfer-continuity or transformation?
Power and Accountability- Systems perspectives
The question of scale and transition – spatial and chronological
Policy making and its impact upon the process of transition
Food Systems and their impact upon Healthy diets
The NHS -A system to…?
Sustainable Systems in Business
Details of participation and submissions

Abstracts: from the 31st of March 2023.
Close for abstracts/submissions: 30th June
Review of submissions by 30th July
Revised submissions/full papers 31st of August.
Conference publication of accepted abstracts 15th September.
Publication of proceedings – January 2024
To submit please see here.

Presentations will F2F and in plenary. Special dispensation for Zoom-based presentations might be considered in special cases but please note the cost of registration remains the same.

For full details of the conference keynote speakers, submission process, registration and accommodation in Oxford please see the conference flyer.
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/uk-systems-society-international-conference-2023-tickets-461932942867

PS Please pass the flyer on to anyone you think might benefit from this conference – thank you and see you in September 2023.

The first Systems Thinking Ontario session for 2023 is scheduled for January 9, on “Root Metaphors and World Hypotheses”.  This is philosophical content, for which a guided tour and discussion will be better than attempting a solo reading of the World Hypotheses wiki on the Open Learning Commons.  Upon announcing the session on social media, I was honoured to receive a response from Michael C. Jackson, OBE…

 January 4, 2023  dividing

World Hypotheses, Contextualism, Systems Methods

Soon after networks became all the rage among statistical physicists, the field turned away from the home turf of complex systems science. This blog …

The quiet revolution: When complex left networks

FRIDAY–> Consulting for Systems Practice Interventions https://bit.ly/3i7ONQb
Facilitation Skills for Systems Practice Interventions https://bit.ly/3jLXyzV
Consulting for Systems Practice Interventions https://bit.ly/3VIN5CD

MIT Systems Awareness Lab & Systems Awareness Research Conference at MIT

MIT Systems Awareness Lab & Systems Awareness Research Conference at MIT – Center for Systems Awareness

Joseph Goguen

Click to access CoR-LtG-ShortHistory.pdf

Thomas Schmickl¹Show more

Published25 Nov 2022

Abstract

Predictions of emergent phenomena, appearing on the macroscopic layer of a complex system, can fail if they are made by a microscopic model. This study demonstrates and analyses this claim on a well-known complex system, Conway’s Game of Life. Straightforward macroscopic mean-field models are easily capable of predicting such emergent properties after they have been fitted to simulation data in an after-the-fact way. Thus, these predictions are macro-to-macro only. However, a micro-to-macro model significantly fails to predict correctly, as does the obvious mesoscopic modeling approach. This suggests that some macroscopic system properties in a complex dynamic system should be interpreted as examples of phenomena (properties) arising from “strong emergence,” due to the lack of ability to build a consistent micro-to-macro model, that could explain these phenomena in a before-the-fact way. The root cause for this inability to predict this in a micro-to-macro way is identified as the pattern formation process, a phenomenon that is usually classified as being of “weak emergence.” Ultimately, this suggests that it may be in principle impossible to discriminate between such distinct categories of “weak” and “strong” emergence, as phenomena of both types can be part of the very same feedback loop that mainly governs the system’s dynamics.

Strong Emergence Arising from Weak Emergence

How to Learn from the Man in the Mirror: Navigating Paradoxes Through Self-Reflexivity, Dragsdahl Lauritezen and La Cour (2020)

Ghita Dragsdahl Lauritzen

 and 

Anders La Cour

Published Online:29 Jul 2020https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.19363abstract

Abstract

In the light of increased organizational and environmental complexity, research turns ever more often to the notion of paradox to investigate how managers can navigate conflicting demands. However, the internal dynamics of paradox remain unclear, making it difficult to understand what exactly is meant by the concept, and how it can be managed in practice. This article notes that the full potential of paradox as an analytical tool for understanding complex situations of organizational life has not been reached, and reveals instances of organizational complexity that appear even more radical than current definitions of paradox posit. Using the sociologist Niklas Luhmann’s concepts of distinction and re-entry, we unfold the complexity of such situations and develop a typology that includes a novel type of paradox that appears underexplored. Illustrating several different ways that opposites can appear interdependent, interwoven, persistent, and synergistic, we contribute to theory- building within paradox research. Finally, we discuss our findings and managerial implications and point towards future research.”

How to Learn from the Man in the Mirror: Navigating Paradoxes Through Self-Reflexivity | Academy of Management Proceedings

Melioristic genealogies and Indigenous philosophies

Helen De Cruz, Johan De Smedt

First published: 05 December 2022

https://doi.org/10.1111/phil.12327

Abstract

According to Mary Midgley, philosophy is like plumbing: like the invisible entrails of an elaborate plumbing system, philosophical ideas respond to basic needs that are fundamental to human life. Melioristic projects in philosophy attempt to fix or reroute this plumbing. An obstacle to melioristic projects is that the sheer familiarity of the underlying philosophical ideas renders the plumbing invisible. Philosophical genealogies aim to overcome this by looking at the origins of our current concepts. We discuss philosophical concepts developed in Indigenous cultures as a source of inspiration for melioristic genealogy. Examining the philosophical concepts of these communities is useful because it gives us a better idea of the range of ethical, political, and metaphysical approaches that exist in the world. Members of western societies do not get a clear view of this range, in part because living in large groups presents its own constraints and challenges, which limit philosophical options. We argue that features of Indigenous philosophies, such as egalitarianism and care for one’s natural environment, are not inevitable byproducts of Native material conditions and lifestyles, but that they are deliberate forms of conceptual engineering. We propose that comparative philosophy is an integral part of the genealogical project.

Melioristic genealogies and Indigenous philosophies – De Cruz – The Philosophical Forum – Wiley Online Library