PurposeTo describe a view of parts of the world as assemblies with emergent properties constructed from related properties or objects, and the modelling of production of emergent properties arising by chance or design.Design/methodology/approachOne and two place sentences of a homogeneous language are combined in a static state to show a variety of possibilities of new structures. Combinations of such sentences in a dynamic state derived from narratives that show how static states are produced.FindingsUsing Cartesian products and network theory the kind and number of new structures can be calculated. Semantic diagrams exhibit the propagation of dynamic states leading to the use of predicate logic statements as carriers of properties of objects with uncertainties.Research limitations/implicationsThe approach is based on linguistic analysis being able to encapsulate linguistic complexities, expressions of feelings, emotions, etc. in homogeneous language. Interpretation of semantics is restricted to human mind. Research may lead to a science and design of complex systems.Practical implicationsThe method embedded in the approach can be developed into a design aid for managers subject to its passing the test of debate and development of software.Originality/valueThe research has led to a more rigorous approach to the analysis and design of scenarios including those with human activities.
Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to describe how ordered pairs representing related objects in static state are used to create hierarchical structures yielding rapidly increasing choices of complex objects to be selected by objects in their environment and how "purposive systems" evolve for the production of such structures. Design/methodology/approach -Basic notions transcending discipline boundaries and natural language formalised into one-and two-place sentences are suggested as related constituents of complexity and hierarchy, the "systemic view". This leads into sets of ordered pairs and sequences of qualified predicate logic statements forming dynamics of systems. Findings -Hierarchies in general can be expressed as ordered pairs. An analytical method for showing how ordered pairs are organised into progressively more complex structures of objects and "products" with increased chances of being selected by environmental objects in evolution or design. Correspondingly, groups of purposive systems operating according to algorithms are needed for the production of products or their evolution is left to chance.Research limitations/implications -The approach uses natural language as the primary model transformed into a formal language for reasoning about outcomes of scenarios with inanimate and animate components with predominantly qualitative properties, emotions and will. The desirability of such an approach, although it matches the generality of the systemic view, needs to be debated. Practical implications -Once past the test of acceptability and software development, the approach can be used as part of "design methodology" for the design of "systems and products" in the context of human activity and technical scenarios. Originality/value -The formal language exhibits properties, relations and interactions or impressions of objects of great diversity and variety. It exhibits the effects of these constituents on the production of outcomes based on semantic and mathematical relationships; it is widely applicable and may facilitate the appreciation of how "related objects evolve".
A number of empirical statements intended to capture features of “systems” considered to be pervasive, is given. A symbolism based on processed natural language is outlined. The symbolism can be used for analysis of scenarios with predominantly qualitative properties i.e. human activity situations. It is capable of carrying the appropriate mathematics and uncertainties associated with operation of human and other types of components, is based on a kind of predicate logic and exhibits changes of states in time. The approach has led to a definition of information and product and systems design.
Purpose -After the postwar years, the realisation that parts of the world, real, imaginary or abstract, can be seen as "related properties or objects", the systemic view, has resulted in an immense production of, by and large, speculative intellectual output. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how following the methodology of conventional science, the systemic view can be turned into systems science. Design/methodology/approach -Basic notions which transcend discipline boundaries are put forward. Natural language is used as the primary model for description of human activity and other scenarios leading to its processing into homogeneous language of one-and two-place declarative sentences, the minimal elements which still reflect the systemic view. These sentences are called "ordered pairs" in static state and "dynamic sentences" in dynamic state. Complex models are developed: as sets of ordered pairs from which meaningful objects and "products" can be deduced (static linguistic modelling) leading to hierarchical structures; and as sequences of predicate logic statements which propagate changes of states towards final states (dynamic linguistic modelling). Findings -Static and dynamic linguistic modelling is used together when products are expressed as sets and in design of products and systems. Linguistic networks, semantic diagrams and an information theory which is an integral part of the dynamics of change, are introduced.Research limitations/implications -The limitations of application of a formal method to scenarios with human components with "will" need to be debated. Practical implications -Once software is developed, a comprehensive method for analysis and design of scenarios is available. Originality/value -Homogeneous language exhibiting the structure and semantics of products and systems based on recognition of empirical and linguistic invariants and carrying uncertainty and mathematics, is put forward.
Purpose The current field of systems thinking consists of a variety of views, methods and a number of organisations involved with these views which suggests a state of confusion and fragmentation of the field which fundamentally is supposed to be a uniform view of structures or systems. This can be interpreted as a “crisis situation”. A resolution of the crisis in the form of a “new science of systems” is proposed. Assuming this new science becomes part of the field of systems thinking, a debate of the elements of the field is suggested with a view to consider its current state and future developments. “Crisis - resolution - debate” is the central theme of the paper. Design/methodology/approach The field of current systems thinking is described in terms of views, methods and organisations and is seen as the “problematic issue”. A “new science of systems” strongly rooted in natural language as its primary symbolism and consisting of three general principles of systems and linguistic modelling is outlined to be considered as the resolution of the crisis. A set of criteria is discussed for use of judging the quality of models and element of the field of systems thinking including the “new science of systems”. To demonstrate a preliminary use of these criteria, the same example is worked out using both, the “soft systems methodology” and “linguistic modelling” for comparison. Findings The universal view of parts of the world as structures or systems is inconsistent with the multiple methods basically pursuing the same purpose: modelling aspects of systems which prevail in current systems thinking. To try to resolve this anomaly an equally universally applicable approach, the “new science of systems” is proposed which can also serve as an aid to problem solving, in particular to an integrated systems and product design. This approach is to be part of the suggested debate of the field of systems thinking. In general, there is no alternative to the structural view. Research limitations/implications The “new science of systems”, if found acceptable, can offer research opportunities in new applications of accepted branches of knowledge like logic, linguistics, mathematics of ordered pairs, uncertainties and in the philosophy of science. New teaching schemes can be developed at classroom level combined with engineering as creator of novelties with linguistics as the symbolism to supplement mathematics. Further considerations can be given to current methodologies of systems thinking as part of a debate with a view of future developments in exploring pioneering ideas. New software is needed for working out the dynamics of scenarios. Practical implications The debate, if it takes place, should result in new developments in the field of systems thinking such as concepts accepted as fundamental in the discipline of systems. Applications of the “new science of systems” to larger scale scenarios and organisations guided by the universal scheme in Figure 1 and linguistic modelling with software are needed for development of schemes for problem solving schemes “utilising” or “producing” products. Social implications The “new science of systems” is rooted in accepted branches of knowledge; it is highly teachable at school and university levels and should lead to use by professionals and in everyday life activities once found acceptable. The use of the scheme in Figure 1 should help in clarifying confusing scenarios and to aid problem solving. Originality/value The suggestion of a debate is an original idea. The “new science of systems” consists of three general principles of systems implemented by linguistic modelling of static and dynamic states. Mathematics of uncertainty and topics from conventional science at the object level supplement the “new science” which together form the “scientific enterprise”. The notions of cognitive value and informative content of models are introduced for evaluating their cognitive worth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.