Alexander Bogdanov and the question of unity: An emerging research agenda

Abstract

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.

Rebooting the systems approach by applying the thinking of Bogdanov and the pragmatists

“…This paper is by no means unique in identifying the restorative potential of Bogdanov's thinking for the systems approach. White (2018), Şenalp and Midgley (2023), and Gare (2000) also recognize the possibilities it offers. White sees Tektology as being ‘comprehensive’, as ‘coherent and integrated’ (2018, p. 317), and therefore potentially capable of uniting the scattered and fragmented branches of contemporary systems thinking.…”

Resurrecting Bogdanov on the 150th anniversary of his birth

“…Perhaps most relevant for the reader of this journal is that he is widely recognized for having produced a systems perspective with striking similarities to von Bertalanffy's (1968) general system theory, and he did so more than a decade before von Bertalanffy's first major work on the subject (von Bertalanffy, 1926). Bogdanov's writings are therefore considered an important predecessor to contemporary systems science and systems thinking (Midgley, 2003), although there are arguments in the literature that they should be seen as much more than this: according to Capra (1996), Bogdanov's magnum opus, Tektology , represents the first systematic explication of the systems paradigm in its modern form, so it can be considered a founding contribution rather than a predecessor (also see Şenalp & Midgley, 2023, in this issue, for an exploration of this claim). Indeed, quite recently, Jackson (2021) recognized that Bogdanov's work already touched upon many of the themes that would later become central to critical systems thinking.…”

The Four Waves of Systems Thinking

“…The starting point of systems thinking is widely debated. Some say in the 1950s with Bertalanffy or Forrester, others say with Prigogine, others say Bogdanov [86], still others go as far back as Lao Tsu [18]. 4 Periodization refers to the tendency (especially in historical analysis) to group or categorize time periods thematically.…”

“…In addition, there are structural and dynamical aspects of DSRP itself (namely the identity-other Distinctions (Dio) variables and the point-view Perspectives (Pƥv) variables, that make DSRP intersubjective (i.e., the opposite of universal objectivism) and therefore capable of underpinning tremendous diversity. Intersubjectivity (made possible by DSRP) , along with subjectivity and objectivity, is essential to applied systems thinking [86].…”