The self-referential structure of an everyday-living situation: A phenomenological ontology for interpretive systemology

Abstract

This is the second article in a trilogy. In the preceding paper, an ontoepistemology for reductionism was presented. It thus constituted a contrasting counter-ontoepistemology for the systems approach. The present article is devoted to outlining an ontoepistemology for the systems approach which, in contrast with the former counter-ontoepistemology, can explain wholeness. Such an outline is organized around the description of the essentially dynamic structure of an everyday-living situation, so that the holistic character of what-ever-is-the-case may be put forward. The discussion concerning the structure of an everyday-living situation is performed under a phenomenological approach. Thus, the paper begins by presenting a very brief introduction to phenomenology.

Systemic Intervention

“…In places I have slightly altered Fuenmayor's terminology to facilitate the presentation of his ideas in truncated form. Fuenmayor's (1991b) starting point is the recursive form of "noetic" (subject-side) and "noematic" (object-side) (see Figure 3.3). A situation can be thought of in terms of either side of this recursive form, and indeed a holistic analysis requires both sides to be considered as a recursive unity.…”

“…One embraces the idea of free will and the other denies it. However, Fuenmayor (1991b) argues that neither position is tenable 00 its own. They represent two sides of a recursive form.…”

“…If we are to appreciate the noematic (object) side of understanding distinction scene situations, it is also important to acknowledge Fuenmayor's (1991b) point that it is possible to identify what has been distinguished, but the "scene" is always illusive. This is because, if any aspect of the scene is identified, it too will have been distinguished and will have moved to the other half of the recursive form "distinction/ scene".…”

The trap of evolutionary organicism

“…I think that the Heideggerian idea of unconcealing-concealing can be more easily grasped in the language of interpretive systemology (Fuenmayor, 1991b and1991c Observe that a distinction, what-ever-is-the-case, is not a thing-in-itself; it is an act of appearing. Its endurance is not, like in dualism, given a-priori.…”

The scene for Interpretive Systemology

“…Ontic-epistemic conception of "socialness" Dávila, 1991;Fuenmayor, 1991a). The work of Dilthey, Husserl, Heidegger, Ortega y Gasset, Theunissen, Laing Entralgo, Schutz, Weber, Berger, Luckmann, and others, with regard to "socialness," constitutes a good starting point for such a purpose.…”