A systems road map

I feel that the reason systems surprise us is that few understand the location of a defined set of boundaries within the larger system. If you can understand the overarching principles that gave rise to our universe, then one is better able to properly place any given system on the map and will be less prone to unexpected surprises. The problem is not that we tend to focus on events, nor that we have difficulty anticipating nonlinear factors, but that we lack the understanding of the underlying structure of all systems and the agility to know when to use each specific tool in our systems thinking tool box.

I think the shortcomings of systems thinking aren't because it lacks the ability to deliver accurate answers to our systems problems, but that our perspective for the most part can't grasp the complexity of systems to a high enough degree. Maybe Wolfram Alpha's Singularity will give us access to that type of computational ability, but for now, the only real chance we have is to raise our level of consciousness.

Chapter 5 was, I think, a step in the right direction, but we need to take it a step further. For systems thinking to be truly predictive, we need to understand the relationships between the boundaries of our systems, the space where our systems overlap.

My question then is how do we begin to do this? How can we place systems in their appropriate context? How do we look at a part without loosing track of the whole?

Embracing the unknowable

Well, I'm sorry the Meadows book has come to an end. It's been my favorite book out of all the BGI classes so far. There were a few parts I found a bit difficult to trudge through (chapter 6) but for the most part it was great. Chapter 7 could have been expanded to a book in and of itself. It was rich with ideas and information. I only wish that it had been the first chapter instead of the last as the gaps in systems analysis seemed so glaringly obvious throughout the book that I wondered if she would ever get around to addressing them. In describing the process of developing systems thinking, she wrote

"What was unique about our search was not our answers, or even our questions, but the fact that the tool of systems thinking, born out of engineering and mathematics, implemented in computers, drawn from a mechanistic mind-set and a quest for prediction and control, leads its practitioners, inexorably I believe, to confront the most deeply human mysteries."

I'm not sure if she was surprised by this or not, but it seems to me, no matter what angle we choose, we end up at the same place. It is like physics search for the unified field or the discovery of DNA. Everything ultimately stems from the same source, which means that if you ask enough questions, you're going to get the same answer. I think chapter 7 is the case for including spirituality as the fourth bottom line in business. Spirituality picks up where systems thinking ends. She wrote

"We don't even know what to optimize. We can't keep track of everything. We can't find a proper, sustainable relationship to nature, each other, or the institutions we create, if we try to do it from the role of omniscient conqueror."

The good news is that, though we should always strive to do our best, it will all com naturally to us who have found a way of eliminating stress, and connecting with our environment. It's not magic, it's not hokey hippie jargon, it's science and the studies are there if you need that sort of thing to convince you. Einstein put it well when he said

“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

This is the goal of spiritual practice. To lift human consciousness to higher levels of functioning more in tune with natures intelligence. And that's really what we're measuring ourselves against isn't it? Nature, for a systems thinker, is king. When our "intelligence" is on par with that of nature, our systems will be equally as life affirming and resilient.