Understanding and aligning our thoughts with reality is a challenge we all face. This paper introduces DSRP (Distinctions, Systems, Relationships, Perspectives) as a simple yet powerful framework to help bridge the gap between how we think and how the world really works. By using DSRP, we can better organize and make sense of information, improving our ability to solve problems and make decisions. This approach isn't just for scientists—it's a tool anyone can use to enhance their thinking. The paper shows how DSRP works in both our minds and in nature, providing practical examples and evidence of its effectiveness. Whether you're tackling everyday challenges or complex issues, understanding DSRP can help you see the world more clearly and think more effectively.
{"title":"A Mathematical Theory of Organization","authors":"Derek Cabrera","doi":"10.54120/jost.00000100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.00000100","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding and aligning our thoughts with reality is a challenge we all face. This paper introduces DSRP (Distinctions, Systems, Relationships, Perspectives) as a simple yet powerful framework to help bridge the gap between how we think and how the world really works. By using DSRP, we can better organize and make sense of information, improving our ability to solve problems and make decisions. This approach isn't just for scientists—it's a tool anyone can use to enhance their thinking. The paper shows how DSRP works in both our minds and in nature, providing practical examples and evidence of its effectiveness. Whether you're tackling everyday challenges or complex issues, understanding DSRP can help you see the world more clearly and think more effectively.","PeriodicalId":351054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems Thinking","volume":" 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141832971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Natasha Steinhall, Rebecca McPettit, James Bond, Michelle Parks, Mahwish Khan, Daniel Sharfarz, Laura Cabrera, Derek Cabrera
“Wicked problems” are often thought of as a situation that should not exist or an inescapable consequence of complex systems. This paper argues for a paradigm shift in instead understanding wicked problems as feedback from the system (i.e., the real world), resulting from a misalignment between our mental model of the system and the system itself, rather than inevitable outcomes of complex systems. Through a systems literature review (SLR) on effective policy and two surveys sampling the US population in order to understand how people are thinking about today’s biggest crises, this paper explores the prevalence of this traditional approach to problem solving. Essentially, wicked problems are the real-world system informing us that our mental model is flawed. When confronted with wicked problems involving webs of causality (as all wicked problems do), people often fail to recognize the needed solutions as a corollary web of actions, instead emphasizing linear causal relationships, or “root causes.” This problem-solving approach has significant consequences, as it overlooks the symmetry between the web of causality generating the problems and the web of solutions that would remedy them. This oversight leads to the implementation of partial solutions divorced from the dynamacy of interaction effects, which in turn leads policy and decision makers to conclude that critical parts of a web of solutions have been ineffective, and thus excluding them from future interventions. This is especially relevant for influential policy makers, planners, and decision makers. However, changing this mindset is in itself a wicked problem. The traditional approach to problems and systems is ineffective, necessitating a more systemic approach to policy. Our statistically significant findings confirm the prevalence of the traditional approach, prompting the recommendation for a more holistic education in critical analysis and systems thinking to address the web of causes that produce “wicked problems.” This is particularly critical for individuals being trained for careers in policy and planning.
{"title":"Wicked Solutions for Wicked Problems","authors":"Natasha Steinhall, Rebecca McPettit, James Bond, Michelle Parks, Mahwish Khan, Daniel Sharfarz, Laura Cabrera, Derek Cabrera","doi":"10.54120/jost.000053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.000053","url":null,"abstract":"“Wicked problems” are often thought of as a situation that should not exist or an inescapable consequence of complex systems. This paper argues for a paradigm shift in instead understanding wicked problems as feedback from the system (i.e., the real world), resulting from a misalignment between our mental model of the system and the system itself, rather than inevitable outcomes of complex systems. Through a systems literature review (SLR) on effective policy and two surveys sampling the US population in order to understand how people are thinking about today’s biggest crises, this paper explores the prevalence of this traditional approach to problem solving. Essentially, wicked problems are the real-world system informing us that our mental model is flawed. When confronted with wicked problems involving webs of causality (as all wicked problems do), people often fail to recognize the needed solutions as a corollary web of actions, instead emphasizing linear causal relationships, or “root causes.” This problem-solving approach has significant consequences, as it overlooks the symmetry between the web of causality generating the problems and the web of solutions that would remedy them. This oversight leads to the implementation of partial solutions divorced from the dynamacy of interaction effects, which in turn leads policy and decision makers to conclude that critical parts of a web of solutions have been ineffective, and thus excluding them from future interventions. This is especially relevant for influential policy makers, planners, and decision makers. However, changing this mindset is in itself a wicked problem. The traditional approach to problems and systems is ineffective, necessitating a more systemic approach to policy. Our statistically significant findings confirm the prevalence of the traditional approach, prompting the recommendation for a more holistic education in critical analysis and systems thinking to address the web of causes that produce “wicked problems.” This is particularly critical for individuals being trained for careers in policy and planning.","PeriodicalId":351054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems Thinking","volume":"36 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139595273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although new historical discoveries can be made, as of this writing, the answer is 1938 in a book entitled, "Interpretations and Misinterpretations of Modern Physics" by Philipp Frank. There are many misconceptions and an abundance of misinformation on Google search of when the term "Systems Thinking" (or "System Thinking") was first used. This publication identifies the first documented use of the term. Note that the first use of the term is not the same as the first discussion of systems, systems, sciences, thinking about systems, complexity, etc. In this article, we are simply looking for the first documented use of the specific term.
虽然新的历史发现可以被发现，但在撰写本文时，答案是1938年菲利普·弗兰克(Philipp Frank)写的一本名为《现代物理学的解释和误解》(interpretation and misinterpretation of Modern Physics)的书。关于“系统思维”(或“系统思维”)一词何时被首次使用，谷歌搜索中存在许多误解和大量错误信息。本出版物确定了该术语的第一个文档使用。请注意，第一次使用这个术语与第一次讨论系统、系统、科学、对系统的思考、复杂性等不同。在本文中，我们只是寻找特定术语的第一个文档用法。
{"title":"What is the first documented use of the term, \"Systems Thinking\"?","authors":"D. Cabrera","doi":"10.54120/jost.v1i1.1383","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.v1i1.1383","url":null,"abstract":"Although new historical discoveries can be made, as of this writing, the answer is 1938 in a book entitled, \"Interpretations and Misinterpretations of Modern Physics\" by Philipp Frank. There are many misconceptions and an abundance of misinformation on Google search of when the term \"Systems Thinking\" (or \"System Thinking\") was first used. This publication identifies the first documented use of the term. Note that the first use of the term is not the same as the first discussion of systems, systems, sciences, thinking about systems, complexity, etc. In this article, we are simply looking for the first documented use of the specific term.","PeriodicalId":351054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems Thinking","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115360551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Where systems thinking approachesare often different and sometimes irreconcilable because they are based on the reasoning of one individual or another, Human-Centric Functional Modeling aims to become universal through looking inwards to the way all human beings perceive. HCFM provide a methodology that enables first person observations within each of the senses of the body or within the emotions, mind, or consciousness as functional systems to be represented as forming mathematical spaces that in turn enable all possible systems thinking approaches to be represented.This creates the possibility of comparing all systems thinking approaches to determine which is most “fit” in each context in which it is used, and it radically reduces the barriers to reusing the best components of each approach.
{"title":"Human-Centric Functional Modeling and the Unification of Systems Thinking Approaches","authors":"Andy E. Williams","doi":"10.54120/jost.v1i1.1369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.v1i1.1369","url":null,"abstract":"Where systems thinking approachesare often different and sometimes irreconcilable because they are based on the reasoning of one individual or another, Human-Centric Functional Modeling aims to become universal through looking inwards to the way all human beings perceive. HCFM provide a methodology that enables first person observations within each of the senses of the body or within the emotions, mind, or consciousness as functional systems to be represented as forming mathematical spaces that in turn enable all possible systems thinking approaches to be represented.This creates the possibility of comparing all systems thinking approaches to determine which is most “fit” in each context in which it is used, and it radically reduces the barriers to reusing the best components of each approach.","PeriodicalId":351054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems Thinking","volume":"8 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126204714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A sustainability framework based on nested adaptive socio-ecological systems is used to analyse historical examples of soil erosion and its implications for food production and security for a growing population. While there are examples of innovation in agriculture to address food availability, there are also cases of inadequate social responses leading to famine. The analysis highlights the value of considering these issues in a framework of linked biophysical and socio-economic systems. The socio-economic system generates management interventions to resolve biophysical limitations such as soil depletion on food production. The socio-economic system is also responsible when there are inadequate social responses. Currently, the biophysical system produces enough food to feed the world population. However, food distribution through the socio-economic system results in increasing numbers of undernourished people. Biophysical system modelling indicates that unless major changes are made to the current world system, overshoot because of resource depletion will lead to system collapse within the 21st century. To develop sustainability strategies, we need to analyse the socio-economic response to this biophysical vulnerability. A socio-ecological analysis also indicates that perspectives based on power relations that govern real-world decision making rather than sustainability interventions to address food security, need to be incorporated.
{"title":"Systems Thinking for Sustainability","authors":"Bryan Robert Jenkins","doi":"10.54120/jost.v1i1.1251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54120/jost.v1i1.1251","url":null,"abstract":"A sustainability framework based on nested adaptive socio-ecological systems is used to analyse historical examples of soil erosion and its implications for food production and security for a growing population. While there are examples of innovation in agriculture to address food availability, there are also cases of inadequate social responses leading to famine. The analysis highlights the value of considering these issues in a framework of linked biophysical and socio-economic systems. The socio-economic system generates management interventions to resolve biophysical limitations such as soil depletion on food production. The socio-economic system is also responsible when there are inadequate social responses. Currently, the biophysical system produces enough food to feed the world population. However, food distribution through the socio-economic system results in increasing numbers of undernourished people. Biophysical system modelling indicates that unless major changes are made to the current world system, overshoot because of resource depletion will lead to system collapse within the 21st century. To develop sustainability strategies, we need to analyse the socio-economic response to this biophysical vulnerability. A socio-ecological analysis also indicates that perspectives based on power relations that govern real-world decision making rather than sustainability interventions to address food security, need to be incorporated.","PeriodicalId":351054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems Thinking","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117248463","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：