Quote:
SYSTEM VIEW: VITAL TO DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM
All things are systems and all things are a part of one, or more systems.[FONT="][52][/FONT] Typically all things are parts of multiple systems and typically multiple systems exist within a thing. Indeed most things are parts of interconnected systems of systems and most things are made up of interconnected systems of systems. The human body, society, the atom, a plant are examples of things that are both constructed from and are parts of interconnected systems of systems.
It is important to study the dialectical laws and principles of the way systems operate because the fact that all things are systems, are created from systems and are parts of one, or more larger systems has everything to do with the nature of history, motion and development of a thing. A thing may be benignly, partially, or wholly impacted in its development by the systems residing within it and by the systems of which it is a member. Systems have 3 major characteristics:
All things are a sea of contradictions, as stated earlier in the chapter “What is Dialectics?”. A system being a thing is therefore also made up of a sea of contradictions. And of course as with every thing, a system has one, or more fundamental contradictions that make it distinct from other kinds of things. A system that develops is likely to have contradictions that are principal and significant for each of it various stages of development. Additionally, a system may be made up of contradictions whose aspects play the roles of the leading factor, the engaging factor, the parametric and the base.
A system has internal contradictions and a system resides in a sea of external contradictions. And a system has just as with all things is mainly determined in its makeup and generally driven in its development by the contradictions external to it. Of course the path a one type of system takes relative to another type of system in the same given set of external contradictions depends upon the nature of its internal contradictions. While all systems are mainly driven in their motion and development by external contradictions, systems that are capable of self-reproduction[FONT="][54][/FONT] and, or self-subsistence tend have self-motion and self-development in addition to the motion and development spurred by external contradictions and such systems may be said to possess a degree of self-determination. It should be noted that even the self-motion and self-development of a system is typically prompted by external conditions and circumstances, just as the human body self-evolves over time in response to adaptation to its surrounding environment.
A new system may arise, or be given birth from a single system or the interaction of multiple systems. A new system may then 1) serve as a part of one or more of its parent systems, 2) standalone from its parent systems, or 3) even incorporate one, or more parent systems within itself. As an example both where some of the new systems became parts of the originating system hand and where some of the new systems come to stand outside of their originating system, a cell that is infected by a virus has its nucleus hijacked by the virus to create new viruses (i.e. new systems), some of the new viruses remain in the infected cell while others leave to infect other cells. Not only does this process create new instances of the same kind of virus, that is new instances of the same kind of system, but through evolutionary mutation the process may create, radically changed, or totally new kinds of viruses, that is radically changed, or totally new kinds of systems. The wrong kind of radical virus change, especially with the dominance of profit first worldwide imperialism, may lead to a global pandemic.
All systems undergo development and they typically do so both on an individual basis and as a species. That is, on an individual basis a system is born, matures, and passes away. On the level of system species over the course of generations the structure, makeup and often functions performed by the individuals of the species tends to evolve (develop) over time. A system may reproduce new instances of the kinds of parts it already possesses and as a system evolves it may produce totally new kinds of parts.
In some cases it is possible to perform a one to one mapping between the parts, or structures of one system to similar, or analogous parts, or structures in another system. To use an example from the chapter “The Leading Factor And The Parametric Role in Development”, the foundation, or base, of a building supports its walls and roof as the superstructure of the building and these map one for one to the economic base of society upon which stands the superstructure of society consisting of things like culture, politics, law, and the arts. When this kind mapping is possible from the parts of one system to the parts of one, or more other systems, the systems are said to be homomorphic[FONT="][55][/FONT]. In respect to each having a base and superstructure, the system of a house and the system of society are homomorphic.
DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM AND ITS PARTS
Having a system perspective, a view of the parts of a system as members of a whole, assists us in being able to navigate through the misdirection, din and chaotic flux of simply viewing the unconnected motion of the parts. A holistic and coherent system view assists us in being able to distinguish trees as parts from the forest as the whole.
With regard to the purpose, output, or effect of a system, its parts function as a single unit to achieve one, or more goals. This means that the parts of a system function in a coherent manner. However the fact that the parts of a system function in a coherent manner to achieve one, or more goals does not imply that contradiction does not exist in the structure and operation of system. Indeed both the relationship between the system as a whole and its parts and the relationship between the parts themselves are dialectical contradictions: part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole and part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]part.
Systems that are capable of self-reproduction, or self-subsistence, which as we previously found often have some degree of self-motion and self-development, usually subordinate one, or more facets of their various parts to the functioning of the system as a whole[FONT="][56][/FONT]. Systems subordinate their parts by:
Systems may subordinate each of their parts differently and for each kind of subordination in the list, a part may subordinated to a greater or lesser degree.
A system has a whole and its parts, with the whole existing as the interplay of its parts. Systems may possess 2 kinds of parts, local and global. The 2 types may exist in a system simultaneously, or at different times. Looking at a system in relationship to its parts, and considering the system in total as the “whole” aspect of a contradiction, that whole aspect is in a contradiction with the parts of the system: part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole. Every part is an aspect in a contradiction opposed to the “whole” aspect of a system. Global parts are elements of a system that operate throughout the system, whereas local parts are elements of a system that do not operate throughout the system. For instance in the worldwide capitalist system, a local part, feudalism, which arose before capitalism and is now subordinated to capitalism, continues to operate in some countries, but not others. On the other hand, investment capital, a global part, used by the capitalist class to extract profits from the joint labor and resources of the people, permeates the societies of every country of the world. Not all systems have both global and local parts, but many of the more complex systems, do so and whatever the nature of a part, all the parts of a system are each in an individual contradiction with the “whole” aspect of the system; there is part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole. Further, many if not most of the parts of a system, regardless of type, are in a contradiction with each another, both one on one, and one opposed many. Both a local part, or a global part may be the principal aspect for one, or more stages in the development of a system. A part may also be the leading factor, just as in the system of society which is formed by its 2 parts, the superstructure and the base, the superstructure is the leading factor.
Typically when a system whole and its parts develop both the whole and the parts do so in a reciprocal, or mutual manner based upon the dialectical contradictions that exists between the system as a whole and each of its parts on the one hand and based upon the dialectical contradictions that exists among the parts themselves on the other. The reciprocal development of the system as a whole and its parts may be viewed graphically as a spiral. Indeed their development may be viewed as a mostly upward, or downward spiral that over time traces out a helix. This helix of mutual development creates a harmony or fitness in the adaptation of the parts to the whole and typically among the parts as well[FONT="][57][/FONT]. When this harmony and fitness occurs in the development of a system it has what is called concinnity [FONT="][58][/FONT]. The existence of concinnity is a major reason why so many things in reality seem to fit, marry and work well together. Many, if not most, objects and processes in existence develop together in a reciprocal and dialectical way as concinnate systems.
Managing a part in terms of the whole should be based upon the priority of the system as a whole. In that way the part remains subordinate to the functioning of the whole. Development of a part in terms of a whole system must necessarily entail some kind of subordination of the part to the demands of the whole.
SYNERGY, EMERGENCE AND SYSTEM CALCULUS
Complex systems in particular often display synergy. Synergy takes place when the combined action and of the parts of a system give rise to effects that are greater than the simple sum of each part acting alone. Examples of synergy occur when the combined action of the parts of a complex system give brings about the emergence of both new kinds of things, and new instances of existing kinds of things. When synergy occurs in complex systems it may give rise to new parts (global and local), new behaviors, new forces and new contradictions in the system. In addition, synergy may destroy parts, and both lessen and intensify existing behavior, forces and contradictions. Synergy and the things that emerge from it often obscure the cause of various actions that take place in a complex system and synergy often contributes to a certain level of chaos in the operation of a complex system. In the operation of a system which combines the effects of synergy with the obscuring of causes and chaos (whether or not the obscuring and chaos were created by the systems internal synergy) it is often impossible to analyze and comprehend the system using simply a straight line (rectilinear), algebraic, formal logic approach. In these cases, we find that we must apply a fully dialectical, non-linear logic and calculus[FONT="][59][/FONT] to the analysis and attempt to comprehend such complex systems[FONT="][60][/FONT]. This is doubly so when we must also take into account the effect of feedback loops and the parallel functioning of various processes, as we commonly must with such systems.
The various qualities and features associated with systems and their parts listed in this section are frequently found to overlap and to nest inside one another in the same system. Some features even nest within themselves and are thus called recursive features.
SYSTEMS ARISE FROM CONTRADICTION
Systems exist due to the universality of contradiction. In the chapter “What is Dialectics?” in Part One, we found that the universality of contradiction means that one, or more contradictions reside in all things. We also found that all contradictions are divided into 2, or more opposed aspects that are in constant struggle. The universality of contradiction is both directly and indirectly responsible for the existence of systems.
Contradiction is directly responsible for the existence of some systems because every contradiction is itself a system. First, a contradiction is divided into at least 2 opposed parts, its aspects. Secondly, there is an architecture, or process for how the 2 opposed parts function to makeup the overall contradiction. Thirdly, all contradictions are affected by their context, this affects the nature of the struggle between the opposed aspects of contradiction and the result of the nature of the struggle in turn has some effect on the context of the contradiction.
Because every contradiction is a system, all things are a part of one, or more systems. That is because all things have internal contradictions that are in contradiction with things that are external to it and thus because a thing is the internal aspect, or part, of an internal[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]external contradiction, everything is a part of a system. In this way all things in the cosmos are parts of a single cosmos wide system. The context we are interested in determines how closely coupled any 2 things are in a system. For instance a computer in a room and the door to the room in which the computer resides are loosely coupled if we are interested in the algorithms used to calculate a formula on the computer, but the door may be very more closely coupled to the computer when we consider the temperature system of the room in which the computer operates.
Contradiction is indirectly responsible for the creation of various other systems due to the identizing, (including identizing transduction) between the internal and external in a contradiction. This dialectical identizing between the internal and external causes one thing to interpenetrate and interconnect with another thing and this along with reciprocal development based upon the same dialectical process may cause 2, or more things to come together to form a single system.
NO SYSTEM STANDS ALONE
No system is completely self-contained and no system can be fully understood in terms of itself. Kurt Göedel, a noted 20th century mathematician, logically proved that no system can be fully explained in its own terms. A system can only be explained by linking it to things, processes, or affairs external to the system. We must connect and relate a system to relevant elements in the context surrounding the system in order to gain full and complete knowledge of the system. This further undermines the notion that the internal is key to the motion and development of a thing.
Everything, including systems, has multiple concentric rings of external contextual circumstances that expand all the way out to the largest possible context, that of the universe, or multiverse as whole. For each concentric ring the explanation and often even what we understand to be the nature of a thing undergoes a change. For instance a street has the multiple concentric ring, contextual circumstances of first its neighborhood, secondly its city, third its region, fourth its country, fifth the world and so on out to the universe as a whole. For each contextual ring the understanding, explanation and possibly our conception of the nature of the street undergoes changes. So when we note that a system can only be explained in terms of how it relates to other things in its context, the fact that every system has multiple concentric rings of context means that a single system may have multiple rings of explanation. A thing, or system does not simply have a single set of concentric rings of context, but rather multiple sets of both overlapping and non-overlapping concentric rings of context and thus a system has multiple sets of both overlapping and non-overlapping concentric rings of explanations.
SYSTEM KEY LINKS
Keeping hold of one, or more key links that allow control of the whole chain is to be system oriented and holistic. Typically the key links for a system are its leading and engaging factors, if they are present in one, or more contradictions within a system. These leading and engaging factors are, as we found earlier, opposed to one, or more parametric, or base aspects.
SYSTEM ABSTRACTION PROVIDES DEEP KNOWLEDGE
The conceptual stage of knowledge of a thing[FONT="][61][/FONT] frequently involves the method of study called abstraction that Marx used in Capital to analyze the capitalist mode of production, with commodity production at its core. The method of understanding a thing by the use of abstraction begins by looking at thing as a whole system from the context in which we are interested in the thing. We then proceed to identify and analyze each part relevant to the functioning of the system from the perspective of the context we are interested in the system as whole. As we analyze each relevant part we analyze its key features: its leading factor, engaging factor, parametric, principal contradictions, principal aspects and all other key properties and behaviors. After analyzing there is a synthesis, where build a conceptual model of the system, that pulls together the knowledge of the key features of the analyzed parts and connects that knowledge as a whole system, to gain a deeper, more thorough going understanding of the thing than we had when first began to apply the process of abstraction to it.
The process of abstraction of a thing as a system with parts is a form of modelling, the most complete form of conceptual system modelling. Any mental concept of a thing is an abstraction because it is a model of the thing.[FONT="][62][/FONT] The mental concept “book” is an abstraction because it is not an actual book, but it represents, or models, a book by bringing to mind the essential characteristics of a book, like having a cover, a spine, pages, etc. So that abstraction may involve simple mental generalization, or modelling, of something on the one hand, or complex detailed analysis and synthesis, i.e. modelling, of a thing as a system on the on the other: simple abstraction[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]complex abstraction.
Using abstraction to gain a knowledge of a thing as a system has a structure that is analogous to the way systems themselves operate. Healthy systems take in elements and, or experience stimuli from the outside (the external), undergo processes internally and as a result and then have output, or behavior that affects things externally. This is akin to how abstraction analysis proceeds inward toward the parts of a system, processes the parts individually, and then reconstitutes the system so that we now see the system from the outside with a clearer picture of how it operates in its contextual environment. Knowledge proceeds 1) from the outside, thesis, 2) to the inside, antithesis and 3) to the outside again on a higher level, synthesis. So that knowledge of the system, just as with the operation, or functioning of the system, proceeds through a process of negation of the negation.[FONT="][63][/FONT]
Because the parts of every system are themselves systems, the process of abstraction may used to gain a knowledge of each them as a system with their respective parts as well. Recursive abstraction is the name used when the process of abstraction is applied not only to a system, but also to its parts as systems.
GLOBAL SYSTEM PLAN, DIVIDED IMPLEMENTATION
Often it is neither advisable, nor possible to fully implement the goals of project, or line of work all at once, or in a single step. We therefore make plans to reach our goal through repeated cycles of work – iterations - that incrementally bring us closer to our goal until we complete them. This is the iterative and incremental style of work, which is a wise style because it recognizes that things do not spring ready made “from the head of Job”, but rather develop as a process over time. Of course all processes contain periods of both small, evolutionary, quantitative change as well as periods of large, revolutionary, qualitative change. But since things do not and can not be fully developed, and our goals can not be reached in one fell swoop in most cases, we must apply the iterative and incremental style while leading it with a system approach. Whenever our work must be divided across time, and or space, we should apply a system plan to an iterative, incremental, or sub-divided implementation of that plan.
Whenever we have a project that that may be sub-divided into tasks, the project overall is a system whole and each of the tasks constitutes a system part. When developing, managing and utilizing a system and its parts it is best to plan globally in terms of the system as whole when deciding how to handle both the system as a whole and each of its parts. This follows because the parts of a system are subordinate to the whole system and given that ultimately the whole system must function properly in order for the parts to function properly. We should always apply a system view to guide our work with regard to the development, and operation of the various parts of a sub-divided the project. An approach that is rooted in an overall understanding of the project; an approach rooted in assessing the project everything from a holistic standpoint.
When dividing our work, our tasks, into parts and planning when to tackle each part, we should take on and attempt to overcome the riskiest parts and aspects first. Adopting the method of confronting a risk by dividing up a complex mission and tackling the greatest risk to the mission upfront is fundamental to correctly placing the whole above the parts and thinking in holistic fashion because if risk is not ameliorated early on there is greater likelihood that the goal of the mission as a whole will never be achieved. Sometimes the doing the riskiest parts before other parts isn’t possible, one thing must simply be done before another, but whenever possible, we should take on the riskiest work first so increase the chances that the whole line of work has the best chance of succeeding. Attacking risk first often settles issues that ease later parts of the work and it gets us “over the hump” so to speak and more quickly places us on the less bothersome downhill side as the time draws near for the overall task, or mission must be completed. There is a greater likelihood for successful completion of a project when as appropriate we sub-divide work and take on the greatest risks in the first iterative divisions of the work.
One way that we should be applying the interests of the whole to whatever we do is to always put politics in command. In our work we should always be thinking in terms of and led by the current needs and future goals of the proletariat in the revolutionary political class struggle both locally, but more importantly internationally. In our work we should keep in mind the principle of thinking globally and acting both locally and globally. Thinking globally and acting in a locally appropriate manner is a form of sub-dividing the tasks of the international proletariat.
Keeping hold of the key links that allow control of the whole chain is to be holistic. Typically the key links are the leading and engaging factors if they are present.
COMPLEXITY[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]SIMPLICITY
Simplicity should be used to understand, manage and control the complexity and chaos of complex systems. There is almost always some simplicity, regularity, order and pattern within the chaos and complexity of complex systems. We should use them to effectively control, manage and chaos and complexity. The are often key links that allow us to control the whole system. Order, regularity and simplicity are often the leading factor in relation to a complex system as whole. We encourage revolution to liberate humanity, but we require a regular and orderly vanguard party in order to lead that revolution. Of course an orderly party should also have a robust, vibrant and vigorous ideological life.
Leveled and modular systems promote loose coupling between their parts and thus reduces complexity. They allow each part to have a greater sphere of self-determination with minimal coupling necessary between the parts, and hence less there is complexity required to comprehend and manage each part. Minimal coupling between the parts of system affords greater ease when polymorphically swapping out, or substituting the parts of a system to increase the contextual effectiveness of the system for a given time and place.
All things are systems and all things are a part of one, or more systems.[FONT="][52][/FONT] Typically all things are parts of multiple systems and typically multiple systems exist within a thing. Indeed most things are parts of interconnected systems of systems and most things are made up of interconnected systems of systems. The human body, society, the atom, a plant are examples of things that are both constructed from and are parts of interconnected systems of systems.
It is important to study the dialectical laws and principles of the way systems operate because the fact that all things are systems, are created from systems and are parts of one, or more larger systems has everything to do with the nature of history, motion and development of a thing. A thing may be benignly, partially, or wholly impacted in its development by the systems residing within it and by the systems of which it is a member. Systems have 3 major characteristics:
- parts that work together for one, or more purposes.
- an architecture that defines how the parts of a system relate to one another and function as a whole.
- input and output functions where the system receives input, or stimulus from its environment and on that basis has some external effect upon, or provides output to, its environment. Most advanced systems also have operations that stand between system input and output. On the basis of input, or stimulus to the system, the system carries out one or more functions, or processing operations and on the basis of these operations the system provides output to its environment. This 3 part - input, operation, output - movement may be seen in one, or more environmental contexts to be the goal, or purpose of the system.[FONT="][53][/FONT]
All things are a sea of contradictions, as stated earlier in the chapter “What is Dialectics?”. A system being a thing is therefore also made up of a sea of contradictions. And of course as with every thing, a system has one, or more fundamental contradictions that make it distinct from other kinds of things. A system that develops is likely to have contradictions that are principal and significant for each of it various stages of development. Additionally, a system may be made up of contradictions whose aspects play the roles of the leading factor, the engaging factor, the parametric and the base.
A system has internal contradictions and a system resides in a sea of external contradictions. And a system has just as with all things is mainly determined in its makeup and generally driven in its development by the contradictions external to it. Of course the path a one type of system takes relative to another type of system in the same given set of external contradictions depends upon the nature of its internal contradictions. While all systems are mainly driven in their motion and development by external contradictions, systems that are capable of self-reproduction[FONT="][54][/FONT] and, or self-subsistence tend have self-motion and self-development in addition to the motion and development spurred by external contradictions and such systems may be said to possess a degree of self-determination. It should be noted that even the self-motion and self-development of a system is typically prompted by external conditions and circumstances, just as the human body self-evolves over time in response to adaptation to its surrounding environment.
A new system may arise, or be given birth from a single system or the interaction of multiple systems. A new system may then 1) serve as a part of one or more of its parent systems, 2) standalone from its parent systems, or 3) even incorporate one, or more parent systems within itself. As an example both where some of the new systems became parts of the originating system hand and where some of the new systems come to stand outside of their originating system, a cell that is infected by a virus has its nucleus hijacked by the virus to create new viruses (i.e. new systems), some of the new viruses remain in the infected cell while others leave to infect other cells. Not only does this process create new instances of the same kind of virus, that is new instances of the same kind of system, but through evolutionary mutation the process may create, radically changed, or totally new kinds of viruses, that is radically changed, or totally new kinds of systems. The wrong kind of radical virus change, especially with the dominance of profit first worldwide imperialism, may lead to a global pandemic.
All systems undergo development and they typically do so both on an individual basis and as a species. That is, on an individual basis a system is born, matures, and passes away. On the level of system species over the course of generations the structure, makeup and often functions performed by the individuals of the species tends to evolve (develop) over time. A system may reproduce new instances of the kinds of parts it already possesses and as a system evolves it may produce totally new kinds of parts.
In some cases it is possible to perform a one to one mapping between the parts, or structures of one system to similar, or analogous parts, or structures in another system. To use an example from the chapter “The Leading Factor And The Parametric Role in Development”, the foundation, or base, of a building supports its walls and roof as the superstructure of the building and these map one for one to the economic base of society upon which stands the superstructure of society consisting of things like culture, politics, law, and the arts. When this kind mapping is possible from the parts of one system to the parts of one, or more other systems, the systems are said to be homomorphic[FONT="][55][/FONT]. In respect to each having a base and superstructure, the system of a house and the system of society are homomorphic.
DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM AND ITS PARTS
Having a system perspective, a view of the parts of a system as members of a whole, assists us in being able to navigate through the misdirection, din and chaotic flux of simply viewing the unconnected motion of the parts. A holistic and coherent system view assists us in being able to distinguish trees as parts from the forest as the whole.
With regard to the purpose, output, or effect of a system, its parts function as a single unit to achieve one, or more goals. This means that the parts of a system function in a coherent manner. However the fact that the parts of a system function in a coherent manner to achieve one, or more goals does not imply that contradiction does not exist in the structure and operation of system. Indeed both the relationship between the system as a whole and its parts and the relationship between the parts themselves are dialectical contradictions: part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole and part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]part.
Systems that are capable of self-reproduction, or self-subsistence, which as we previously found often have some degree of self-motion and self-development, usually subordinate one, or more facets of their various parts to the functioning of the system as a whole[FONT="][56][/FONT]. Systems subordinate their parts by:
- impacting their development
- controlling their birth, death and period of membership in the system
- managing one, or more aspects of their functioning
Systems may subordinate each of their parts differently and for each kind of subordination in the list, a part may subordinated to a greater or lesser degree.
A system has a whole and its parts, with the whole existing as the interplay of its parts. Systems may possess 2 kinds of parts, local and global. The 2 types may exist in a system simultaneously, or at different times. Looking at a system in relationship to its parts, and considering the system in total as the “whole” aspect of a contradiction, that whole aspect is in a contradiction with the parts of the system: part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole. Every part is an aspect in a contradiction opposed to the “whole” aspect of a system. Global parts are elements of a system that operate throughout the system, whereas local parts are elements of a system that do not operate throughout the system. For instance in the worldwide capitalist system, a local part, feudalism, which arose before capitalism and is now subordinated to capitalism, continues to operate in some countries, but not others. On the other hand, investment capital, a global part, used by the capitalist class to extract profits from the joint labor and resources of the people, permeates the societies of every country of the world. Not all systems have both global and local parts, but many of the more complex systems, do so and whatever the nature of a part, all the parts of a system are each in an individual contradiction with the “whole” aspect of the system; there is part[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]whole. Further, many if not most of the parts of a system, regardless of type, are in a contradiction with each another, both one on one, and one opposed many. Both a local part, or a global part may be the principal aspect for one, or more stages in the development of a system. A part may also be the leading factor, just as in the system of society which is formed by its 2 parts, the superstructure and the base, the superstructure is the leading factor.
Typically when a system whole and its parts develop both the whole and the parts do so in a reciprocal, or mutual manner based upon the dialectical contradictions that exists between the system as a whole and each of its parts on the one hand and based upon the dialectical contradictions that exists among the parts themselves on the other. The reciprocal development of the system as a whole and its parts may be viewed graphically as a spiral. Indeed their development may be viewed as a mostly upward, or downward spiral that over time traces out a helix. This helix of mutual development creates a harmony or fitness in the adaptation of the parts to the whole and typically among the parts as well[FONT="][57][/FONT]. When this harmony and fitness occurs in the development of a system it has what is called concinnity [FONT="][58][/FONT]. The existence of concinnity is a major reason why so many things in reality seem to fit, marry and work well together. Many, if not most, objects and processes in existence develop together in a reciprocal and dialectical way as concinnate systems.
Managing a part in terms of the whole should be based upon the priority of the system as a whole. In that way the part remains subordinate to the functioning of the whole. Development of a part in terms of a whole system must necessarily entail some kind of subordination of the part to the demands of the whole.
SYNERGY, EMERGENCE AND SYSTEM CALCULUS
Complex systems in particular often display synergy. Synergy takes place when the combined action and of the parts of a system give rise to effects that are greater than the simple sum of each part acting alone. Examples of synergy occur when the combined action of the parts of a complex system give brings about the emergence of both new kinds of things, and new instances of existing kinds of things. When synergy occurs in complex systems it may give rise to new parts (global and local), new behaviors, new forces and new contradictions in the system. In addition, synergy may destroy parts, and both lessen and intensify existing behavior, forces and contradictions. Synergy and the things that emerge from it often obscure the cause of various actions that take place in a complex system and synergy often contributes to a certain level of chaos in the operation of a complex system. In the operation of a system which combines the effects of synergy with the obscuring of causes and chaos (whether or not the obscuring and chaos were created by the systems internal synergy) it is often impossible to analyze and comprehend the system using simply a straight line (rectilinear), algebraic, formal logic approach. In these cases, we find that we must apply a fully dialectical, non-linear logic and calculus[FONT="][59][/FONT] to the analysis and attempt to comprehend such complex systems[FONT="][60][/FONT]. This is doubly so when we must also take into account the effect of feedback loops and the parallel functioning of various processes, as we commonly must with such systems.
The various qualities and features associated with systems and their parts listed in this section are frequently found to overlap and to nest inside one another in the same system. Some features even nest within themselves and are thus called recursive features.
SYSTEMS ARISE FROM CONTRADICTION
Systems exist due to the universality of contradiction. In the chapter “What is Dialectics?” in Part One, we found that the universality of contradiction means that one, or more contradictions reside in all things. We also found that all contradictions are divided into 2, or more opposed aspects that are in constant struggle. The universality of contradiction is both directly and indirectly responsible for the existence of systems.
Contradiction is directly responsible for the existence of some systems because every contradiction is itself a system. First, a contradiction is divided into at least 2 opposed parts, its aspects. Secondly, there is an architecture, or process for how the 2 opposed parts function to makeup the overall contradiction. Thirdly, all contradictions are affected by their context, this affects the nature of the struggle between the opposed aspects of contradiction and the result of the nature of the struggle in turn has some effect on the context of the contradiction.
Because every contradiction is a system, all things are a part of one, or more systems. That is because all things have internal contradictions that are in contradiction with things that are external to it and thus because a thing is the internal aspect, or part, of an internal[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]external contradiction, everything is a part of a system. In this way all things in the cosmos are parts of a single cosmos wide system. The context we are interested in determines how closely coupled any 2 things are in a system. For instance a computer in a room and the door to the room in which the computer resides are loosely coupled if we are interested in the algorithms used to calculate a formula on the computer, but the door may be very more closely coupled to the computer when we consider the temperature system of the room in which the computer operates.
Contradiction is indirectly responsible for the creation of various other systems due to the identizing, (including identizing transduction) between the internal and external in a contradiction. This dialectical identizing between the internal and external causes one thing to interpenetrate and interconnect with another thing and this along with reciprocal development based upon the same dialectical process may cause 2, or more things to come together to form a single system.
NO SYSTEM STANDS ALONE
No system is completely self-contained and no system can be fully understood in terms of itself. Kurt Göedel, a noted 20th century mathematician, logically proved that no system can be fully explained in its own terms. A system can only be explained by linking it to things, processes, or affairs external to the system. We must connect and relate a system to relevant elements in the context surrounding the system in order to gain full and complete knowledge of the system. This further undermines the notion that the internal is key to the motion and development of a thing.
Everything, including systems, has multiple concentric rings of external contextual circumstances that expand all the way out to the largest possible context, that of the universe, or multiverse as whole. For each concentric ring the explanation and often even what we understand to be the nature of a thing undergoes a change. For instance a street has the multiple concentric ring, contextual circumstances of first its neighborhood, secondly its city, third its region, fourth its country, fifth the world and so on out to the universe as a whole. For each contextual ring the understanding, explanation and possibly our conception of the nature of the street undergoes changes. So when we note that a system can only be explained in terms of how it relates to other things in its context, the fact that every system has multiple concentric rings of context means that a single system may have multiple rings of explanation. A thing, or system does not simply have a single set of concentric rings of context, but rather multiple sets of both overlapping and non-overlapping concentric rings of context and thus a system has multiple sets of both overlapping and non-overlapping concentric rings of explanations.
SYSTEM KEY LINKS
Keeping hold of one, or more key links that allow control of the whole chain is to be system oriented and holistic. Typically the key links for a system are its leading and engaging factors, if they are present in one, or more contradictions within a system. These leading and engaging factors are, as we found earlier, opposed to one, or more parametric, or base aspects.
SYSTEM ABSTRACTION PROVIDES DEEP KNOWLEDGE
The conceptual stage of knowledge of a thing[FONT="][61][/FONT] frequently involves the method of study called abstraction that Marx used in Capital to analyze the capitalist mode of production, with commodity production at its core. The method of understanding a thing by the use of abstraction begins by looking at thing as a whole system from the context in which we are interested in the thing. We then proceed to identify and analyze each part relevant to the functioning of the system from the perspective of the context we are interested in the system as whole. As we analyze each relevant part we analyze its key features: its leading factor, engaging factor, parametric, principal contradictions, principal aspects and all other key properties and behaviors. After analyzing there is a synthesis, where build a conceptual model of the system, that pulls together the knowledge of the key features of the analyzed parts and connects that knowledge as a whole system, to gain a deeper, more thorough going understanding of the thing than we had when first began to apply the process of abstraction to it.
The process of abstraction of a thing as a system with parts is a form of modelling, the most complete form of conceptual system modelling. Any mental concept of a thing is an abstraction because it is a model of the thing.[FONT="][62][/FONT] The mental concept “book” is an abstraction because it is not an actual book, but it represents, or models, a book by bringing to mind the essential characteristics of a book, like having a cover, a spine, pages, etc. So that abstraction may involve simple mental generalization, or modelling, of something on the one hand, or complex detailed analysis and synthesis, i.e. modelling, of a thing as a system on the on the other: simple abstraction[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]complex abstraction.
Using abstraction to gain a knowledge of a thing as a system has a structure that is analogous to the way systems themselves operate. Healthy systems take in elements and, or experience stimuli from the outside (the external), undergo processes internally and as a result and then have output, or behavior that affects things externally. This is akin to how abstraction analysis proceeds inward toward the parts of a system, processes the parts individually, and then reconstitutes the system so that we now see the system from the outside with a clearer picture of how it operates in its contextual environment. Knowledge proceeds 1) from the outside, thesis, 2) to the inside, antithesis and 3) to the outside again on a higher level, synthesis. So that knowledge of the system, just as with the operation, or functioning of the system, proceeds through a process of negation of the negation.[FONT="][63][/FONT]
Because the parts of every system are themselves systems, the process of abstraction may used to gain a knowledge of each them as a system with their respective parts as well. Recursive abstraction is the name used when the process of abstraction is applied not only to a system, but also to its parts as systems.
GLOBAL SYSTEM PLAN, DIVIDED IMPLEMENTATION
Often it is neither advisable, nor possible to fully implement the goals of project, or line of work all at once, or in a single step. We therefore make plans to reach our goal through repeated cycles of work – iterations - that incrementally bring us closer to our goal until we complete them. This is the iterative and incremental style of work, which is a wise style because it recognizes that things do not spring ready made “from the head of Job”, but rather develop as a process over time. Of course all processes contain periods of both small, evolutionary, quantitative change as well as periods of large, revolutionary, qualitative change. But since things do not and can not be fully developed, and our goals can not be reached in one fell swoop in most cases, we must apply the iterative and incremental style while leading it with a system approach. Whenever our work must be divided across time, and or space, we should apply a system plan to an iterative, incremental, or sub-divided implementation of that plan.
Whenever we have a project that that may be sub-divided into tasks, the project overall is a system whole and each of the tasks constitutes a system part. When developing, managing and utilizing a system and its parts it is best to plan globally in terms of the system as whole when deciding how to handle both the system as a whole and each of its parts. This follows because the parts of a system are subordinate to the whole system and given that ultimately the whole system must function properly in order for the parts to function properly. We should always apply a system view to guide our work with regard to the development, and operation of the various parts of a sub-divided the project. An approach that is rooted in an overall understanding of the project; an approach rooted in assessing the project everything from a holistic standpoint.
When dividing our work, our tasks, into parts and planning when to tackle each part, we should take on and attempt to overcome the riskiest parts and aspects first. Adopting the method of confronting a risk by dividing up a complex mission and tackling the greatest risk to the mission upfront is fundamental to correctly placing the whole above the parts and thinking in holistic fashion because if risk is not ameliorated early on there is greater likelihood that the goal of the mission as a whole will never be achieved. Sometimes the doing the riskiest parts before other parts isn’t possible, one thing must simply be done before another, but whenever possible, we should take on the riskiest work first so increase the chances that the whole line of work has the best chance of succeeding. Attacking risk first often settles issues that ease later parts of the work and it gets us “over the hump” so to speak and more quickly places us on the less bothersome downhill side as the time draws near for the overall task, or mission must be completed. There is a greater likelihood for successful completion of a project when as appropriate we sub-divide work and take on the greatest risks in the first iterative divisions of the work.
One way that we should be applying the interests of the whole to whatever we do is to always put politics in command. In our work we should always be thinking in terms of and led by the current needs and future goals of the proletariat in the revolutionary political class struggle both locally, but more importantly internationally. In our work we should keep in mind the principle of thinking globally and acting both locally and globally. Thinking globally and acting in a locally appropriate manner is a form of sub-dividing the tasks of the international proletariat.
Keeping hold of the key links that allow control of the whole chain is to be holistic. Typically the key links are the leading and engaging factors if they are present.
COMPLEXITY[FONT=Wingdings]ó[/FONT]SIMPLICITY
Simplicity should be used to understand, manage and control the complexity and chaos of complex systems. There is almost always some simplicity, regularity, order and pattern within the chaos and complexity of complex systems. We should use them to effectively control, manage and chaos and complexity. The are often key links that allow us to control the whole system. Order, regularity and simplicity are often the leading factor in relation to a complex system as whole. We encourage revolution to liberate humanity, but we require a regular and orderly vanguard party in order to lead that revolution. Of course an orderly party should also have a robust, vibrant and vigorous ideological life.
Leveled and modular systems promote loose coupling between their parts and thus reduces complexity. They allow each part to have a greater sphere of self-determination with minimal coupling necessary between the parts, and hence less there is complexity required to comprehend and manage each part. Minimal coupling between the parts of system affords greater ease when polymorphically swapping out, or substituting the parts of a system to increase the contextual effectiveness of the system for a given time and place.