3 ms·
That's correct, and I think the author goes too far in implying that the efficient cause is the "wrong" way. I think what they are actually opposing is _linear_
by beaconstudios 5y ago
That's correct, and I think the author goes too far in implying that the efficient cause is the "wrong" way. I think what they are actually opposing is _linear_ causal thinking; after all, systems thinking is about graduating from linear to nonlinear causal reasoning.
Culturally in the West we tend to think of linear modelling as the highest truthful form (see reverence for subjects like physics, though ironically quantum physics moved away from this paradigm to a degree) which is not ideal because only a small number of subjects are amenable to such a model and most are far removed from the arenas in which we act day to day and thus would be well served with accurate models.
- datastoat 5y agoI've not heard of nonlinear causal reasoning. It sounds interesting. Could you suggest some reading? (A quick search throws up uninteresting hits about nonlinear models.)
- beaconstudios 5y ago[edit] this might be a good starting point: - general overview of complex systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system - nonlinear dynamics (maths-heavy): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_system it's the underlying topic of study in systems theory in the same way that mathematics is about axiomatic models; you won't see it explicitly mentioned that much unless you go into the more pure, self-referential subdisciplines. cybernetics focuses on things like feedback loops (where cause-and-effect runs in a loop - ie, it is not linear), systems theory works on higher-order patterns based on feedback; it spans out in many different directions (systems theory is extremely transdisciplinary) and there's a lot to it so I'm not sure what specifically I could direct you towards. "Thinking in Systems" by Donella Meadows is the typical recommendation, but I find it very diagram-focused and that's probably the least interesting part about it in my mind.