2 ms·

"The purpose of a system is what it does." The purpose is not to create an absolute paradise for its citizens and residents, unfortunately. https://en.wikipedi

"The purpose of a system is what it does." The purpose is not to create an absolute paradise for its citizens and residents, unfortunately. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

goodmythical 8mo ago
That's not a fact. That's just an opinion. You could just as easily claim, and still be just as opinionated, that a system is what is intended to be (intentional design theory), or that a system should be what it ought to be (normative systems theory), or that a system should evolve to fit the purposes of it's environment (structural functionism), or that there is no fixed purpose and that purpose is instead decided by social consensus (social constructivism). A motivated reader might notice that the above systems thinking models each align with various schools of thought/philosophical schools. Idealism, telologism, constructivism, etc. This highlights the assertion that there might not be any one correct system of thought given one's stance on Truth, in that certain said systems might believe that they are the One Truth but could not logically demonstrate to the others that they are as such.
- toomuchtodo 8mo ago
  The US spends ~$1T/year on its military but states it cannot afford universal healthcare, childcare, education, efforts towards affordable housing, etc. Observe what the system does, not what it says it does. Agree this is just my opinion, as a scholar of systems field reporting observations. Am I wrong? I am always open to being challenged and wrong, in my quest for the Truth. "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" as the song goes. https://usafacts.org/government-spending/ https://usafacts.org/government-spending/
micromacrofoot 8mo ago
I think the closest thing we'd get to purpose for a government is likely defined by the constitution? we're not really even upholding those values

goodmythical 8mo ago

That's not a fact. That's just an opinion. You could just as easily claim, and still be just as opinionated, that a system is what is intended to be (intentional design theory), or that a system should be what it ought to be (normative systems theory), or that a system should evolve to fit the purposes of it's environment (structural functionism), or that there is no fixed purpose and that purpose is instead decided by social consensus (social constructivism). A motivated reader might notice that the above systems thinking models each align with various schools of thought/philosophical schools. Idealism, telologism, constructivism, etc. This highlights the assertion that there might not be any one correct system of thought given one's stance on Truth, in that certain said systems might believe that they are the One Truth but could not logically demonstrate to the others that they are as such.

toomuchtodo 8mo ago
The US spends ~$1T/year on its military but states it cannot afford universal healthcare, childcare, education, efforts towards affordable housing, etc. Observe what the system does, not what it says it does. Agree this is just my opinion, as a scholar of systems field reporting observations. Am I wrong? I am always open to being challenged and wrong, in my quest for the Truth. "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" as the song goes. https://usafacts.org/government-spending/ https://usafacts.org/government-spending/

micromacrofoot 8mo ago

I think the closest thing we'd get to purpose for a government is likely defined by the constitution? we're not really even upholding those values