Systemantics

Last updated
General Systemantics
Systemantics.jpg
1977 edition
Author John Gall
IllustratorR. O. Blechman
LanguageEnglish
Subject Systems science
PublisherGeneral Systemantics Press
Publication date
1975/78, 1986, 2002
Media typePrint

General Systemantics (retitled to Systemantics in its second edition and The Systems Bible in its third) is a systems engineering treatise by John Gall in which he offers practical principles of systems design based on experience and anecdotes.

Contents

It is offered from the perspective of how not to design systems, based on system engineering failures. The primary precept of the treatise is that large complex systems are extremely difficult to design correctly despite best intentions, so care must be taken to design smaller, less-complex systems and to do so with incremental functionality based on close and continual touch with user needs and measures of effectiveness.

History

The book was initially self-published after Gall received rejection letters from 30 publishers. After several reviews in academic journals, it was picked up by Quadrangle–The New York Times Book Company, who published it in 1977. [1] A condensed version was also published in The New York Times prior to the book's publication. [2]

Title origin

The term systemantics is a commentary on prior work by Alfred Korzybski called general semantics which conjectured that all systems failures could be attributed to a single root cause – a failure to communicate. Gall observes that, instead, system failure is an intrinsic feature of systems. He thereby derives the term general systemantics in deference to the notion of a sweeping theory of system failure, but attributed to an intrinsic feature based on laws of system behavior. He observes as a side-note that system antics also playfully captures the concept that systems naturally "act up." [3]

Contents

Background

Premise

  • Systems in general work poorly or not at all. [4]

This is more a universal observation than a law. The origin of this observation is traced back via:

  1. Murphy's Law that "if anything can go wrong, it will",
  2. Alfred Korzybski's general semantics notion of failure's root cause being a communication problem,
  3. Humorist Stephen Potter's One-upmanship on ways to "game" the system for personal benefit,
  4. Historian C. Northcote Parkinson's principle called Parkinson's Law – "Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion"
  5. Educator Lawrence J. Peter's widely cited Peter Principle – "In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence ... in time every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties ... Work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence."

Scope

By systems, the author refers to those that "...involve human beings, particularly those very large systems such as national governments, nations themselves, religions, the railway system, the post office..." though the intention is that the principles are general to any system. [5]

Additionally, the author observes:

  1. Everything is a system.
  2. Everything is part of a larger system.
  3. The universe is infinitely systematized, both upward (larger systems) and downward (smaller systems).
  4. All systems are infinitely complex.

First principles

Once a system is set up to solve some problem, the system itself engenders new problems relating to its development, operations and maintenance. The author points out that the additional energy required to support the system can consume the energy it was meant to save. This leads to the next principle:

The author defines anergy as the effort required to bring about a change. This is meant as a tongue-in-cheek analog of the law of conservation of energy.

One of the problems that a system creates is that it becomes an entity unto itself that not only persists but expands and encroaches on areas beyond the original system's purview.

Why systems behave poorly

The author cites a number of spectacular unexpected behaviors including:

  1. The Aswan Dam diverting the Nile River's fertilizing sediment to Lake Nasser (where it is useless) requiring the dam to operate at full electrical generating capacity to run the artificial fertilizer plants needed to replace the diverted sediment.
  2. The space Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center designed to protect vehicles from weather is so large that it produces its own weather.

Feedback

Not only do systems expand well beyond their original goals, but as they evolve they tend to oppose even their own original goals. This is seen as a systems theory analog of Le Chatelier's principle that suggests chemical and physical processes tend to counteract changed conditions that upset equilibrium until a new equilibrium is established. This same counteraction force can be seen in systems behavior. For example, incentive reward systems set up in business can have the effect of institutionalizing mediocrity. [8] This leads to the following principle:

What's in a name

People performing roles in systems often do not perform the role suggested by the name the system gives that person, nor does the system itself perform the role that its name suggests.

Inside systems

In other words, the system has a severely censored and distorted view of reality from biased and filtering sensory organs. This distorted view displaces understanding of the actual real-world, which in turn pales and tends to disappear. This displacement creates a type of sensory deprivation and a kind of hallucinogenic effect on those inside the systems, causing them to lose common sense. In addition to negatively affecting those inside the system, the system attracts to it people who are optimized for the pathological environment the system creates. Thus,

Elementary systems functions

  1. A complex system cannot be "made" to work. It either works or it does not.
  2. A simple system, designed from scratch, sometimes works.
  3. Some complex systems actually work.
  4. A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.
  5. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. One has to start over, beginning with a working simple system. [12]

Advanced systems functions

  1. The Functional Indeterminacy Theorem (F.I.T.): in complex systems, malfunction and even total non-function may not be detectable for long periods, if ever.
  2. The Newtonian Law of Systems Inertia: a system that performs a certain way will continue to operate in that way regardless of the need or of changed conditions.
  3. Systems develop goals of their own the instant they come into being.
  4. Intrasystem goals come first. [13]

System failure

  1. The Fundamental Failure-Mode Theorem (F.F.T.): complex systems usually operate in a failure mode.
  2. A complex system can fail in an infinite number of ways. (If anything can go wrong, it will; see Murphy's law.)
  3. The mode of failure of a complex system cannot ordinarily be predicted from its structure.
  4. The crucial variables are discovered by accident.
  5. The larger the system, the greater the probability of unexpected failure.
  6. "Success" or "function" in any system may be failure in the larger or smaller systems to which the system is connected.
  7. The Fail-Safe Theorem: when a fail-safe system fails, it fails by failing to fail safe. [14]

Practical systems design

  1. The Vector Theory of Systems: systems run better when designed to run downhill.
  2. Loose systems last longer and work better. (Efficient systems are dangerous to themselves and to others.) [15]

Management and other myths

  1. Complex systems tend to produce complex responses (not solutions) to problems.
  2. Great advances are not produced by systems designed to produce great advances. [16]

Other laws of systemantics

  1. As systems grow in size, they tend to lose basic functions.
  2. The larger the system, the less the variety in the product.
  3. Control of a system is exercised by the element with the greatest variety of behavioral responses.
  4. Colossal systems foster colossal errors.
  5. Choose systems with care.

Reception

Money stated in 1978 that the author "clearly set out to write another Peter Principle". [17] A 1977 review in Etc: A Review of General Semantics states that the book's aim is unclear, commenting, "As a put-down of institutional practices it works well, as good as anything in print", but "As a slam at systems theory the book is less successful, even ambiguous." [18] A Library Journal review from 1977 comments, "Like some of its predecessors, the book pretends to rebuke people for their manifold stupidities, but is, in fact, an invitation to take pleasure in them. That's not a failing, just a fact. Recommended." [19] A 2004 review in the American Society of Safety Professionals' Professional Safety says, "It is at once deadly serious with all the outrageous contrived irony of Gary Larson's 'Far Side' cartoons" and that "the book is one continuous insight after another." [20] PCMag calls the book "small but insightful". [21]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alfred Korzybski</span> Polish-American scholar and philosopher (1879–1950)

Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybski was a Polish-American independent scholar who developed a field called general semantics, which he viewed as both distinct from, and more encompassing than, the field of semantics. He argued that human knowledge of the world is limited both by the human nervous system and the languages humans have developed, and thus no one can have direct access to reality, given that the most we can know is that which is filtered through the brain's responses to reality. His best known dictum is "The map is not the territory".

Automated theorem proving is a subfield of automated reasoning and mathematical logic dealing with proving mathematical theorems by computer programs. Automated reasoning over mathematical proof was a major motivating factor for the development of computer science.

E-Prime denotes a restricted form of English in which authors avoid all forms of the verb to be.

Knowledge representation and reasoning is a field of artificial intelligence (AI) dedicated to representing information about the world in a form that a computer system can use to solve complex tasks, such as diagnosing a medical condition or having a natural-language dialog. Knowledge representation incorporates findings from psychology about how humans solve problems and represent knowledge, in order to design formalisms that make complex systems easier to design and build. Knowledge representation and reasoning also incorporates findings from logic to automate various kinds of reasoning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peter principle</span> Management concept by Laurence J. Peter

The Peter principle is a concept in management developed by Laurence J. Peter which observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to "a level of respective incompetence": employees are promoted based on their success in previous jobs until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent, as skills in one job do not necessarily translate to another.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emergence</span> Unpredictable phenomenon in complex systems

In philosophy, systems theory, science, and art, emergence occurs when a complex entity has properties or behaviors that its parts do not have on their own, and emerge only when they interact in a wider whole.

General semantics is a school of thought that incorporates philosophic and scientific aspects. Although it does not stand on its own as a separate school of philosophy, a separate science, or an academic discipline, it describes itself as a scientifically empirical approach to cognition and problem solving. It has been described by nonproponents as a self-help system, and it has been criticized as having pseudoscientific aspects, but it has also been favorably viewed by various scientists as a useful set of analytical tools albeit not its own science.

Test-driven development (TDD) is a way of writing code that involves writing an automated unit-level test case that fails, then writing just enough code to make the test pass, then refactoring both the test code and the production code, then repeating with another new test case.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Map–territory relation</span> Relationship between an object and a representation of that object

The map–territory relation is the relationship between an object and a representation of that object, as in the relation between a geographical territory and a map of it. Mistaking the map for the territory is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone confuses the semantics of a term with what it represents. Polish-American scientist and philosopher Alfred Korzybski remarked that "the map is not the territory" and that "the word is not the thing", encapsulating his view that an abstraction derived from something, or a reaction to it, is not the thing itself. Korzybski held that many people do confuse maps with territories, that is, confuse conceptual models of reality with reality itself. These ideas are crucial to general semantics, a system Korzybski originated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jerry Fodor</span> American philosopher (1935–2017)

Jerry Alan Fodor was an American philosopher and the author of many crucial works in the fields of philosophy of mind and cognitive science. His writings in these fields laid the groundwork for the modularity of mind and the language of thought hypotheses, and he is recognized as having had "an enormous influence on virtually every portion of the philosophy of mind literature since 1960." At the time of his death in 2017, he held the position of State of New Jersey Professor of Philosophy, Emeritus, at Rutgers University, and had taught previously at the City University of New York Graduate Center and MIT.

The study of how language influences thought, and vice-versa, has a long history in a variety of fields. There are two bodies of thought forming around this debate. One body of thought stems from linguistics and is known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. There is a strong and a weak version of the hypothesis which argue for more or less influence of language on thought. The strong version, linguistic determinism, argues that without language there is and can be no thought, while the weak version, linguistic relativity, supports the idea that there are some influences from language on thought. And on the opposing side, there are 'language of thought' theories (LOTH) which believe that public language is inessential to private thought. LOTH theories address the debate of whether thought is possible without language which is related to the question of whether language evolved for thought. These ideas are difficult to study because it proves challenging to parse the effects of culture versus thought versus language in all academic fields.

Linguistic determinism is the concept that language and its structures limit and determine human knowledge or thought, as well as thought processes such as categorization, memory, and perception. The term implies that people's native languages will affect their thought process and therefore people will have different thought processes based on their mother tongues.

John Gall was an American author, scholar, and pediatrician. Gall is known for his 1975 book General systemantics: an essay on how systems work, and especially how they fail..., a critique of systems theory. One of the statements from this book has become known as Gall's law.

The structural differential is a physical chart or three-dimensional model illustrating the abstracting processes of the human nervous system. In one form, it appears as a pegboard with tags. Created by Alfred Korzybski, and awarded a U.S. patent on May 26, 1925, it is used as a training device in general semantics. The device is intended to show that human "knowledge" of, or acquaintance with, anything is partial—not total.

The Institute of General Semantics (IGS) is a not-for-profit corporation established in 1938 by Alfred Korzybski, to support research and publication on the topic of general semantics. The Institute publishes Korzybski's writings, including the seminal text Science & Sanity, and books by other authors who have studied or taught general semantics, such as Robert Pula, Irving J. Lee, Wendell Johnson, and Stuart Chase. Every year since 1952, it has sponsored the Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture, with presenters from a broad range of disciplines, from science to medicine to entertainment, including names like actor Steve Allen, psychologist Albert Ellis, scientist and visionary R. Buckminster Fuller, linguist Allen Walker Read, and philosopher F. S. C. Northrop. The Institute offers periodic seminars, workshops and conferences and is headquartered in New York City.

The law of triviality is C. Northcote Parkinson's 1957 argument that people within an organization commonly give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Parkinson provides the example of a fictional committee whose job was to approve the plans for a nuclear power plant spending the majority of its time on discussions about relatively minor but easy-to-grasp issues, such as what materials to use for the staff bicycle shed, while neglecting the proposed design of the plant itself, which is far more important and a far more difficult and complex task.

<i>Levels of Knowing and Existence</i>

Levels of Knowing and Existence: Studies in General Semantics is a textbook written by Professor Harry L. Weinberg that provides a broad overview of general semantics in language accessible to the layman.

Collaborative tagging, also known as social tagging or folksonomy, allows users to apply public tags to online items, typically to make those items easier for themselves or others to find later. It has been argued that these tagging systems can provide navigational cues or "way-finders" for other users to explore information. The notion is that given that social tags are labels users create to represent topics extracted from online documents, the interpretation of these tags should allow other users to predict the contents of different documents efficiently. Social tags are arguably more important in exploratory search, in which the users may engage in iterative cycles of goal refinement and exploration of new information, and interpretation of information contents by others will provide useful cues for people to discover topics that are relevant.

In information security, computer science, and other fields, the principle of least privilege (PoLP), also known as the principle of minimal privilege (PoMP) or the principle of least authority (PoLA), requires that in a particular abstraction layer of a computing environment, every module must be able to access only the information and resources that are necessary for its legitimate purpose.

<i>Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty</i> Book by Morris Kline

Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty is a book by Morris Kline on the developing perspectives within mathematical cultures throughout the centuries.

References

  1. ↑ Serrin, Judith (1977-01-05). "Why Things Just Won't Work". Detroit Free Press . pp. 1C, 5C. Retrieved 2023-09-20– via Newspapers.com.
  2. ↑ Gall, John (1976-12-26). "Why nothing works the way it's supposed to: Systemanantics". The New York Times . p. SM3. ProQuest   122788800 . Retrieved 2024-01-12– via ProQuest.
  3. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 24.
  4. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 22.
  5. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 26.
  6. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 29.
  7. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 40.
  8. ↑ Pink, Daniel (2011). Drive. Penguin. ISBN   978-1594484803.
  9. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 48.
  10. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 58.
  11. ↑ Gall 1978, p. 65.
  12. ↑ Gall 1978, pp. 79–82.
  13. ↑ Gall 1978, pp. 83–90.
  14. ↑ Gall 1978, pp. 91–97.
  15. ↑ Gall 1978, pp. 99–104.
  16. ↑ Gall 1978, pp. 99–110.
  17. ↑ Harris, Marlys (January 1978). "Why Things Don't Work: Three books on systems". Money . Vol. 7, no. 1.
  18. ↑ Quinby, David L. (December 1977). "Review: General Sematics and General Systems: An Irreverent View". Etc: A Review of General Semantics . 34 (4). JSTOR   42575291.
  19. ↑ Anderson, A. J. (1977-05-01). "Humor: Gall, John. Systemantics: How systems work and especially how they fail". Library Journal . 102 (9): 1018 – via EBSCO.
  20. ↑ Metzgar, Carl R. (October 2004). "Writing Worth Reading: Review: The Systems Bible". Professional Safety. 49 (10). American Society of Safety Professionals: 20, 72. JSTOR   45453930.
  21. ↑ "Definition of Systemantics". PCMag . Retrieved 2023-09-20.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.