Science and Design of Problem Solving Systems

Janos Korn

Description

The book is about an empirical, systems theory of a general, systemic/structural view of parts of the world integrated with creative problem solving procedure with the latter generating a 'product and systems' design method. As an alternative to the speculative and fragmented nature of current 'systems thinking' and practice, the book proposes three principles of systems: 'Generality/nested hierarchy, changes of equilibrium states and problem solving/purpose' together with 'linguistic modelling' using processed, natural language or transformation of narratives of scenarios into sequences of logical conditionals, the executor of the principles. Implementation of the creative, innovative, inspirational stage leads to 'design parameters' which guide the detailed design of systems and products defined as any entity capable of generating interaction. Uncertainties and mathematical models are introduced at the object/agent level as required. The theory is 'property driven' i.e., uses qualitative, quantitative properties including social, emotive and other mental states. Elementary, systemic or structural properties are '1 - and 2 - place simple sentences' which can lead to operational representations when appropriate. Meaning preserving, linguistic transformations convert a narrative or story into such sentences. A user driven approach to the analysis of 'information' is introduced. Recent paradigm changes and problematic issues in current 'systems thinking' are reviewed. The theory is based on accepted branches of knowledge such as linguistics, network theory, biology, physics, chemistry, social science as needed, it is highly teachable, introduces linguistics in addition to mathematics as a symbolic model and can inspire further research. It introduces four criteria for judging the 'soundness' of symbolic models. However, it needs peer review, software development to work out the dynamics of scenarios and further developments for applications to more practical problem situations in organisations, technical and natural circumstances.

Sujets

• Sciences et techniques
• Physics
• Chemistry

Informations

• Publié par: Troubador Publishing Ltd
• Date de parution: 18 novembre 2022
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781803134253
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them’. [A quotation from A. Einstein]
‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point however is to change it’. [On Marx’s tombstone in Highgate Cemetery, Levene, 2010] Modification by author: ‘The scientists have only interpreted the world in various ways. It is the job of systems/structures to change it’.
‘The purpose of change is problem solving’. [Janos Korn]
‘Viewing parts of the world in terms of their structure is systems thinking’. [Janos Korn]
‘Systems are created for solving problems through accomplishment of change of state or disequilibrium’. [Janos Korn]
‘Ideas can be wonderful or evil but to turn them into action they have to be expressed in precise terms. Hence, the aim is to turn speculative and fragmented thinking in the field of systems thinking into more basic and exact reasoning structures’. [Janos Korn]
‘The ‘symbolic language’ of conventional science is ‘mathematical modelling’,
‘The ‘symbolic language’ of systems science is ‘linguistic modelling’. [Janos korn]
Acknowledgement
The author would like to express his gratitude once again to his former colleagues, Dr Frank Huss and Mr John Cumbers and to keep their memory alive, and to Mr Andras Takats, for all their contribution to the early development of linguistic modelling which took place in the 1980s. My sincere thanks are extended to the Open University where I had been exposed to ideas of human activity scenarios and spent an inspiring time of my life. I am very grateful to the country of the United Kingdom which accepted me as a citizen and gave me the opportunity of higher education and subsequent career.
PREAMBLE
Summary: Perhaps the most general notion abstracted from the existence and operation of natural and artificial, inanimate and living things, is the ‘concept of equilibrium and its ‘change’’. Living things, apart from being subject to change due to accidents by chance, are engaged in ‘changes’ called problem solving in accordance with purpose , both are innate , universal in the living sphere and are a particular form of change. No change takes place by itself, the general notion of agent which induces the change is called ‘system or structure’, innate or artificial. Accordingly, the two concepts, ‘problem solving’ and ‘systems or structures’ are connected but currently discussed by and large separately and inadequately. The aim of the proposed symbolic structure of ‘systems theory’ is to discuss the two concepts as an integrated whole resulting in product and systems design thinking. [End of Summary]
Human beings are constantly engaged in creating thoughts deliberately or instinctively based on processing the results of output of perception by the sense organs or using their imagination. They may express the thoughts into symbolic structures such as natural language [most frequently used], gestures, road signs, works of art, mathematics and a variety of others any of which when cast in a ‘medium’, is called a ‘model’. Conventional science of physics accepts only models which can be tested against observation, experiment or application for their truth value. The envisaged ‘systems science’ based on ‘systems theory’ operates along similar principle but with systemic content i.e. viewing aspects of parts of the world from the point of view of their ‘structure’. Design thinking is concerned with models called prototypes which have been created methodically or by instinct or ingenuity to specifications to correspond to requirements to fit or to match a material or mental object. Problem solving is about finding the means capable of converting an unsatisfactory or inadequate state of affairs into one that is judged to be acceptable. The objective of this book is to introduce a ‘systems theory’ which is a symbolic structure with systemic content integrated with the idea of problem solving which prompts thinking of ‘systems and product design’ and fosters creativity, inspiration, intuition.
People have no difficulty in recognising ‘structures or systems’ in static or dynamic state when they perceive entities described as concrete [motor car [just off the assembly line in static state], motor car and driver [in motion, in dynamic state], symbolic [the statue of the king], abstract [quality such as a cloth with smooth feel and bright colour] or imaginary [centaur]. In fact, the terms ‘system or structure’ have been in use for a long time like the Ptolemaic or Copernic system, ‘A system of logic’ of Mills, the philosopher, and now in every day life. Normally the term ‘system’ is referred to an entity which, when perceived, appears ‘complex’ or a ‘set of things considered as a connected whole [Anon., 1993] and which would be difficult to elaborate in detail [much easier to think of it as a whole and using the ‘vague term system’] and/ or appears to be engaged in some kind of potential or actual activity.
Using the term ‘structure’ is clear, no problem, especially when it is applied to concrete things which obviously consist of discernible parts like ‘the tall crane on a building site’, ‘the writing desk in the office’ or ‘an algebraic equation’ and so on. All in static state. Using the term ‘system’ should not be a problem either but people usually apply the term to something not so straightforward as a ‘structure’. Perhaps the difference between the application of the terms ‘structure’ and ‘system’ is that the former is understood to be something ‘static’ like a ‘bridge’ whereas the latter appears to be ‘dynamic’ like a ‘frog’. For example, we have ‘a natural system [volcano erupting, solar system]’, ‘an artificial system [a transport system such as a high speed train in motion or the railway network in a district]’, a ‘living system [digestive system or a part of it like the pancreas]’. People also say ‘the system broke down [when the computer in the office stopped working]’ or ‘the central heating system warming the house’ or ‘the belief system which is in action when affecting the mental state of believers’. All in dynamic state.
However, whether we speak of ‘structure’ or ‘system’ we speak of the same ‘concept seen to consist of related parts each with a function to perform contributing to the functioning of the whole, the idea of holon [Koestler, 1967], which is the agent destined to resolve ‘problematic issues’’ [The author’s idea]. The translation of this idea into a particular kind of symbolic structure is the central question and to attempt an answer is the central task of the current research.
The production of symbolic structures in the mind which when implemented in a medium, is called a model is an ‘intellectual exercise’ requiring great mental effort and ingenuity exerted over time. This kind of exercise is usually exerted by individuals driven by self interest which may have turned out to be of interest to a group of people or a society as a whole and is called ‘human need’. Models are the product of practically limitless ‘imagination’ which resides in the brain/mind apparatus. In many cases models are based on thoughts or concepts derived from the results of perception of aspects of parts of the world which are empirical models. The ‘systemic or structural view’ of parts of the world is an empirical view.
There are a number of recognised, well organised models or ‘intellectual products’ for the ‘change of mental state’ as part of resolving ‘problematic issues’ which have been developed by individuals over the millennia. They have been invented and developed by people usually with intense ‘interest, curiosity, emotions’ because it was felt that they could contribute to satisfying ‘ human need ’ and are shown in Table P1 .
In Table P1 . the ‘intellectual products’ or models are the result of well defined and recognised ‘intellectual activities’ for attempting to satisfy physical and mental ‘human needs’. We anticipate that there is a ‘systems science’ also a well defined activity with its INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITIES MODELS HUMAN NEED A. Conventional science of physics Testable models Reliable knowledge B. Fine/performing arts Imaginative models Emotional states C. Social sciences including medicine Mostly untestable models of living activities Mostly speculative approaches to social problems D. Conventional engineering Designed prototypes Certainty of performance of products E. Religions Habits, rituals, devotion Peace of mind INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITIES MODELS HUMAN NEED F. Ideas of social order Idealistic views, beliefs Benefits/otherwise to human groups G . Systems science Structural models Universal ‘problem solving’
Table P1. Summary of intellectual products
‘structural model’ to accomplish ‘problem solving’ as a universal activity and need of living things. This is the reason for its existence and operation for generating models. In fact, there is no such thing at the moment. However, there is a need to supplement the ever present ‘innateness’ of ability of living things ‘to solve problems’ so as to facilitate understanding the mechanism of this mental activity, its fundamentals, to appreciate the design of its means of resolution and to fit it into the background of recognised intellectual activities. The basic aim of current work is to create this kind of ‘systems science’ for peer review and, if passes scrutiny, to develop it for application in organisations and in teaching.
Remarks &&&
Entries A., B., C., D., E. and F. in Table P1 . are well accepted disciplines in the fields of intellectual activities which exert their appropriate and significant contribution to social, intellectual, mental and material lives of human beings and on technology to serve their survival, convenience, productivity, well being of mind and body, striving for higher performance and so on. Although anticipated to have similar features, entry G. does not seem to make appreciable contribution to advancement of socie