"This entirely misunderstands that technological achievements are due to synthesis—the incremental improvement of technology by gradually building on what has been made before—rather than analysis of systems such as the human immune system, which we only partially understand."
You have brought out a very important aspect of systems thinking, i.e., synthesis. John Boyd, creator of the OODA Loop, only wrote ONE paper in his life (the rest of his work was in old-style vu-foils (overhead transparencies). That one paper, written in 1976, was entitled, "Destruction and Creation.". (Or, analysis followed by synthesis.) In that paper, Boyd illustrated the inseparability of the two with the example of "building snowmobiles." He posited taking the seat, handlebars and yoke from a bicycle ... then combining that with a pair of skis (boards only), adding a boat's outboard motor and a single tread from a tank. The result was something completely new, and totally unrelated to the purposes of the original devices from which the components came. Analysis and synthesis --- destruction and creation --- simplified. Of course, being primarily interested in military applications of such thinking, Boyd's ultimate conclusion was the the victor in a battle was the side that could build snowmobiles faster than the opponent. And isn't that really true of business competition today...?
Mar 30, 2023·edited Mar 30, 2023Liked by Thorsteinn Siglaugsson
I'm a Systems Thinking lead in multi-mational business and have been working in the field for about 18 years now. This is a really interesting piece, and I would say that my ST mindset has certainly helped me to understand what has been going on in the world for the last few years, none of it good. Many of the problems seem to me due to an unwillingness to even try to understand the interaction of forces shaping society or the trade-offs between action and consequence. This was glaringly apparent when the obvious downsides of locking down populations to attempt to contain a virus that presented minimal risk to most of society, were simply ignored by policymakers.
Although they don't specifically reference ST, Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying have been really good at teasing out some of the malign interrelationships between pharma, regulators, academia and the media; others, such as Sam Harris, seem incapable of seeing beyond simplistic heuristics, such as, 'if the majority of experts say a thing, then it must be true'. Without sincere and dilligent work to understand the interrelation of the drivers of societal behaviour, I fear we are doomed.
"This entirely misunderstands that technological achievements are due to synthesis—the incremental improvement of technology by gradually building on what has been made before—rather than analysis of systems such as the human immune system, which we only partially understand."
You have brought out a very important aspect of systems thinking, i.e., synthesis. John Boyd, creator of the OODA Loop, only wrote ONE paper in his life (the rest of his work was in old-style vu-foils (overhead transparencies). That one paper, written in 1976, was entitled, "Destruction and Creation.". (Or, analysis followed by synthesis.) In that paper, Boyd illustrated the inseparability of the two with the example of "building snowmobiles." He posited taking the seat, handlebars and yoke from a bicycle ... then combining that with a pair of skis (boards only), adding a boat's outboard motor and a single tread from a tank. The result was something completely new, and totally unrelated to the purposes of the original devices from which the components came. Analysis and synthesis --- destruction and creation --- simplified. Of course, being primarily interested in military applications of such thinking, Boyd's ultimate conclusion was the the victor in a battle was the side that could build snowmobiles faster than the opponent. And isn't that really true of business competition today...?
I'm a Systems Thinking lead in multi-mational business and have been working in the field for about 18 years now. This is a really interesting piece, and I would say that my ST mindset has certainly helped me to understand what has been going on in the world for the last few years, none of it good. Many of the problems seem to me due to an unwillingness to even try to understand the interaction of forces shaping society or the trade-offs between action and consequence. This was glaringly apparent when the obvious downsides of locking down populations to attempt to contain a virus that presented minimal risk to most of society, were simply ignored by policymakers.
Although they don't specifically reference ST, Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying have been really good at teasing out some of the malign interrelationships between pharma, regulators, academia and the media; others, such as Sam Harris, seem incapable of seeing beyond simplistic heuristics, such as, 'if the majority of experts say a thing, then it must be true'. Without sincere and dilligent work to understand the interrelation of the drivers of societal behaviour, I fear we are doomed.