The advent of general system theory (GST) is generally attributed to Ludwig von Bertalanffy, with original publications in the 1930s. He points to intellectual predecessors, however, that include Paracelsus, Vico, ibn-Kaldun, Marx, Helgel and Lotka, as well as contemporaries (von Bertalanffy 1968)ref. Von Bertalanffy, along with Boulding (an economist), Gerard (a physiologist), and Rapoport (a biomathametician), formed the original Society for General System Theory in 1954.
[2] The basic thesis of GST is that systems carry similar characteristics, regardless of the domain in which they are manifest. The theory attempts to identify and describe these ismorphisms, or characteristics general to all systems. Von Bertalanffy (1968) defended the need for such theory by pointing to the increasing complexity of human societies, knowledge and technologies:
A steam engine, automobile, or radio receiver was within the competence of the engineer trained in the respective specialty. But when it comes to ballistic missiles or space vehicles, they have to be assembled from components originating in heterogeneous technologies; ... relations of man and machine come into play; and innumerable financial, economic, social and political problems are thrown into the bargain...
These developments would be merely another of the many facets of change in our contemporary technological society were it not for a significant factor apt to be overlooked in the highly sophisticated and necessarily specialized techniques of computer science, systems engineering and related fields. This is not only a tendency in technology to make things bigger and better (or alternatively, more profitable, destructive, or both). It is a change in basic categories of thought of which the complexities of modern technology are only one - and possibly not the most important - manifestation. In one way or another, we are forced to deal with complexities, with "wholes" or "systems," in all fields of knowledge. This implies a basic re-orientation in scientific thinking. (von Bertalanffy 1968: 4-5)
[3] As von Bertalanffy saw it, the features required by this 'basic re-orientation' meant that a 'systems approach' (in contrast to an analytical approach) became necessary - with the basic distinction being the 'wholistic' nature of the former.
>> system characteristics
>> typologies
>> analytical vs. system approach
>> lessons for sympoisis
previous substantive revisions: 2003.11.27; 12.28
page created: 2003.11.24
2003 - 2007