Chris, Oh, yeah! (from an old coot myself) I thank you for reminding me and us of Bertalanffy! I forgot that I use that definition of open systems from biology quite frequently as an explanation that has metaphoric and actual application in human terms. Thus... Far out! :-)
John On Feb 13, 2014, at 7:29 AM, Chris Kloth wrote: > At the risk of seeming to be an old coot, I do plead guilty to cootness, I > would like to clarify one aspect of the history of "open systems." > > John posted "The term "open systems" comes from thermodynamics, especially > from Prigogine and Stengers..." > > While I love how Prigogine and Stengers and others who have explored what > contemporary physics (chaos, complexity, string and other theories) have > added to our understanding of human systems, I am looking at my copy of > Ludwig von Bertalanffy's General System Theory, published in 1950. He is > usually credited with both the earliest description of Open Systems > (importing energy, using energy, expelling energy) in nature (he was a > biologist) as well as the application of open systems to human systems in > that same publication. > > In a practical sense the theory is so fundamental that it continues to inform > much of how we understand the world today, including chaos, complexity, etc. > The reason I like to keep old Ludwig's work in front of us is that I find > that when folks I am working with begin to explore the systems they are part > of it is easier to start with the subsystems (individual people, groups, > communities) we are able and willing to make choices about, influence and > shape... together (oops, have I mentioned interdependence lately?) :-0! They > also more easily begin to grasp that those subsystems are part of a larger > environment or ecosystem that is more complicated and chaotic... like severe > weather (he said with the snow outside his house piled as high as his car > windows... oops, have I mentioned vulnerability lately?) > > Thus, (the coot substitute for the currently popular vernacular "So, ..." and > the popular alternative of my youth "Like, ...), I thank John and others for > keeping the latest thinking on how science may inform our questions and > answers about systems in our conversations, but I like to give credit where > credit is due. > > Just sayin'! ;-) > > Shalom, > > Chris Kloth > ChangeWorks of the Heartland > [email protected] > www.got2change.com > phone - 614.239.1336 > fax - 614.237.2347 > > Think Globally, Act Locally > > Please think about the environment before printing this e-mail. > > > On 2/11/2014 11:19 PM, Lucas Cioffi wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I read that "Open Space works because self-organization works." But I >> remember from physics class that disorder (entropy) in the Universe is >> always increasing, so when the order of something increases (such as during >> OS), the order of something else must decrease. >> >> Paraphrased from Wikipedia: >> "The second law of thermodynamics states that in general the total entropy >> of any system (the disorder, randomness, or our lack of information about >> it) will not decrease other than by increasing the entropy of some other >> system." >> >> So when participants organize themselves during Open Space does something >> else become disorganized? Or is it that all the disorder created (by >> consuming the muffins, coffee, fuel, paper, electricity, etc) always >> outweighed by the order created by the self-organization? >> >> For what it's worth, below is an interesting thread I found from the list >> archives from a few years ago that mentions entropy... >> >> Lucas Cioffi >> Charlottesville, VA >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: John Watkins <[email protected]> >> Date: Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:25 AM >> Subject: Re: [OSList] Designing an OS way >> To: Artur Silva <[email protected]>, World wide Open Space Technology >> email list <[email protected]> >> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> >> >> Artur, >> >> The term "open systems" comes from thermodynamics, especially from Prigogine >> and Stengers, who also refer to them as "dissipative" systems. It does not >> mean open to change; it means open in the sense of importing "energy" from >> outside itself and excreting "energy" back into the surrounding system. >> Such systems are most often self-organizing and self-recreating >> (autopoiesis). They "sort" energy into that which will help them recreate >> themselves and that which will not, and they dissipate the rest, creating, >> paradoxically, internally order and externally more entropy. Bureaucracies >> are actually great examples of open systems in this regard. >> >> John >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSList mailing list >> To post send emails to [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: >> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org >
_______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
