Content uploaded by Jordi Soler Alomà
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jordi Soler Alomà on Feb 08, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Philosophy International Journal
ISSN: 2641-9130
MEDWIN PUBLISHERS
Commied to Create Value for Researchers
Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship Philos Int J
Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak
Relationship
Soler Alomà J*
UPF-Tecnocampus, Spain
*Corresponding author: Jordi Soler Alomà, UPF-Tecnocampus, NAVARRO 3, 4rt - 1a, Spain,
Tel: 660884554; Email: jsoler@tecnocampus.cat
Research article
Volume 5 Issue 1
Received Date: January 05, 2022
Published Date: February 04, 2022
DOI: 10.23880/phij-16000226
Abstract
Developmental Systems Theory (DST) has the merit of revitalizing the concept of system and applying it in a phenomenal
is ascribed and through the use of the principle of unity of system and environment. One of the most glaring contradictions of
already contained in the old but in force systemic approach.
Keywords:
Introduction
that he vindicated his authorship of the concept, he referred
(Bertalanffy, 1968).
theme are still proliferating, such as the prevalent DST
approach of the genotype-phenotype relationship and its
that, both in the case of Oyama and Bertalanffy, as in all the
process qualifying as a “system” or “developing system”. In
fact, even though the merit of calling attention to the systemic
nature of reality must be recognized, Bertalanffy’s elegant
description of these), plus some thoughtful opinions about
Regarding the supposed use of metaphors by science,
Philosophy International Journal
2
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
be forgotten is that it is about models, not reality itself [2];
origin”, but rather has to apply its methodological system.
This is a problem that DST, according to the appreciation of
The Systemic Paradigm
The systemic approach in the study of reality, even
of subsystems, such as the physical, the biological, the logical,
etc. No one can deny, on the other hand, that both Leonardo da
systemic paradigms [2], contributing to the emergence of the
there is at least one control subsystem that “ensures” the
the subsystems that contribute to that operation. In the case
of animals (including humans), this controlling system is
The concept of structure is very seductive, as it can be
applied to everything. Perhaps it is due to this phenomenon
structuralism in general) [4]; this substitution means that
either the fact that the structure is nothing other than the
set of relationships of the components of a system and
the system that they constitute: there are no structures
components that maintain them, and these are components
inputs and outputs [5]; This reductionism only achieves the
self-destruction of the concept itself, since it is not possible
by such “inputs and outputs”). Therefore, it can be said that
structuralism and reductionism are alien to the systemic
approach.
The simplest model of a material system is the inventory
of its components, its environment, its structure and its
mechanism/s [2]. Both the environment and the components
mechanism are common to all types of systems. The structure
that the structure of each system is part of the structures of
the other systems. Mechanisms are processes that determine
the “identity” of the system and intervene in its development.
borne in mind that a model of a system is not the system itself
sometimes ideological presuppositions, are the very reality
that they claim to represent).
there are) almost as many systems theories as systems
theorists (Bertalanffy, L., 1968). Furthermore, systems
either empirical research or accurate theorizing [6], so that
old holism. The systemic approach goes beyond the holistic
of their components and the set of variables related to them
[2].
replaces other theories, but is a methodology to understand
the reality that manifests itself systemically and to be
characteristics of real systems and conceive models of these
to distinguish one thing from the other). It is not enough to
Philosophy International Journal
3
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
and for this, it is necessary to discover its components and
mechanisms that underlie its operation.
that operate simultaneously at different “levels.” The brain,
locomotor, cognitive and rational processes in parallel (to
and evolution of organisms depend on a multiplicity of
interdependent mechanisms, such as genetic change
organisms, but they also transform their environments, thus
creating a “virtuous” cycle).
default, is dynamic) is its difference from the classical
genetic calendar; in the systemic-dynamic conception, the
environment of the system can modify the genetic calendar.
in the study of the development of the human individual, it
contemplates this development in the dynamic bio-psycho-
Milestonian approach
Event Time Event Time Event Time Event
Birth Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Table 1:
Figure 1:
elaboration]).
convenient to distinguish the mechanisms that are essential
from those that are not [7]. The former are those peculiar
and sine qua non for systems of a certain type. On the
Philosophy International Journal
4
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
adrenache and gonadarche
to the increased production of adrenal androgens such as
dehydroepiandrosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate,
of pubic hair. A couple of years later, the gonadal glands begin
to mature, promoting the production of gonadal hormones
and genitals; this is the empirically most plausible and
component. Both are biological mechanisms programmed
in the genetic calendar and that should be accompanied
by a free and open reception by the environment for the
such as moral and religious prejudices and the taboo nature
strongly condition and repress the healthy development of
said processes subject to the aforementioned mechanisms;
consequently, society alters biological processes and, to
legitimize the disastrous result, constructs imaginary stages
psychiatry, , that is, one that demands for a systemic
concept of organizational causality instead of typical linear;
biopsychosocial processes that can stimulate the emergence
subsets. In any case, the approach that unites biological,
psychic and social factors (biopsychosocial approach or BPS)
on the individual could condition or favour the development
the systems involved intersect. It is precisely in the space in
the derived behaviour from the effect of social repression
on personal development may have on the genetic calendar
it consists of a process that causes the desired changes or
some authors conceive essential social mechanisms as the
social processes that have the intended consequences for
may be essential social mechanisms supervening, such as
revolutions, that do not necessarily meet the requirements
alleged above.
Social processes, in addition to assuming mechanisms
morals, absurd prejudices, etc. not reducible to natural
counter-norm [13], although it does not seem at all obvious
that for certain classes there is no norm at all and, in front of
Cogito ergo sum means, then,
Unobservable mechanisms are inferred in the manner
of hypotheses, and hypothesis formulation, as characterized
by the father of Pragmatism, is an art [14]. Not only can
pollution and social inconsistency, but mechanisms that
Philosophy International Journal
5
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
economic democracy and free participation). Scientists have
mechanisms [2]. The curvature of space caused by bodies
since reality is made up of systems, the universe must be the
requirements that a system must meet to be considered as
such.
A system is made up of:
1. Components: Elements or subsystems.
2. Structure:
environment.
3. Environment:
4. Mechanisms:
5. Functions: Results of the “activity” of the system as
such.
not meet one of the “requirements” to be a system: to be
it can maintain structural relationships. Consequently, on the
structural property endogenously, so that only the systems
not the remotest idea of the “result” of the “activity” of the
universe (that is, its functions).
that 1. The universe is not a system and 2. It is necessary to
a prioriuniverse,
forget that the significationsign
that signifies it). The same concept of space, separated from
the concept of time, is imprecise, and can be used both to
space”. Also, the concept of time, separated from space, has
right
now. In reality, it is impossible to determine any moment,
because outside of our imagination there are no moments or
instants; seconds, minutes and hours are a human invention
spacetime
continuum
order to understand reality and have some control over it. A
that alternative hypotheses (such as the “parallel universes”
or those that assume the periodicity of the universe in cycles
system, for the simple fact that this is a sort of processes and
systems factory and, a fortiori, because of the indisputable fact
A New Systems Theory?
DST (or Developmental Systems Theory) is the latest
version of the systemic approach, and focuses on self-
dynamic system is self-developing, the importance of DST
psychobiology (or evolutionary cognitive neuroscience)
psychiatry [11]. Although some authors circumscribe DST
development and evolution [15], there is no doubt that DST
Philosophy International Journal
6
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
and the system. In this sense (namely, its application to
dichotomies such as nature versus nurture, genes versus
environment, and biology versus culture [16]. In any case, in
DST applied to biology it is not clear if the environment is
part of the self-developing system or if it is a conjunctural
factor (in a purely systemic approach, the environment
they share structures). One of the most notable shortcomings
the concept of structure applied to the dynamic relationship
also be conceptually productive to establish the hierarchy of
sense or in an involutionary sense, by the environment:
“process” are introduced, placing them in a sui generis
(since the concept of process comes “from the factory” in
The fact that DST emphasizes processes involving organisms
does not mean that DST can be reduced to a theory of
a dynamic process and that, as such, must be studied through
a procedure that accounts for this dynamism. The concept
structures and mechanisms behind it; therefore, reducing
epigenesis to a “processual” concept is simplifying it.
“processual” to the dynamics of development, since it goes
of organisms, components, structures, mechanisms and
environments intervene. In the end, a process is nothing more
than an event over time [2]. And there are no processes per
se, but things, organisms and environments (that is, systems)
epigenetic hypotheses, and his investigations on the non-
developing organism can vary due to changes both genetic
obvious as soon as society is studied from the biopsychosocial
ideology (and let’s not forget that ideology of a society is the
ideology of the class that controls it). According to this, each
organism is the result of reading its DNA in some temporal
events that arise due to the very small number of molecules
abstract constructions: there are no genes isolated from
combination of genes and environment produces a unique
and unpredictable developmental outcome in advance. The
share) is that there are separable genetic and environmental
causes, yet there are no genetic processes outside of
from the gene-free environment. The necessary condition
for an environment to be such is that it be of a developing
organism, that is, there are no abstract organisms outside
an environment, although DNA molecules can be found
circumstances and DNA molecules that turn these physical
circumstances into causes of development only in this
the mechanisms that underlie evolution and development
and reveal the structure of the systems that participate
(partly because of the erroneous interpretation, on the
biological meaning of the sequencing of the genome). In
any case, it is not necessary to “demonize” the genotype to
Philosophy International Journal
7
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
bioevolutionary paradigm because one of the requirements
for something to be a system is that it be in an environment
a
priori conceptualizations cannot contribute much more than
opinions (despite the more respectable and brainy that they
are). For instance, although the development of lung cancer
is a very complicated process that involves the combined
unreasonable to consider that the fact of tobacco use has a
potentiating effect on the development of lung cancer. This
Bacillus
thuringiensis
argued, development approaches must be evaluated on
is properly applied, DST can argue that the plant and the
DST, perhaps due to its misuse of systemic concepts, has not
accused of certain inconsistence in accounting for facts such
as the relative importance of the environment in the role that
genes have in the human predisposition for speech in general
and not of a language in particular [19].
interactionism, a concept that is accused of being too vague
battery of arguments in the correct concepts of the systemic
approach.
Conclusions
As has been observed, DST is a theory of systems
the principle of unity of system and environment, it does not
use the concept of system beyond the simple mention of the
attached. One of the most notorious contradictions of DST is
not already contained in the systemic approach.
in its “forest of structures”, DST applied the methodology and
give coherence and precision to its discourse. This could
concept of structure, applying it to the dynamic relationship
the description of ontogenetic and evolutionary systemic
they consider that each of these structures is, ultimately,
hierarchy of the mechanisms that underlie evolution and
sense or in an involutive sense, in relation to the environment
the label of “developmental system” to everything that lends
itself to it.
Regarding the sources, it cannot be objected that DST
is right to vindicate the epigenetics of Waddington and the
epistemological critique of Oyama, but it is undoubtedly that
do even better if, in addition to praising the sources, he
Philosophy International Journal
8
Soler Alomà J. Developmental Systems Theory and Systemic Approach: A Weak Relationship. Philos
Int J 2022, 5(1): 000226.
Copyright© Soler Alomà J.
carried out some constructive criticism to demonstrate his
methodological solvency.
have to overcome: either adhere consistently to the systemic
to certain biological and bio-psycho-social facts.
References
1. Oyama S (2000) The Ontogeny of Information
University Press. Durham.
2. Bunge M (2007) Chasing reality: strife over realism.
University of Toronto Press. Toronto.
3. Wiener N (1948) Cybernetics: Or Control and
Communication in the Animal and the Machine. MIT
Press. Cambridge.
4. The Constitution of Society: Outline of
the Theory of Structuration. Polity Press. Cambridge.
5. Ashby WR (1963) An Introduction to Cybernetics. John
6. László E (1972) Introduction to Systems Philosophy.
Routledge, London.
7. Planning in Crisis? Theoretical
Orientations for Architecture and Planning. Routletge,
London.
8. Sperling MA (2014) Pediatric endocrinology e-book.
9. Sexuality Development in Childhood
10. Papalia DE, Olds SW (1991) Human Development.
11. Bio-psycho-social interaction: an
enactive perspective. Int Rev Psychiatry 33(5): 471-477.
12. The clinical application of the
biopsychosocial model. The American Journal of
Psychiatry 137(5): 535-44.
13. Merton RK (1976) Sociological Ambivalence and Other
Essays.
14. Peirce CS (1958) Science and Philosophy
University Press. Cambridge.
15. Dressino V (2017) La ontogenia y la evolución desde
la perspectiva de la teoría de los sistemas de desarrollo
(DST). Acta biol Colomb 22(3): 265-273.
16. Developmental Systems Theory
as a Process Theory.
17. The Evolution of Developmental
Systems
18. The Triple Helix: Gene, Organism, and
Environment
19. Making sense of heritability. Cambridge
University Press.
20. Logical Fallacies Used to Dismiss the
Evidence on Intelligence Testing. American Psychological
Association. Washington, D. C.