Content uploaded by James Schofield
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by James Schofield on May 26, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
2 3
©2022 Jim Schofield
Words Jim Schofield
Editing & Design Mick Schofield
www.e-journal.org.uk/shape
Waves
The Systems Theory of Everything I
Special Issue 76 / May 2022
4. Introducing Schofield’s Systems Theory
7. The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles
11. The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles II
16. The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles III
The Systems Approach
21. The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles IV
Beyond Marx and Darwin
26. Revolution and Stability
30. Contention and Cycles within Evolving Systems
33. Mathematics and Both-Ways Causality
Art Director’s note
The illustration in this series of issues on Jim Schofield’s new Systems Theory, draws heavily
on the genre of fine art known as action painting, of which Jackson Pollock was the most
renowned exponent.
The reasons for this choice are more than aesthetic.
Action painting marked a sea-change in approach during the 1950s, in which process and
method became more important considerations for the artist, than the final image created.
The movement also saw a renewed acknowledgment of the painting’s own materiality and
objectness, not as an illusory depiction of some scene or person, but as a trace record of real
matter, motion and time.
The approach of abstract expressionism may have been intuitive, with the artist responding
to the changing canvas, but it was also often the result of a repeating schema or cyclical
systematic approach to mark-making. This can be seen as an interesting analog for natural
systems and their emergences, where simple repeating processes and feedback loops
result in systems capable of responding to changing conditions, and can lead to seemingly
inpenetrable complexity - even the creation of entirely new forms of matter. These are
universal phenomena that reductionist science has never been able to fully understand and
explain. The Systems approach to reality attempts to address these shortcomings...
To further illustrate these parallels, action paintings are juxtaposed here with images from
science - namely the Wellcome Trust’s annual photography awards.
4 5
Introducing Jim Schofield’s
Systems Theory
Mick Schofield
This series of issues attempts to set out the first definitive
account of Jim Schofield’s new Systems Approach to
Science. The various papers collected here, and over the
next few editions of this journal, explore the proposed
theory and explain why it is such a radical departure
from the current universally applied scientific method.
While working on the recent YouTube video “Taking
Shape: Denis Noble and the Systems Level Approach”
(2022), it arose in discussion between myself and Jim,
whether or not “system” was even the right word to use
for these ideas. Schofield’s revised view of natural systems
is certainly not the usual one. They are not “systematic”,
mechanistic or carefully structured in any way. They
don’t follow universal laws and rules. They are dynamic,
contingent and emergent, containing contention and
contradiction. They can be hidden, vastly complex, and
sometimes seemingly chaotic from our human vantage
point. Many are stable and extremely long-lasting, and
are routinely misinterpreted by scientists as eternal and
fundamental laws of nature. Schofield’s view of systems
is Holist and Materialist, arguing that the holistic
understanding of how natural systems evolve and
maintain themselves, is vital if we are to really appreciate
how things come to be, and why they are the way they
are.
There have been systems theories before. However, the
scientific study of systems has historically been hamstrung
by pervasive reductionism and the formalisation of
entities, laws and causality. In Sociology, for example,
Systems Theory was actually a conservative approach to
the subject that saw society as bascially functional and
explicable via person-to-person interactions.
This approach was dogged by a rigid and ordered way
of seeing things and was largely rejected by Marxist
sociologists in the 1970s, which favoured examining
conflict, change and contradiction, as the key driving
forces underpinning social conditions. Similarly in
systems engineering, machine logic, computer modelling
and mathematics, systems are widely used but still
conceived of as the complex but predictable interactions
of fundamentally reducible elements and rules. This
demonstrates the importance of epistemology, politics
and a critique of the scientific method, in moving the
study of systems forward - beyond the usual approaches,
and towards one that embraces the vital roles played
by interconnection, contention and hidden top-down
effects.
Missing from many approaches to systems is the role
that different Levels of Reality play in its composition
and evolution, with causality often happening at a much
higher systems level than the ones scientists currently
seek data in for clues.
The Philosophy of Science must look to other disciplines
for ways of dealing with such phenomena, from art
to politics, from Buddhist Holism to Dialectical
Materialism, the basic ingredients for a new Systems
Approach already exist. But first we must look at how
the usual scientific methods fail to appreciate the role
dynamic natural systems play in everything that we try
to study and understand.
The series begins with a look at cycles in systems, and
the vital role cyclical processes play in both maintaining
stability and instigating radical change.
6 7
The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles
Jim Schofield
A key understanding in my new Systems Approach to
Science, is the importance of interrealted Natural Cycles,
constantly occuring at all different Levels of Reality.
In a recent See the Pattern video on Youtube, Gareth
Samuels hinted at this same epiphany, revealing various
surprising New Cycles, occurring at literally all possible
Levels of Reality, but concentrating most upon the
variations in Cycles which he had extracted from
Astronomy, and which he has linked to those within
Historical Ideas in Astrology.
As usual, it must be said, he attempts No Causal
Explanations of these fascinating observations, for, as
always, he puts his sole trust entirely in revealing ever
more accurate Quantitative Measurements, which
he seems-to-believe will entirely alone, result in our
Understanding of the actually causing interactions.
But, it is, I’m afraid, just another example of “the
data will reveal all” stance of the “Engineers”. I’m also
fully aware, that it is in fact, a wholly mistaken and
misleading approach, in all such investigations (even
those purporting to be justifiably scientific). For, that
has led inevitably, over the last two and a half millennia,
to the error of endowing all Explanatory Truth solely to
Quantitative Data, and their relationships embodied in
Mathematical Relationships alone.
Now, this has to be wholly inadequa!e, as such
relationships only appear, and are employed, entirely as
exclusively Fixed Laws, which are certainly NOT what
can explain the vast majority of Reality-as-is, particularly
its evolution over time...
Unfortunately for Samuels, “Seeing the Pattern”, is not
enough! A “pattern” can only ever be an abstraction and
a fixed simplification.
For, what is missing in such a mechanistic approach,
amounts to two major and misleading oversights. First,
there are always many such Effects both present and
acting simultaneously in a given natural System, AND
secondly, they can also definitely affect one another, and
as such, affect any overall outcome.
The reductionist assumption that such processes are
somehow independent, extractable and merely SUM
together to create the whole, with only the measurable
amounts changing, is certainly wrong! For, mutually-
affecting processes can effectively flip the current
Dominant Effect of a System, to a vastly different
alternative (as in an “If / Then Clause” in a computer
Program). And, when they are also diametrically
opposite Effects, they can even totally cancel each other
out. And when the processes involved also constitute
integral parts of Chains or Cycles of such processes, they
can, and indeed sometimes do, cause a total cancellation
- terminating the entire System.
Clearly, the unacknowledged assumptions of simple
summations can lead to massive gaps in our scientific
knowledge. Particularly when that is coupled with the
way that we encapsulate all such interactions solely in
terms of Individual Components, brought together in
general Equations, as if, every single Component of such
a System is naturally lined-up ready-and-waiting for its
turn, in a natural sequence.
8 9
Now, such a simplification can be nothing like the
actual ways real interactions and reactions take place
in such multiply-involved natural situations, and even
competitive random-mixes of many possibilities, all
attempting to happen at once. The consequently Ideal
Mathematical Equations, as we reduce such situations
to, must be a very long way from what actually occurs!
Indeed, so much so, that they NEVER, as a Full Set,
actually deliver what happens, but only an idealised and
totally separated version of just an abstracted part of
what really occurs in nature.
The Real Situations, outside of the rigidly-controlled
experiments we rely on for most data, include things
that don’t even occur in those Equations, and which can
actually exclude other results that indeed do!
Any straight-forward study of any natural phenomenon,
undertaken exclusively via such idealised Equations, does
NOT deliver everything that actually occurs as part of
it: so that the accepted methods, employed-universally
in Science, always fail to fully replicate the richness of
natural situations. Indeed, it has become the norm,
both in investigations and in production, to so radically
restrict situations as to make them conform to our prior
assumptions: but, of course, they, therefore, NEVER
reflect Reality-as-is, and hence the Real relationships all
around us!
Now, there are approaches that attempt to deliver all
that occurs: but they involve an absolutely essential and
Developed Theory, to interpret what evidence they have,
correctly! For, Theory attempts to explain phenomena in
terms of Causes and Effects: due to known properties
from the Real World, so the artificial separations of the
ideal Equations DO NOT happen as they are predicted
to, within those Idealised Equations.
Indeed, long before the anomalies in Physics addressed by
Samuels, there have always been others, which are never
explained, but are just added-in (because they certainly
do occur) without any explanation or modification due
to Context.
Indeed, it was these increasingly evident, yet unexplained
features that deliver the reasons for the final effects,
that became the supposedly clinching arguments, for
the triumph of Positivism, in the early 20th century,
commenced initially by Poincare and Mach.
But, long before the major changes in representing the
seemingly-revealed Laws, the actual experimenters-
and-deliverers had long been severely restricting-and-
maintaining absolutely all involved Contexts, so that
the very same situations and consequent outcomes were
always assured, and could therefore be relied upon, also
in using the results within Production in the exact same
Contexts. The same restricted conditiona were always
required for both!
And, of coutse, the “Tail” of such-well-established
Practice, also wagged the “Dog” of representation,
and the consequent restrictions DID indeed enable
the simplified way of representing what was going on
within wholly Fixed Laws - as it was precisely those very
restrictions that distorted the actual Natural Laws in the
first place - into what I term “Pluralist Laws”. Meanwhile
Reality-as-is, outside of our technologies, remains
steadfastly Holistic - the opposite of Pluralistic. Reality’s
Holism is always clearly demonstrated by long-term and
wholly-unrestricted Developments, in particular with
both Life and Evolution.
Now for the Evolution of Science, such a tight-and-closed
System was, in its day, a remarkable achievement, not only
for its evident consistency, but indeed for its prodigious
technological successes! For, though it DID NOT reflect
Reality-as-is, it did deliver working situations, even if
necessarily divided into multiple differently controlled
stages. With technology we built a parallel Reality we
could control.
But, of course, the necessary artificial conditions for
this could NOT be both established-and-maintained
absolutely Everywhere! Only a netwok of entirely non-
mutually-connected-sequences were ever possible! For,
after each such process, the work would have to be
physically transferred to the next ideal setting: so such
a System could never, overall, tackle everything within
Reality-as-is : for in spite of the technological success,
absolutely NO Explanations linking all the necessary
steps is ever possible with this Approach. Indeed, any
overview of what is established, cannot but reveal just
how much is never included!
And, of coutse, outside of mere productive imperatives,
there is truly vast amounts that need to be understood,
in order to develop Explanatory Overall Theory, without
which absolutely no Real Understanding is ever really
possible!
10 11
Now, this clearly being the case, let us see what the
“Experts” in our Universties do to educate our scientists.
They simplify the real multifarious-and-complex
situations of Reality, to match their extracted constrained
relations, by addressing only Single Molecules, which
they purely-formerly relate (regardleass of Context) to
match their productive extractions in experiments within
wholly NON NATURAL circumstances.
This, they have successfully done! So that their Simplified
Equations do mostly address, their productive Processes.
But, neither of these get anywhere near matching Reality-
as-is. Indeed, they constitute a severely reduced-and-
distorted Sub-World, well-within, but wholly different-
to, the all embracing Reality.
And, most damaging of all, No Real Theory of that
Reality as-yet exists within Mankind’s ideas, and instead,
only those relations extracted from carefully limited-
and-maintained Sub Divisions are wrongly regarded as
“Reality”- for such are limited-exclusively to only those
relations rigidly conforming to Mathematical Rationality,
and therefore only delivering Fixed Laws!
And these, of course, DO NOT reflect the “Laws” of
Reality-as-is, which must be entirely Holistic! And these
alone, allow the Really Existing Laws related to the
Systems of such multiple simultaneous Laws - AND their
consequent adjustments within Chains annd Cycles - to
give us ultimate developments into the Wholly New...
The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles II
Systems Theory has been sketched out before in this
journal, but it is now necessary to begin a much fuller
and deeper effort, by a much more detailed and revealing
account - as I am absolutely certain that the now essential
and coming Theoretical Revolution, is crucial for literally
all of The Sciences, and consequently, thereafter, for all
subsequent Thinking in general too.
And it CANNOT be the usually-applied narrowing and
simplifying type of adjustments-and-omissions, as has
always been applied heretofore, OR even one based upon
some singular new discovery - BUT, instead, a wholly
New Approach, based upon a valid appreciation of, and
a required correction to, the actual Trajectory of Human
Thinking thus far!
Because it was, when it happered, and, for the Very First
Time - only within Mankind - that we saw this wholly
New Development in Reality. And, that Trajectory just
had to be determined by Man’s then-current extremely-
precarious state - endowed ONLY with this wholly new,
though, as yet, totally undeveloped ability - to attempt to
imperatively conceive of New Ways to even survive, and,
at that stage, certainly NOT at all to prosper, as their
conditions of Life had varied dramatically, with a truly
Major Climate Change! For, in spite of their obvious
physical inadequacies, Human Beings did already exceed
their opponents, if only marginly, in their evident Ability
to Think. And this, remarkably, also led to physical
changes, more or less incidentally, due to their choices of
where to live, so that, in time, it also gave them another
important set of advantages, including the ability to
travel vast distances and create tools - features that then
changed the entire world.
It was, by no means, a conscious development! Indeed, it
was never an intended feature, but a physical consequence
of how they had to pursue their prey at the time, along
with what New Things they could do to them, when
successfully caught-up-and-killed them! For, in addition,
their intelligence had also enabled them to conquer-and-
safely-maintain Fire!
And that intelligence enabled them to adopt remarkable
hunting techniques, never based upon speed, but upon
skilful tracking and steady pursuing, over long periods, of
the swift but very short-winded food sources! And again,
unintentionally, these methods led to significant changes
in human’s bodies: they lost their furry coverings, had
developed the ability to sweat, which kept their body
temperature down, along with other changes, and most
significant of all - they developed a remarkable physical
resilience, so they could out-run their prey - to drive
them to their consequent total exhaustion, so their
pursuers could then easily kill them!
For the first time, the shortness of all individual human
lifetimes, along with the changes in their offspring,
brought about also by many very much later, cultural
effects, via Training and Education, began to accelerate
evolutionary development at a remarkable rate.
NOTE: My own paternal Grandmother could neither
read-nor-write, yet I achieved a Professorial Level Post in
a College of London University, after posts in Universities
in three different countries -- so such rapid developments
still continue!
12 13
These kinds of developments continued to be added to,
but the last totally-transforming Revolution in Human
Thinking was, in fact, the Greek Intellectual Revolution
in the 5th century BC - which remarkably still greatly
underpins what we do in the Sciences to this day.
And, that series of related gains was only possible, by means
of a whole set of mutually-supportive-assumptions, that
apparently, but mistakenly, removed the contradictions
between the well-established, pragmatic approaches of
the “artisans”, who successfully made many implements
and structures, such as functional carts amd boats, all
based upon the simple principle “If it wotks, it is right!”
AND the achievements of the Greek Philosophers in
soundly establishing Mathematical Rationality, and hence
both Euclidian Geometry and the Logical Consistency of
All of Science - BUT ONLY, formally - that is - treating
Mathematics as a Set of Forms, rather than a description
of Elements of Reality-as-is, which accordingly made all
the Laws involved Permanently Fixed! And, of course,
that is NEVER true of Reality-as-is. As, otherwise, Real
Qualitative Developments involving the Wholly New,
could never emerge: and Life and Evolution would be
impossible!
Now, the above alternative introduction to this series, was
considered a necessary foundation before re-embarking
upon an investigation of the true Nature of Reality-as-
is, which in all the usual attempts at explaining things
has been extensively ignored. So, let us commence with
a systematic attempt to correct those wholly wrong and
misleading assumptions, and consequent “Supposed
Explanations” of what is actually really going on.
First and foremost, the supposed extractions from
Reality-as-is that are always made: they must be
condemned out-right: for ONLY SOME of the elements
present are selected out, and such a move ignores what has
been left behind.
The basis for believing that such a selection will simplify
the revelation of interactions involving that very limited
subset, is never delivered for Reality-as-is, and the
reason is that for literally millennia Mankind has always
intervened in specially extracted, and maintained-as-
such, areas, wherein such required extractions were
entirely valid, so as long as those required restrictions
were maintained, any conclusions arrived at solely from
that subset would be both valid and useable there.
Indeed, the whole basis of Science had, ever since, been
addressed that way, and indeed successfully, for many,
many years. But, such artificial conditions are not always
possible, so, still, the majority of Natural Changes, will
only be occurring within Reality-as-is - by which I mean
the Universe beyond our direct control.
Indeed, the controlled situations ONLY apply to
certain achieveable limited conditions, AND particular
externally conceived-of and applied objectives. There
is NO Single Restriction appropriate for all possible
required interactions. Indeed, even the simplest of
productions requires a Whole Series of very different-
and-maintained Contexts, to be sequentially used in any
Successful Production.
And, this is because Reality-as-is cannot, as such, ever
succumb to such processes in their Natural States: the
situation just has to be divided into, and then maintained,
as, a whole series of much simpler and rigidly-controlled
episodes, to ever be amenable to our primary approaches:
Analysis,
Prediction,
Intervention,
and Use!
And the reasons for this are never established and thought
about! So what are they?
The way we were forced to conceive of Reality, was laid
down millennia ago, because the Natural Situation AS
IS will never allow any such process to be inflicted upon
it, without radically altering it first and transforming it
into something else! So artisans of those times learned to
radically change a context until their intervension would
work. They effectively held Reality still!
But, such control would only wotk for a single
intervention: so they had to re-control things differently,
for each-and-every step - so they were NEVER working
with Reality-as-is, but with a series of very different
situations, each of which allowed a single change only.
But, of course, they were always working with different
situations - even with a single initial intention.
They, therefore, got a Pragmatic result - OK in
Production, BUT totally useless in revealing how things
happened naturally in Reality-as-is. And hence, such
pragmatism would be useless in revealing how Natural
14 15
Changes - and even Natural Stabilities, as we shall see
- are normally established, without the extra stabilizing
interventions required of Man!
And, it is worth reiterating again that this was the basic
method employed throughout All of The Sciences - and
by definition this wasn’t really Science at all - what we
were doing most of the time was Technology.
So how should we approach Science?
Many years ago, when confronted with the failures of
Stanley Miller’s remarkable experiment concerning The
Origin of Life on Earth, I embarked upon an attempt to
correct his methods. For, after all, his revelation of the
origin of Amino Acids was still highly significant!
I attempted to make a New Analysis of all that would
be simultaneously happening within Reality-as-is, in the
Natural Situations occurring then: and I realised that the
various ways we have were determined exclusively by the
Pragmatic Means of the Artisans, whereas Reality would
be much more “chaotic”, with many many different
things all happening simultaneously, and in both Chains
and Cycles, all jostling-for their next required stage in
each of their own various overall, multi-stage Processes!
In other words, our idealised way of representing and
manipulating such processes was never as simple as we
always made it. The standard Scientific approach, even
that taken by Miller, meant that we always missed a lot of
the subtlety, complexity and hidden processes necessary
for evolution and development of new Systems to occur.
So, perhaps, we have finally established a sound basis for
coherently addressing The Systems Approach in the next
paper...
16 17
The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles III
The Systems Approach
The time has finally arrived, to systematically establish
the foundation of what I have called The Systems Approach
to Science.
Studying Natural Systems, holistically, and as we find
them, is essential in re-addressing Reality-as-is, rather
than the usual approach, of first establishing a severely
limited and cut-down version of that assumed context
- yet always rigidly defined by what basically keeps that
context exactly-the-same, and does so by mimimising,
or even eliminating, most of the active elements usually
present in unfettered Reality, so that only those imposed-
by-the-observer, would be allowed, and, hence, the
consequent effects still produced, would be limited solely
to those alone.
It amounted to Science NEVER addressing true Reality-
as-is - the prior Natural State, as that would not only
include all sorts of hidden active-elements, but also
many different, and even contending ones too! It was
historically, essentially, the requirements of the Artisan,
and his purposes, that were necessarily paramount - for
only by such means, could intended changes ever be
implemented-as-intended, and no others!
It was generally seen, by literally everybody, as a
necessary-revealing requirement, suppressing all other
unwanted variables and effects to allow only intended
ones to act alone.
Now, if on the other hand, we also need to actually
“Understand” The Real, Natural World - both as it is
now, and how it has developed to reach this present State,
AND, to, thereafter, further develop from now onwards:
we simply must begin investigating Reality-as-is!
And, once outside the meagre influences of Man, such
as in the Cosmos-at-Large, absolutely everything will
be down to a totally un-edited Reality-as-is! So, clearly,
all Basic, Generally-Applicable Theories MUST be
exclusively-based upon Reality-as-is too - for Universe-
wide, that is its Real Content! And, though we can have
“useable systems” based upon Reality-as-controlled-by-
us, it will never answer the more fundamental questions
about our World and the Universe that contains it!
Or, even address our self-inflicted Crises here at home,
such as those now besetting us on all sides, whether in
the changing climate of Earth or the failing economic
systems of Human Society. We must KNOW how we
have distorted Reality-as-is within our own realm, and
what to do to avoid planet-wide potential calamities!
Of course, directly opposite to the usual requirements
imposed upon Reality-as-is, for ease of all human
interventions, are the requirements identified above,
that will unavoidably need the fullest possible original
content, indeed, to deliver the actual Source Reality-
as-is - representing The Wholly Unmodified Natural
World. So, we need, to accurately describe, exactly what
occurs in that original state, and, therefore, enable it to
ultimately deliver the whole range of actually required
contents, that will alone then be simultaneously initially
present, and hence absolutely crucial in determining all
its potential-natural-possibilities of Developments, and
deliver all possible potentials for selective reduction, or
vital revelations too!
And, these will be nothing like the usually requited,
and drastically reduced contents required in most Man-
devised situations and objectives.
18 19
Let us, then, alternatively begin to describe their real full-
and-original natures - and, consequently, their actually
possible forms: for even in other crucial, Mankind-
required-situations, indeed those where they will certainly
start as true examples of Reality-as-is, and hence have to
be radically altered to fit their now-required-state! The
question is, “Can that transition always and ever be
easily, straight-forwardly and accurately attained?”
A given context in Reality-as-is will have to contain the
contents required for any particular limited aimed-for
Objective Content, and that will occur as individual
Molecules. But, as distinct from the usually-considered
contents, they will NEVER be there alone! Indeed, along
with many multiples of the required molecules, there will
also be multiples of many others, possibly necessary for
use in other quite different yet simultaneous interactions.
And, the whole complex mix will all be milling around
seeking their own currently-required partners. Indeed,
many different processes, all in various different states,
will be involved simultaneously. Nevertheless, some
processes wont have even started yet, while others will
already have moved on to further stages. Countless
things will be happerning at once!
Now, in such a complex melee, some molecules might
be required in two different processes - to be used within
quite unconnected reactions - and they might, at some
stage, be mutually-required by both simultaneously. And,
the overall results of this, and maybe other contentions
too, will be that not all sequences will be equally-served,
and once we are aware these actually-existing problems,
can significantly produce major Systems Effects!
Indeed, the most important of these occur in Necessary
Sequences of Reactions, that we call Chains! And, this is
because literally no single reaction happens in isolation:
for each produces a given product, enabling it to then
be involved in another quite different process - so that
the available possibilities change with each-and-every
reaction, and the significant ones will often recur -
forming further Chains.
And, occasionally, the output from one reaction in a
Chain - turns out to be exactly what was required to
initiate the whole Chain in the first place - and so, it
links directly to such a Process to turn it into a Repeating
Cycle!
And, therefore, these turn out to be far more resilient-
and-persistant simpler Chains: and, indeed, become
absolutely essential in All Life Processes!
Now, there are many other hidden effects, which also
significantly happen in complex Natural Systems
(particularly within Life). For, simultaneous processes
can also actually compete with one another: and, in
those circumstances, the most numerous quantitatively
will always Dominate a given Natural Context - and
hence drown-out the effects of current rivals! And, if a
pair of rivals produce diametric-opposites, ONLY the
Dominant one will survive: no sign of the other will
remain un-cancelled. And, if there are exactly equal
numbers of each - then NEITHER will be evident: the
processes will have cancelled each other out!
Now, consider this important latter case when both
processes exist within Chains or Cycles, for then both
sequences will be prematurely terminated, and the
relative weights of their combined overall contributions
will change, and perhaps switch over the Dominances
involved, and precipitate the alternative Effect.
{It, for the first time, gives a causal explanation to the
action of the full range of “if-then” clauses in computer
simulations - including not only the common “if” and
“else”! effects, but also the much rarer “neither” effect
too]
Crucially these are Systems Effects: and they are NOT
revealed by the usual truncated way we formulate
reactions. Indeed, that way diverges significantly from
delivering important aspects of The Truth. The Systems
Approach is about trying to correct this.
And, it strongly echoes the Systems Findings of Denis
Noble in his last two books upon the importance of such
Systems Effects in Biology!
Why do we need a
Systems Approach?
The development of Euclidian Geometry in Ancient
Greece, as a complete, concise and comprehensive
definition, marked the very first useable idea of an
Applicable Logic, and thereafter, this was perfectly
soundly applied to the rest of Mathematics, establishing
what was correctly called Mathematical Rationality.
BUT, this was also then incorrectly applied to other
fields, including all the nascent Sciences, and thereby led
Mankind increasingly astray, for the next two and a half
Millennia, in all those important areas!
For Mathematical Rationality is only applicable to Man-
devised Forms, and NOT to Reality-as-is, for though
Mathematics can quite legitimately have Fixed Laws,
Reality-as-is cannot, for everything does indeed develop,
and Reality can even create the Wholly New, involving
both Life itelf, and its subsequent Evolution. Fixed Laws
cannot explain this, or even apply here.
Indeed, this is best explained by the role of Forms
within Language, wherein it would be useless without
its identified Forms always having to mean the very same
thing! It is both a necessity and a restriction upon the
wondrous facility of Language! But, Any Such Legitimate
Rationality, always has a great attraction for Mankind
- as it allows use of an Associated Logic, in which it
is legitimate to Reason-out the solution to problems
entirely-within-the-head, without any direct recourse to
messy Reality-as-is - which, by using Man’s agile brain,
can find solutions quickly-and-easily!
And this requirement is certainly wholly present, for
Mathematics, BUT, just as certainly, NOT available for
Reality-as-is: so, it can NEVER be applicable in any of
The Sciences. Yet, it has, illegitimately, taken-over them
all! This severely limits what Science can now explain.
When I was at Grammar School, in Manchester,
England, many decades ago, I was adept at Mathematics,
as such, but I, along with all my teachers, exclusively,
and gratefully used Causality for all Explanations within
Physics! But, in spite of those being absolutely correct,
there were always discovered Laws, that could NOT be
adequately explained by Causality.
Such Laws were only found by Experiment, but were at
that stage impossible to explain rationally! This difficulty
had a major Effect upon all the Sciences, because they
needed to be reliably-used by the increasing number
of competant Artisans, and they had been successfully
using such Fixed Laws for a very long time! How had this
been possible? They didn’t change the Laws: they changed
Reality!
They became adept at using unchanging materials, or
alternatively, by rigidly controlling contexts, so that Fixed
Laws could be validly used. This was OK in Production,
but useless in Explanation of the Natural World. These
moves had restricted Science into Technology! Its
practitioners were not Scientists, but Artisans!
So, for literally millenia, studies of Reality were limited to
Observations and Experiments within rigidly-controlled
environments, and Explanatory Science did not yet exist!
But, of course, adequate explanations were patchy, to
say the least, and real Understanding was not yet firmly
established: while Technology surged ahead, Science,
and indeed General Understanding, was increasingly
inadequate.
Now, a great deal more has been, and still remains
to be said, about this distortion of Science: but its
Universal Establishment has to work, in its one-to-one
matching between its technological distortions and its
Mathematical representations (at least most of the time).
For both Mathematics, and technological experiences
within Science, produce the same Fixed Laws! That, of
course was due to the severely restricted enviroments,
which delivered the very same sort of Fixed Rationality
as did Mathematics! That clinched it, as far as Mankind
was concerned, but it did not reflect the real Truth of
Reality-as-is.
Now, in contrast, the reader may well already be guessing
that the missing truths could perhaps finally be validly
explained by a thorough Development of The Systems
Approach! The assessment of what they call Science, is
Correct but Insufficient! It is woefully incomplete.
20 21
The True and Profound Significance of Natural Cycles IV
Beyond Marx and Darwin
Let us continue with the necessary description of The
Systems Approach, taking us beyond the initial measures
dealt with thus far. For, it must by now be clearly evident
to the reader, that many important aspects of Reality-as-
is, are not yet included in the usually assumed version of
events, dominated by Mathematical Rationality, yet also
ignoring its prior physically existing Systems, where it is,
in fact, composed of both multiple and simultaneously-
different - even contending components - that are
always greatly simplified in their representations in
Science, in order to to facilitate further, wholly-formal
“developments”.
Yet, Actual Reality is a much much richer and, indeed, a
vastly more complex Meta-System, so that many more
of its features are both initially, and, thereafter, even
more significantly active, as the true Complication of
the multiple, relatively-independent, yet, nevertheless,
further complicating, as ever more significant features
are gradually revealed! The usual “Lego” analogy of
understading the world via its building blocks, never
suffices, even though it is, indeed, initially helpful, as
Causality is not always Bottom-Up, but occasionally,
and importantly, Top Down as well! For, though it does
indeed simplify things to leave Life out of the Basic
Scientific Account: it must, most definitely, be included
there, and as Denis Noble of Oxford University has
extensively demonstrated, the usual simplifications do
indeed HIDE extremely significant features of Real
Development!
[Though, I am not competent to extensively deal with
this specialism, Noble certainly is, and has independently
come up with a detailed description of his version of The
Systems Approach, in his excellent work in Biology.]
But let us start here, by defining the full scope of a
possible The Systems Approach, to then define the
enormous range involved!
The first inklings of a wholly new approach were originally
realised by the philosopher and historian Karl Marx, not
only in his subscription to Hegel’s Dialectics, but also, in
his attempts to explain the evident and important Social
Revolutions, which always resulted in features of society
that were Whollly New, and hence totally impossible to
predict before their First Emergences.
Alongside Revolution, and actually more difficult to
explain than that, were the often very long periods of
apparently “Permanent” Stability, which, somewhat later,
were also presented to Charles Darwin, in his conception
of the same kinds of “stabilities” in Nature - the stable
interludes between, once again, the appearences of The
Wholly New.
The problem was always those Stabilities: what actually
maintained them over such vast periods of Time, and
why did they then self-destruct after that longevity?
Those questions were wholly inexplicable, within the
usually applied means available in The Sciences: but they
were certainly the main block to further explanations of
Reality. Indeed, even in Biology, with Stanley Miller’s
Experiment, where he was finally forced to abandon
his investigation, he couldn’t cope with the diverse
developments necessary to tackle the consequent
problems.
Now, all these grindings-to-a-halt, did, indeed, involve
many, often contending components, which we weren’t
yet equipped to discern, nevermind cope with!
22 23
But The Systems Approach slowly emerged to be able
to address all these cases - to at least identify where the
problems lay - and then perhaps ultimately solve them!
The Key, which seems as always to be relevant, will
usually be found at the Very Highest Levels of Reality,
which is also where The Wholly New mostly appears,
at least at our point in the history of the Universe - and
creates its Newly-Existing and Controlling Features,
though also, over time, somewhat contradictingly,
seemingly-outweighed by its also produced, long-lasting
Stabilities, which appear to short-life span human beings
to be frequently wholly permanent.
The reasons for both of these extremes, is located in
the situation’s overall Complexity, that was, as always,
the result of many different, but also contending and
mutually-supporting Processes. For though we usually
find many of the easier answers by drastically limiting
and even simplifying within such complex groupings, the
really important resolutions along with the significant
creations of the Wholly New, definitely occur only when
“Complexity finds its own Balances”, and the forming
of wholly New Levels - along with their own Laws, and
even surprising “Downwards Causalities”
Now, exactly how they find these Balances, is a
profoundly different and as yet mysterious process: for
these are never just the Static Balances (such as those of
balanced-pairs), but, on the contrary, they always deliver
“Active constantly-re-adjusting Balances” - always both
temporarily slipping off-balance, but then, somehow,
correcting the situation, to then return it to its now
natural, maintained state!
Now, we already know, from prior use of The Systems
Approach that the answers we are seeking, reside within
only the Systems actual Nature of many Complex,
and multi-process situations, as distinct from the usual
Causal Connections. We will find the answers in the
very different, mutual-yet-indirect-effects - acting
between seemingly wholly-independent, but merely
simultaneously-acting Processes! And, the simplest
influence will be, whether such Processes, though
causally-unrelated, may well be either contending or
supporting in their effects upon consequent outcomes.
The simplest case being the one where wholly
independent processes, nevertheless produce Outcomes,
which are Diametrically Opposite: for these will cancel-
each-other-out, if of exactly-equal-magnitiude: but in all
other cases will always leave just one of them, that will be
both Dominant-and-clearly-Evident.
And, a quite different Systems Effect could be in how
such a Complexity of many processes, will Change,
in Nature, over time - for all other present processes,
without any mutual effects with the rest of the set, will
NOT persist as such for long, while only those that can
deliver the necessary means, in order to participate in a
continuing Overall Balance will necessarily survive.
The achieved Natural Balance is therefore selected for
by only keeping the processes that enable its continuing
existence, while all others, with no such role, could indeed
be lost from the set! [Now, this account is descriptive
rather than explanatory: but, nevertheless, it does infer
an as yet unrevealed relationship, relating the contents
of such sets, or, maybe, instead, the inter-relationships of
the whole containing set, with other such sets, occurring
at an even Higher Systems Level]
Now, these System Effects are NOT of the basic Causal
Kind, which are due to actual relationships between the
substances within the kinds of molecules (essentially
chemical in nature), while these newly-found ones are to
do with purely Systems relationships!
Now perhaps we should pause for a moment. to
additionally consider the possible Proliferation of Levels
- Absolutely All of which exist well beyond our current
investigative interventions, as in the truly vast Cosmos!
For, in the studies of the Heavens, which were perhaps
the oldest scientific considerations of Mankind, there are
surprisingly Common and wide-ranging Relationships.
Though, of course, they are often drowned-out by the
much greater influences of more Local and well-known
ones.
So, returning-back to those we are now finally revealing,
very much closer to home, let us re-iterate what we have
discovered about Chains and Cycles of Processes, and
their significant Systems Effects!
All Proceses require Resources to act upon, and deliver
various Outcomes: and, for anything to happen, due to
these important components, Outcomes must become
Resources for consequent Processes, ultimately producing
Whole Chains of such Processes, and ultimately if the
single final Outcome turns out to be exactly what was the
24 25
process’s necessary Original Resource, we will naturally
get a Constantly Repeatable Cycle, which will be more
resilient-and-persistent than a terminating Chain.
Indeed, Life itself is built around prolific collections of
such Cycles.
Now, both Chains and Cycles involve both other
inputs and other outputs, in addition to the definitive
Primary Resources and Final Outputs: and they will also
involve subsiduary lateral inputs, as well as subsiduary
consequent lateral outputs, which, in Life perform
secondary linkages to other necessary sequences.
Indeed, within any Living Form, it is clear that a
hierarchical system of such related sub-systems, together,
deliver each individual Lifeform: and beyond that, there
has to be yet another Hierarchy, this time of related
Systems that make each and every Lifeform together
deliver the Ecosystem, and even the overall System we
call Life!
Indeed, it is becomong increasingly clear that all the
processes we together call Life, could never even exist,
without the features being revealed in this Systems
Approach: for, the complication, flexibility and literally
vast potential of Systems of Chains and Cycles and these
interconnecting Networks alone, make possible not only
the rich structures - delivering an individual Lifeform,
BUT also, and vitally, all those relations above that
Level, including Language, Intelligence, and Societies,
as well as Planet-wide Materials and Economic relations,
without which absolutely none of it could have become
established or been maintained.
26 27
Revolution and Stability
The Philosophical Diagram opposite was created several
decades ago by the writer of this paper, initially as a
visual description of Karl Marx’s ideas on the processes
and trajectory involved in both Social Revolutions, and
their interregnums - the often long-lasting Interludes of
comparative Stability.
But, it also went a little further, in extending these
observations to Emergence in general, but also describing
the important Trajectories of Failed Crises always
involved in Emergence, BUT always without indicating
any actual causes of how they usually terminated.
While a similar idea was also repeatedly-included, in
the Intervening Periods of Stability, always happening
between Revolutionary Emergences - though modified
throughout into an almost constant sequence of limited
and always failed crises, which though still ultimately
maintaining-the-Stability, also always inferred that it was
composed of incessant, yet necessarily-failing processes.
Clearly, I was already adding something of my own to
Karl Marx’s original conceptions, BUT still just as wholly
unexplained, and also as vitally implicit as the usually
prior Form of Incessant minor Crises! For, I’m afraid,
that I too followed in the usual error of adding more
descriptive details, without ever resorting to a revealing
Explanation!
So, it is now very clear that such a diagram as this,
urgently requires a full and detailed Causal Explanation.
And as just such updates always also inevitably add new
things, that will not only change the Diagram eventually,
but also, and crucially, address important things that
cannot be illustratively included in such an image. As
they will be NOT directly visable, they will require an
absolutely essential Accompanying Narrative!
Now, for an extremely long time I was unable to develop
any satisfactory explanations for those perplexingly
long periods of Stability, but the recent theortical turn
to The Systems Approach, though only slowly, and
very selectively to begin with, has gradually been able
to deliver some partial Explanations - particularly of the
Trajectory of a Single Isolated Crisis.
Recently, the problem of Long Term Stabilities in Natural
Systems has finally become addressable: though of course,
still initially seen (and illustrated) as an incessant stream
of many very short-term and inevitable failures (without
any specific Explanations at all) - but it has finally
succumbed to a New-and-Necessary Approach - now
involving Balances of Key Contending Contributions.
Systems are not only always and regularly slipping out of
one given balance, but just as easily slipping immediately
into another quite-different short-term balance, BUT
one that never precipitates into the necessary overall
cataclysmic collapse that happens in a Revolution,
where the involved strong connections always cause
unavoidable failures, one after the other, to ultimately
bring the Whole System to An End!
For, instead, the absolutely crucial elements in the Overall
Stability are never profoundly affected - the individual
failures being relatively independant of one another, and
only trivially involved in the maintenance of the wider
System. So in affect, NO precarious House of Cards is
involved, but delivers only a minor internal shuffling of
the deck - and so the Overall Stability survives.
28 29
Indeed, such a Form of Stability is self-selected by
Reality-as-is, which, via trial-and-error, finds the mix
and proportions of Processes that are all kept within the
necessary limits, a situation that still allows constant
variation, but within an arrangement which won’t
precipitate the collapse of the Overall System.
Left to itself, this is the normal persisting solution in
Society. But, either multiple Natural calamities or self-
caused-and-mounting Crises, due to the dominant Ruling
Classes in any such Social System, will unavoidably skew
the Variation into precipitous and damaging Changes,
which when occurring upon several different fronts
simultaneously, can and do push the Whole System into
unavoidable General Collapse!
This is exactly what happened with the First and Second
World Wars, and arguably it is what is happening again
NOW, and this time it is very likely to precipitate the
threatened disaster. And it isn’t just the Global Climate
Catastrophe: important Social Support Systems like the
NHS are close to Collapse too. Most of what was taken
into Public Hands is now Privatised and is vulnerable to
instabilities in markets. And Global Pandemics such as
COVID cannot be tamed from the top down. War has
returned to previously stable parts of the world such as
Europe...
Do you really think Revolutions are precipitated by
revolutionaries? Of course not! And never by those who
claim that purpose! The real job of Revolutionaries is to
EXPLAIN them - understand what is happening and
intervene with Real Solutions for the people.
Conclusion:
The interpretation of Descriptive Diagrams, as appeared
at the head of this paper is usually significantly
misdirected by the usual Rationality (or Logic) used in
such associated explanations, for the absolutely essential
Systems Approach, which has only recently been
discovered, revealed and applied, is literally NEVER
employed in such interpretations, while it is in fact the
only approach that can do so correctly.
Thus, in spite of something being an accurate description,
it is always wrongly applied, and consequently cannot
remedy the ills that are generally believed to be its
contained message, and thereby always misleadingly, and
indeed wrongly, explained.
Indeed. the above case delivers an example of how mere
description is never enough, for the usual assumption
that it is, and the genuine explanations from it though
seemingly obvious, are always wrong.
Real Understanding requires Real Explanations.
Now, the standard given solution of suggesting reference
to the appropriate branch of Science, is I’m afraid,
NEVER the answer in such cases, as all the Sciences are
now subjugated to Mathematical Rationality, which,
following Mathematics itseslf, is entirely Pluralist, and
hence can only be limited to formalised and Fixed Laws,
which is never the case in Reality-as-is.
The most important weakness in the Pluralist Approach
to Science, is that it NEVER allows Natural Development
or Emergence. These disciplines have been effectively
“castrated” by Plurality, and vast and vital areas of
Developing Truth are NEVER allowed to be explained!
Now, of course, this limitation never applies to
Production - the real Overall System that dominates us
- as such situations are always limited in the exact same
way physically, as Plurality is limited theoretically.
30 31
Contention and Cycles within Evolving Systems
The appearence of CYCLES in sequences of Processes
allowed the constant repetitition of the involved set,
a very large number of times - perhaps in seeming
perpetuity from our vantage point. And as they are also
a member of a simultaneous number of such Systems,
existing also in a stacked hierarchy of Levels, this would
help contribute to maintaining long-persisting Overall
Stabilities, due to a finally-arrived-at Overall Balance -
delivered by Multiple Contentions, and, hence, thereafter
repeat them “almost-endlessly”, as an element in an
actively maintained Complex of Systems of Contending
Processes.
But, such a situation can also be maintained,by using
many different contentions, and even occurring withim
various different Processes - and as long as they perform
the very same function, within the overall Collection,
that role will NOT be affected. And, such substitutions
within the described melee of components could then
even take a different amount of time, and even slightly
vary the elements involved, as long as it continued to
play that same necessary role.
The Overall System could vary substantially in its
contents, as long as its larger role was unchanged! It
could, indeed, successively drift over many iterations -
performing things quicker, or alternatively, if requiring
less energy, it could perhaps could do it ultimately by
merely changing the amount of its overall contribution.
In this way Actual Development could indeed also occur,
as a result of such changes!
In particular the relative abundences of certain
components, could vary enough to cause a significant
flip elsewhere in the Overall System, and thereby cause
an important change in the Overall System Effects!
For, as minor changes could occur, and accumulare
over many repeats of a CYCLE, while still effectively
maintaining its necessary function: SO a new situation
could be reached, where the changes finally totally
undermine its key balancing role, and the necessary
Stability might well be lost, while new substitutions,
coming from the Containing Melee, could re-establish a
New Balance - but then, usually a different one. In this
way Overall Stability might be maintained, but with a
significant change happening beneath it.
The famous “If / Then” Clause used successfully
in Computer Simulation is thus finally physically-
explained: BUT, this can only ever at the Systems Level!
Now, these Processes, and, indeed, sets of them, in all
persisting Systems, (particularly those within Balanced
CYCLES), go a great deal further in situations composed
of Multiple Levels, both locally, globally and even
universally: the most significant at all Levels being
naturally entirely elf-establishing of their own Balanced
Stabilities, and hence appearing to be “Permanent
Features” of Reality - though they never actually are!
The very nature of Planet Earth, imposes its own
patterns, due to its orbit around the Sun, the tilt upon its
axis, as well as its constant rotation, with its consequent
alternating Night-and-Day: ALL imposing their own
physical cycles upon Global Systems of Processes.
This stable repetition of conditions helps drive the Natural
Systems, converted from CHAINS into CYCLES.
And, of course, the internal physical mechanisms of
the Planet itself, involving the movements of Tectonic
Plates, causing violent Volcanic Eruptions, along also
with varying Birkeland Currents of Plasma from-and-
to The Sun: ALL compounding the uneveness of what
we usually assume to be permanent Natural Processes,
delivering, for example, Four sepaeate, variable-speed Jet
Streams caused by other Flows, yet subsequently actually
directing them too.
So, for us to so often “find” so many apparent constancies
literally Everywhere in Nature, it is therefore clear that
the organising of these major Systems, and in a natural
basically Single Direction, constantly re-establishes
an Order out of Chaos - perhaps, as a series of natural
switches to processes and Systems requiring Less Energy:
but, nevertheless, constantly afflicted by Events that do
the precise opposite.
Finally, it should be emphasized that the Overall System,
defined here as a special case: is, indeed, no such thing!
It is quite definitely, a version of a Generally True State
of All Things, happening Everywhere and at Every Single
Level of Reality-as-is!
Indeed, something very like the above description, is,
in fact, the only way that such seemingly-permanent,
yet actually temporary Stable Systems, could ever be
established and maintained!
AND, also at times negated, both in rapidly naturally
evolving Systems: yet, also, though rarely, suffering both
Cataclysmic Collapse AND Remarkable Revolutionary
Developments - such as the original Origin of Life.
Literally nothing else, as a self-moving Complex of
Systems, could ever do it!
And, clearly, as now is the case, NO entirely unco-
ordinated Global System of personal Greed, could ever
gainstay its inevitable Cataclysmic Calamity, as the only
possible outcome.
Capitalism could never do it! The internal contradictions
are constantly emerging and new stable mixes of
processes sought to preserve the Overall System, in the
interests of those who benefit most from its preservation.
This constant fight against instability can’t go on forever.
Once Calamity does strike, a new more stable System
will have to Emerge, or Chaos will be the final outcome.
32 33
Mathematics and Both-Ways Causality
On thinking about Biology, and the notion of Both-
Ways Causality, in particular the version contained in
Denis Noble’s The Music of Life, in which he makes his
own claims for a version of The Systems Approach to
Science (which I largely subscribe to) - I noticed that he
sees it as though both directions seem to arrive with very
similar Causal Conclusions. Contrastingly, in my own
findings, we finally arrive at very different conclusions,
and indeed they must involve wholly different basic
Methods, for the two directions.
For my research started in a very different area, and much
lower Level of Reality - Sub Atomic Physics - but from
a philosophical position which rejected Mathematics-
based Theories as unretrieveably erroneous. This is
becacuse they are all based upon a strict Mathematical
Rationality, with its always Exclusively Fixed Laws,
valid only within that Wholly Pluralist Ideality: whereas
Reality-as-is can never fit into such a fundamentally
resticted Context - demanding instead, a much wider
Holist Understanding.
Consequently, Mathematics is far too limited to
encompass many important aspects of Reality-as-is, and
hence means that all supposedly adequate explanations
will be Exclusively-Limited Metaphors, of the cases he
supposes he has correctly-defined.
So while Noble’s Systems Approach is sound, his
interpretations of Downwards Causality, simply must
be just such limited Metaphors, and hence his wider
explanation cannot be valid! And, the reason for my
insistence upon this stance is supported by Noble’s own
Explanation of the inadequate role of Metaphors in that
same book: along with my insisted-upon, completely
Holistic Explanation of the “Apparent Downwards
Causality”, in terms of a mixture of Upwards Causality,
gradually totally changing the resulting Context, to
finally give that false Top-Down Appearence!
And, to fill in the obvious gaps in my own initial
alternative, I had to very slowly reveal a whole catalogue
of Bottom-Up changes, over many necessary series
of iterations to finally transform the structure to give
exactly what the very same apportionment that a “Top
Down Causality” would deliver.
This Conclusion is not limited to this case alone,
however: it is considered to be generally applicable, as is
seen when investigations proceed into the immediately
evident attempts at Explanation: over very short time
periods, and also for apparently simplified forms, which
can be (and indeed are) there settled into, as initial
incorrect explanations.
But, ever more detail and study over extended periods
of time, regularly dissociate most things into a series of
only-temporarily-true-approximations, and only much
later, and with extended study, do the natural variabilities
become ever more apparent.
Indeed, though generally not immediately evident,
almost Everything is involved in a slow series of similar
changes, which at some point will result in dramatic
conversions - as we see in Emergence Theory.
And Reality-as-is also gradually reveals some of its very
extensive Hierarchy of Different Levels of existence -
many of which have long been beyond our Abilities-and-
Reach to adequately investigate: YET, very slowly, even
34 35
they are gradually extended too.
But, of course, many are still well beyond our current
reach, and even those that are more easily investigated,
are made radically easier to Understand and Control,
when limited to maintained-as-fixed situations.
And, it is precisely there, in so-called Science and its
Experimentation, that the vast bulk of both investigations
and Manufactures of desired Products are limited
in that way! The very first Intellectual Discipline of
Mathematics was correctly limited (as was its Contexts)
to being entirely Pluralist: that is involving only Fixed
Relations: so the same restrictions imposed upon
scientific investigation AND Production drew those into
the same artificially restricted World!
Consequently, only very rarely do any of the Sciences
depart from a wholly Pluralistic approach to Reality, and
the recent turn to what is termed The Systems Approach,
has been, as yet, both halting and limited: theorists like
Denis Noble are certainly only the beginning.
Now, this historical aberration has not only been very
badly served by Mathematics, which from the outset
was correctly Pluralistic: but has, in addition, delivered
a vast complex of developments, which are made just as
inflexably Pluralistic. This approach can-and-does deliver
many sophisticated developments, which wrongly appear
to get-around their congenital limitations.
The Classic case, based upon Probability Theory is, of
course the Quantum re-writing of Sub Atomic Physics.
For, as with many others of this ilk, it can be massaged
to “look like” a legitimate Holist Theory: while actually
being no such thing!
And, for this falsehood we can blame Henri Poinare and
Ernt Mach, who early in the 20th century, convinced
their colleagues of the legitimacy of Positivism (which
they called Empirio Criticism, at the time) in which
experimentally established relations were given the same
weight as Causal Explanations, and thereby “made”
Mathematics as legitimate as Causality.
But it is no such thing!
As ever more complicated Mathematics became involved
- and of course, the conclusions would indeed be right,
if used in the right Context - it would invalidly be
smuggled-in, as being as reliable as Causality, and so it
was: BUT never as Causes!
And, of course, with tremendous pressure from the
scientific consensus, Denis Noble was also driven to
conquer and apply a whole galaxy of sophisticated
Mathematics to his Holist ideas - and though he did
so, he was constantly also regularly being confronted
with features that did not fit that paradigm, and he
was driven in these cases to further develop a necessary
Systems Approach. YET this moved forward only in
his conviciton that Causality could be Top-Down as
well as Bottom-up: and he seemed to be unaware of the
unavoidable Plurality of absolutely all Mathematical
approaches.
Noble wasn’t yet a thorough-going Holist, and did not
know to generally limit Mathematics to only the strictly
Pluralist Contexts where it could legitimately be used.
And as I have already insisted, without that adjustment,
the Effects encountered could be very easily
misinterpreted.
36