Overview Systematics – study of multi-term systems

1 overview

1.1 practical , applied bennettian systems
1.2 history
1.3 programme

overview

bennett has described discipline of systematics in quite general terms study of systems , application problem of understanding ourselves , world. notes in general context 4 branches of systematics:

pure systematics – seeks identify , describe universal properties or attributes common systems .
formal systematics – studies properties of systems without reference nature of terms. consists of investigation of possible modes of connectedness evidently can complex systems more 3 or 4 terms .
applied systematics – study of systems occurring in our experience , chiefly directed identification of terms , characteristics .
practical systematics – focuses on application of understanding gained through study of systems problems arise in departments of life .

bennett s use of term systematics synonymous today falls under terms systemics , systemology , systems science , , systems theory . however, own specific work under name systematics takes approaches still unfamiliar many current systems specialists, making work specialty in broader field. in addition, use of term systematics in biology refer classification of types , forms of organisms creates ambiguity , rather overwhelms term s current viability within general systemology. reference can made bennettian systems (or systemics or systematics), or multi-term systems describe work , continuations.

formal bennettian systems defined around , focus on idea of logical or qualitative complexity rather quantitative complexity. there possible analogy philosophical program of logical atomism. ( quantitative complexity , contrasted qualitative , results presence in practical setting of 2 or more actual components of same qualitative type. however, in practical systematics, quantity or amount of component has concrete qualitative effects, , 2 categories cannot separated.)

thus in formal systematics, bennettian systems abstract, , each system represents qualitative or logical type or level analogous logical levels used bertrand russell in theory of types.

each formal level consists of qualitatively independent mutually relevant terms constitute universe of discourse specific level, , terminology suitable @ 1 level can cause category confusion when used in other contexts.

every multi-term system so-defined has special system-level attribute or characteristic emergent quality, such dynamism triad, or significance pentad. emergence of these qualities, according work of anthony blake in calls lattice systematics, mysterious not random , occurs within process involving both increasing spiritualization of , increasing specification or materialization of function.

the logical level of system depends on number of qualitatively different mutually relevant terms in system. bennettian systems increase in qualitative complexity, , display new emergent qualities, in quantized, progressive series number of qualitatively distinct terms within system increases.

conversely, terms of given formal system correlate in general way specific degree, type, or level of system occur in, terms of dyad characterized poles , of triad impulses , of tetrad sources , of pentad limits, , on.

each system beyond first contains subsystems , systems, theoretically, embedded in supersystems higher number of terms.

in practical systematics, bennett carried process of elaboration 12-term system best within constraints of limited technical vocabulary available make such distinctions. beyond 12-term system spoke of societies .

bennett correlates logical levels or leaps of qualitative complexity calls concrete or qualitative significance of number, perhaps again analogous russell calls relation number in principia mathematica , in looser reference pythagorean traditions, although bennett @ pains distinguish doing various kinds of mere numerology .

the series of bennettian systems includes monad, dyad, triad, tetrad, , on, open-endedly. systems progress in complexity monad up, , vague wholeness increasingly articulate structure reaches society, history , ontological fabric of cosmos.

practical , applied bennettian systems

the series of multi-term systems can serve in applications simplified progressively complex outer checklists ascertain objective diagnostic completeness of survey , analysis of system or situation. conversely, system models can used inwardly aid subjectively assessing 1 s own impartiality, wisdom , adequacy of comprehension. can point toward real structures , processes in outer world of fact as, logically, structures , processes in inner world of values , human capacities.

the enneagram of process of gurdjieff central partial part of bennettian systematics of ennead.

history

systematics came in part out of pythagorean historical tradition influenced twentieth century movements such a. n. whitehead s philosophy of organism, c. s. peirce s pragmatism, , bertrand russell s logical atomism, theory of types, , logic of relations. however, independent of bertalanffy s general systems theory , other systems thinking work. strongest personal influence gurdjieff , writings. gurdjieff had taught significance of law of 3 , law of 7 in meta-scientific context, bennett proposed there law every integral number, , people understand practical things such management , education.

parallels can drawn between bennettian systematics , work of c. g. jung , marie louise von franz on number archetypal, philosophies of engineers such buckminster fuller , arthur young.

programme

bennettian systematics has integrative programme. throughout cultures , throughout disciplines there discernible threads of meaning associated multi-term systems might otherwise missed. bennettian systematics links understanding connected structural unity , how insight 1 area of experience can transferred without distortion. journal called systematics launched bennett’s institute comparative study of history, philosophy , sciences in 1963 publish diversity of articles relating programme. systematics led development of new learning system called structural communication, later became broad methodology called logovisual thinking (lvt).