Systems Thinking
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 мар 2015
- Take the full course: bit.ly/SiCourse
Download booklet: bit.ly/SiBooklets
Twitter: bit.ly/2JuNmXX
LinkedIn: bit.ly/2YCP2U6
A short video explaining the primary differences between analytical methods of reasoning and systems thinking while also discussing the two methods that underpin them; synthesis and reductionism. 
Наука
Watching this video was one of the most worthwhile 5.40 minutes of my life! Things just clicked into place. Thanks for posting.
YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JK U GOT ME LAUGHIN!!!!!
My whole doctoral study is embedded within system/complexity theory so finding this channel absolutely amazing. Thanks so much for the great content, animation and simple explanations.
+1
This channel is the best kept secret on the internet because too many people are busy rejecting it AS I fuck with the dynamics and, thus, the interdependencies around them....
*The dishwasher has entered the construct. Eschaton imminentized!*
This is insanely brilliant! It has helped me in my studies a lot.
Thank you for the video, I'm waiting for my books on the subject and wanna get a head start. I recently discovered this discipline and already I can see the good implications this type of systhesis thinking can have on our society.
This is unbelievably helpful. Thank you, kindly.
Thanks for this well-made video. I knew a bit about systems thinking. The contrast between analysis and synthesis was especially interesting for me.
Thank you for these series of videos. I think they are very helpful.
Historically youd want to check out Schelling's early nature philosophy and identity philosophy of the wurzburg lectures of 1804, hegels phenomenology/logic, and husserls 3rd logical investigation in 1901..... Could add plotinus, spinoza, deleuze, etc.
Excellent series and channel!!!
This is somewhat i was doing a long time but didn't realize that there is a entire topic and name for this process. I allways try to get into smallest entity of the system or process, to describe its behaviour, characteristics and to see how it interconnects. Then i try to see what else falls in similar cathegory and how that other thing interacts with its context. This way i can see much broader possibilities to modify some interconnections or to make more flexible processes.
Same. I just discovered there's a name for this. I always get frustrated when people don't see things in these terms.
Great explanation. Discovered the concept from studies.
Thanks for the concise explanation.
I am completing an assignment where I need to use systems thinking. Therefore, I found this video useful to understand what systems thinking is.
This is a very promising channel. Keep up the good work.
Amen
son got da jokes
Thanks for this information :)
I enjoy decomposing organisms into their constituent parts in my spare time.
Great and important view for add complexity .
Great content, thank you
Great content!
Great Analysis!!
Well done! Helpful.
If you like this you mght want to read "The systems thinking" from Fritijov Capra and Pierre Luis Luigi
Thank you for recommendation about the book
Thanks for this valuable resource. Could you please update the link to the eBook? Thanks in advance.
Thank you.
great video
1. What system is this object part of?
(Identify the system, which this object is of an interest?)
e.g. a person being is part of a greater cutlure
2. How this whole system functions?
e.g. a harddrive is part of a computer system, so we need an understanding of the whole computer?
3. How the parts are interconnected and arranged to function as an entirty?
Excellent
I love this
This video motivate me to create an App on Android .Next I will create on IOS.
I have a subject at university that teaches the exact same subject, the only difference is that your presentation is way more exemplified and better structured as well as explained.Good job!
Even tho i understand largely what a system is, its importance and abstraction, i don t quite see the need for a separate lecture just for teaching all this abstract concepts, it feels like a big vocabulary lesson. Ain't terms like entropy, synergy, reductionism etc become natural once you actually get involve in real world simulation of systems? What is the higher importance of this concepts that i m not able to see?
@@3quark I majored in automatic control, systems engineering. Politehnica Bucuresti.
HI! This is very well done. I've contributed to your subtitles in spanish, do you have to aprobe or something? they're not available yet
I Laura, thanks for contributing, I don't see any option on this end to approve it, I will look into it
So you observe the whole system(or as much as is apparent), then look at the parts individually, then look at the whole and make an educated guess on how the parts fit together, test and repeat until you can predict the behavior of the system.
From my experience, women seem to think more in terms of synthesis whereas male psychology is more geared towards analysis. Would you guys agree?
Certainly, holism is more associated with femininity and if you think of more reductive domains like physics, engineering, and math they are traditionally associated with and populated by men.
@Complexity Labs Don't you think engineers are trained to have a more holistic approach to solutions? They do, at the end of the day, incorporate factors such as profit, availability of funds, environmental effects, "holism" , etc. in to their main design. I tend to associate "systems thinking" with the engineering way of thinking.
this reminds me of dialectical materialism
as an autistic person this is how i try to learn social stuff. it's useful in the beginning, but after a while thinking in systems for this type of thing becomes useless because the system become too complex. it's not humanely possible to keep up with it and other types of thinking have to come into play.
Required for understanding Data Centres and the Internet
Excuse me for asking this here, but I haven't found much accurate information about it, and maybe some here know about this topic. I am looking to orient my education towards what I am passionate about (maybe graduate options), but I am a bit confused as it involves a lot of interdisciplinarity. I am interested in studying systems (economic, environmental, social, etc.), the relationship between them and developing more efficient and sustainable organization models. I have been reading a lot about systems dynamics, systems thinking and other topics, but I do not know if they are suitable options. In what direction should I orient my education? I am currently studying a degree in Physics. Thank you. Take care
Can you share what is the application/tool you use to create these videos? They are very clear and creative!
Thanks for the positive feedback. The videos are made using the program Keynote by Apple. You can find out more here: goo.gl/Xgt7Ob
Thanks!
What is the important of Systems thinking in this video?
Hi there, I would like to make the translation of this vid and then reload it, is it possible? would I be breaking any rules (I most certainly don´t want to) Let me know! and Thanks for this great vid!
It is creative commons, so sure you can do that, good luck!
Great info, but monotone was rough
Are you guys aware of the journal Cosmos + Taxis? Are there any similar academic journals you can recommend? I'm pretty sure the Sante Fe Institute doesn't have a regular journal, though I may be wrong.
Was not aware of this journal you mention, Cosmos + Taxis, will have a look at it, you could also try
Journals ISSS | International Society for the Systems Sciences
Cool. Thanks for providing this material online for free! It's hard being trapped in Alabama with no direct access to people who think like me. It's very lonely. Thank you for what you do.
However, methodologies and methods of system thinking deal with different aspects of complexity and various relationships among actors. In other words, systems approaches have strengths and weaknesses. Thus, systems thinking needs critical systems thinking and practice to tackle ill-structured problems. But, analysts do not speak the same language, and we do not have much time to choose an alternative course of action in real world! Is systems thinking really practical?
Can someone explain this to me? It feels as if "Systems Thinking" and the "Analytical Approach" are one in the same. I don't think anyone ever looks at the "gas tank" of a vehicle and thinks "this is not related to the engine, which is a different component." You can't escape from separating things into components, and you can't escape from understanding that they all work together. So can someone explain to me the point that I'm missing?
Maybe take a look at this video, it goes more in-depth on the issue, it might help. goo.gl/wFvdA9
While that video did explain it in more useful terms by using examples, I still find it to be a false assumption that classical analysis just decides to "stop" at the component level, and not looking at something in terms of its relationship to other systems. For instance, we know that the tide rises due to the gravity from the moon. We know that birds fly south in the Winter. Never have I heard of a scientist just "stopping" at the component level and believing their knowledge to be complete. Also, "systems thinking" is creating "systems" until one is too tired to continue, otherwise you would consider the entire Universe and all of its events in every single system that is related to whatever it is that is being studied.
Hi Ricardo, I understand your point, I have just been watching another of our videos that I think might help you to understand this idea, please see this video: goo.gl/P5HyAx
Ricardo, I feel that the analysis/synthesis dichotomy is good but contrived. It might be because of my mathematics background where analysis is contrasted to algebra and geometry; the three being distinct source of knowledge and agency. In that context, there is study (not to say analysis) of internal relationship, the study of external relationships, and the study of constraints and universality. These form 9 domains of inquiry, which I am not sure how to fit into the up-versus-down paradigm.
For me System analysis is more like top-down approach? Am I wrong?
Systems analysis is not the same thing as systems thinking or theory, if you do mean systems analysis, then systems analysis studies the overall dynamics to a system but I would not describe it as top-down, it is primarily concerned with the feedback loops that govern the system's development over time
In short deductive vs inductive
Please how can I cite this lecture? What is the name of the author?
You can cite my name if you wish, Joss Colchester I wrote the script. Also, you can find the article relating to this video on our site with the correct citation at the bottom of the page: goo.gl/kWafCM
@@SystemsInnovationNetwork That link does NOT work.
Doesnt analysis also focus on relationships because you break a large subject matter down to its medium to small constituents and discovering how these constituents function cohesively to make the subject matter exist or work.
Analysis does but it only looks at linear interactions, not synergeis.
Quem foi o indivíduo que traduziu para português?
Deixa eu te dar um abraço indivíduo anônimo
Watching at 1.5x
How is this different from Synergy. There's minut differences, but this video is like almost splitting hairs which is possible. But on average you're video on synergy covers this
UKODUS -- soduk
When I analyse a system, I analyse everything .. it's components, their interactions, their environment, interactions with co-systems, its supra-system, structures, behaviours, characteristics, limits, ... I don't see analysis as a reductionist approach. Instead I see a reductionist approach as a limited application of analysis. Analysis is about acquiring insight in systems. It makes no sense to me to study systems partially and leaving out crucial information.
Some fields of academic study are far too complex to understand in its entirety. It's simply more productive to utilize the systems thinking method which makes it easier to apply and then add additional information to your current knowledge framework. Systems thinking serves as a map towards reductionism and the cycle feeds upon itself.
Strange. Strange to put analysis and synthesis like this against each other, or competing methods. Instead synthesis is better taught as a natural continuation of analysis. First you break down and then you try to build (synthesis, leading back together), based on your findings in the analysis (what you have taken apart). This is just going to confuse students and make them look for easy, alternative methods.
I agree with your comment. It is wrong to pit analysis and synthesis against each other. The understanding of a system's individual and fundamental elements is undeniably critical to having a complete understanding of a thing. It is just the case that, unfortunately, the study of synthesis (the *relationships* between components that create a system's behavior, and the *relationships* between systems that create the world's behavior) has been completely ignored by our educational system.
That moment when you have an IQ of 167 and you feel stupid. What the beep does all of this mean?
Like si vienes del modulo de la UVEG y tampoco entiendes.🥲
I asked?
U got me laughin
ruclips.net/video/gpphrHJL9fQ/видео.html