Lewis Works

This open, on-line Newsletter is published weekly, every Friday Afternoon at 4:30 PM PST. It is updated with new announcements and articles each week.

Lewis Works Newsletter

The E-zine of Applied General Systems Science

By Hugh M. Lewis, PhD, MA, general editor

Vol. II:  No. 6

11/12/04 Copyright 2004 ©, Hugh M. Lewis.  Facsimiles of this page or parts of this page may be printed and distributed for non-profit research, consulting and educational purposes only, as governed by fair use policy.

If you really need to know, find out all about it with one of our SEARCH engines:

On Top

Onward Christian Soldiers!...It is clear that lately God has been answering all George Bush's prayers. How wonderful for Bush that he must not be losing much sleep at night due to his recent blessings and ministrations.

But I must steer away once and for all from recent political concerns and back towards the main objectives of this framework. We have made a significant breakthrough in the organization of the framework, and positive results are expected to be rapidly forthcoming from a shift in our focus away from backend matters towards front-end development. I have opened a new CMS web-portal that will deal with contemporary political commentary directly, to be found at:

http://www.lewismicropublishing.us

This front-end systems framework is organized along fundamentally different principles than the backend, but the two are intended to be fully articulated with one another, at least in the best of possible worlds. The design of an alternative meta-systems framework has been around for the past year, but the manner and place to implement it in relation to the main framework has been something of a riddle. The reconfiguration brings the problem of programming and data-base management to the foreground, as well as a number of other related issues.

The problem of the framework as it had been articulated thus far was that it did not come back together at some point, and efforts undertaken in elaborating the backend would spin off in increasing complexities in almost any direction, to the wasting of considerable but limited resources. Focusing our efforts and resources on one critical focal point, that ties up the diverse tendrils of the backend, allows us to push forward the framework in a manner that will be seen as less confusing and more available for users.

I have set few deadlines or schedules to the implementation of the framework, and scheduling its development, which has often been lateral and tangential to preconceived ideas, has proven well-nigh impossible to implement. On the other hand, an effective hot-spot approach to implementation, referenced by a common frame of reference that permits coordination and contextualization of effort, has proven to be of great service to development of the system overall. So we carry on with our project, come what may with the world, in the hope that one day we may make the world a better place than we found it in the first place, in however small a portion, and not any worse. 

I really don't expect any dialog on these issues, and I'm led to believe that most people have more important things on their minds to worry about. But if one reads between the lines of Bush's monosyllabic statements, and between the lines of news reports and commentary worldwide, one might come around to the notion that maybe there is something more to this systems stuff than meets the eye, and, yes, by God, maybe we should be paying a little bit more attention to it than we have been. Enough said on my part though.

Criticisms/Comments, then Provide Feedback

Main Article

For purposes of this essay, I offer the following operational definitions:

Meta-system: A "system of systems," and, theoretically, a generalized system of less general and more particular systems. Also, a philosophical and theoretical dialog about systems relativity and systems contexts.

Cybernetics: The logical organization of information that is implicit to the functional, developmental and relational-structural patterning of any given system. Usually cybernetic systems are looked at from the standpoint of control and feedback mechanisms that serve to maintain a complex stable-state of dynamic equilibrium over the structure of the long run and the large. Cybernetics also implies a model of nervous system feedback and organization typical of all animals, which is a model especially fit and adapted for the cognitive sciences and the development of artificial intelligence.

Integration: The problem of integration is the central theoretical and applied problem of general systems theory and methodology. Systems integration may be defined as the problem of understanding how systems come together, and how the components of systems interact, in such a way as to  produce emergent properties that are uniquely associated with a particular kind of system. Furthermore, meta-systems integration implies that there are ordered relationships not only of parts of systems, but between different kinds of systems, and this overarching sense of order forms the foundation for our understanding of the world.

Before proceeding let it be remarked that not everything in the world is integrated, nor was everything even meant to be integrated. In fact, most things that occur in the world appear to occur in a relatively un-integrated and therefore independent manner. And it seems, at least as far as we can tell, if left alone, things in the long run tend to fall apart. Things seem to go from states of greater integration to less integration. And this poses a riddle about the natural organization of reality--how did integrated systems come about in the first place if the tendency of all self-organization is towards greater disintegration. True Believing, born again, bible thumping Presidents hold to "Intelligent Design" which is another euphemized way of saying "God created the world in six days and rested on the Sabbath." But origin mythology aside, the sciences are indeed hard pressed to answer the question of the seemingly spontaneous stochastic self-organization of integrated systems when the overarching tendency in the universe is definitely towards disintegration.

Integration is what can be called organization of things into a larger whole, a system, which occurs over time and space in some self-consistent way. Any such organization requires working energy to maintain, and it also implies knowledge, or a sense of order, in its functional and structural relationships. So the question becomes, without some sense of predetermination being involved, or without the hand of some deliberate or intentional being, how did systems arise, apparently by themselves, in nature, when the gradient for all events seems to be in the opposite direction?

Ludwig von Bertalanffy essentially solved this riddle, and thereby laid the foundation for general systems theory as a fundamental paradigm for the sciences. First, he identified the difference between ideally closed systems, upon which the conventional laws of Thermodynamics were based, and the idea of partially closed/partially open systems. Second, he restated the principle that there can be no completely self-organizing systems, with the idea that systems may be partially self-organizational through interaction with the environment, and particularly, with interaction of other systems within the environment. Finally, he stated that systems may become self-organizing and integrative as complex-state, order-increasing systems in the context of open environmental situations when conditions of energy transport into the system may temporarily outweigh the loss of energy from the system, due primarily to the immediate availability of a certain form of energy and the availability of suitable transport mechanisms that permit energy to be carried into the system with a certain level of efficiency.

It appears for instance that the explanation for the spontaneous self organization of living systems as we have uncovered these from the strata of the earth follows precisely this general systems model, and can be explained scientifically in no other way. Any living system we know about on earth follows this same pattern of organization and systemic integration, however convoluted and meta-biotic they have become, and it can be hypothesized in a reliable way that any living system we may in the future encounter in the universe will also follow the exact same principle, albeit if not in exactly the same ways.

I would like to theoretically explain the spontaneous self-organization of physical systems by a similar model, but Big Bang creationists, thank you George Gamow, will have nothing to do with alternative paradigms. The organization of energy upon a fundamental level has yet to be clearly ascertained, if it ever can be clearly ascertained, given the statements of relativity that have been forthcoming regarding physical event structures.

And, if we are to believe prognostications of global warming and conspiracy theories about the fossil fuel wars, it appears that human systems, as grand state systems, operating upon the same basic guidelines, much to the chagrin of traditional capitalists and social engineers of all kinds.

The problem of systems solutions and integration is fundamentally the problem of solving the Von Neumann information bottle-neck in the search solution space for any given problem set. Each system imaginable or demonstrable in reality has one or more abstract symbolic representations that may be used for the purpose of relational and structural generalization about systems. The challenge of integration can be said to the problem of getting behind any immediate, or relatively local solution set, to achieve a more comprehensive or general solution set that properly integrates the local solution to a larger frame of reference. Systems integration is successful if local solutions, as subsystems, become coordinate to and incorporated within a larger systems framework. 

The problem of this is the relativity of systems by size, scale and generality. Many systems occur in the world independently, and there is no clear sense why they should be integrated. Ideally, we would want to create a socio-political system in which all people, as individual human systems, are independent and wealthy enough to pursue their own goals as long as these goals do not hurt or hinder the freedom of anyone else. There is no sense in such a world that there must be a single overarching ideological or political entity by which the interests of all people should be made to conform to a single set of general standards, however these may be conceived. On the other hand, there appears in any socio-political meta-system a need for the rule of just law that may apply to all people equally, without double-standards, without religious or racial bias, etc., etc. 

It is clear that if any real or possible system is underdetermined in any ultimate sense, then there is no reason to conceive of or attempt to design a meta-system, or a system of systems, that is itself more over-determined than the systems it contains. At the same time, it is generally conceded that in the long run some form of meta-systems integration is perhaps inevitable, in whatever manner it may be eventually achieved or realized. There is a clear sense, for instance, that the mass extinctions that followed the Permian or the Triassic were probably not caused by a gigantic meteorite or a super-volcanic eruption, which would be part of systems by themselves, but from the inherent dynamics of biological meta-systems that tend to run towards deterministic integration in the long run. Therefore, over-determination through meta-system integration is not always the most desirable state to achieve, and in fact may eventuate ultimately in a rather night-marish state.

The entire criticism of modern development has been the pursuit of local solutions that are not generalizable to global problem sets, and the lack of coordination of resources and information that would permit such generalization of solutions in a common context to take place. What occurs in this perspective is not the over-determination of systems, but the mass wastage of resources, and inefficient utilization of systems, and the arising of critical events from complex states, that result in destructive interference of systems or subsystems and the increase in randomization of systems.  This is not the same as foisting on the world a limited symbolic ideology or a form of "planned development" that stems from power and relatively narrow-minded and self-serving interests. It is rather a challenge of figuring out an appropriate generalizable methodology that can be considered genuinely comprehensive in design and therefore universally applicable, with the appropriate modifications, to all manner of different kinds of local problem sets.

Systems are good to think for humans because human thought is organized upon systems principles. The emergent properties associated with mind, and found to be transcendent to the functions of the brain, are the properties of the brain functioning as a super complex system in a symbolic manner. The entire mind-body dichotomy that underlies particularly Western Philosophy, and the binding problem that lies at the heart of philosophical debate concerning AI, resolves itself upon a systems-based perspective. This is not to say that we necessarily understand in any adequate way how the brain functions as a system to create the noetic properties of mind, but this system, as natural as it is, and as a unique product of natural evolution, forms the central basis for human systems that are to be distinguished analytically from biological and physical systems.

The entire challenge of attempting to design and articulate a comprehensive systems-based framework has resolved itself on the problem of integration. It is largely a cybernetic problem as it represents attempts to think through to solutions to problems that lie behind more immediate solutions. It is a cybernetic problem not only because systems are naturally good for humans to think and act in, but because all systems themselves that have any sense of order carry information and this information can be said to be cybernetic in terms of its integration. We are attempting to move from local problem sets to basic and global problems, to try to get behind local problem sets to see what connects them to larger frameworks. To a great extent this feels like an ever vanishing horizon, and with each step towards greater generality, there is implied an exponential jump in the levels of complexity that are being subsumed in the search-solution space.

The problem can be resolved in two ways--formally through the implementation of alternative general frames of reference, and heuristically through the implementation of practical shortcuts of working presuppositions that permit us to resolve some of the complexities for practical purposes. Fortunately, we have some fairly powerful heuristic shortcuts that allow us to resolve complexities at every-turn. One can even say that symbolic organization of consciousness, manifest for instance in human speech, permits us to put a simple and sweet symbolic label on a complex reality, and then to treat that reality by means of its symbolic handle as if they were one and the same thing. Even human perception appears to accomplish the same tricks of the imagination, in numerous ways and instances, that saves us the problem of processing all the information and signals that exist in the world. The more formal approach of course is large the approach of scientifically methodologies, in whatever way they are expressed or realized in terms of research and application in the world. These approaches tend overall to be more systematic, more deliberate, more analytical in dealing less with generalizations and more with the details of reality subsumed by such generalizations.

Backward chaining of inference structure is an important consideration of achieving comprehensive solution sets to general problems, and this process allows a formalization of solutions and their organization into a larger meta-systems framework with the promise of creating relatively complete computer-based integration of the framework utilizing a relevant inference engine and suitable database structures. In fact, it provides the entire basis for seeking a comprehensive systems-based solution set that can be cybernetically expressed in terms of computer-based design and management of information. If we recognize that all real systems carry information as intrinsic to the fact of their functioning organization, and knowledge, like work, requires non-random modulation and transference of energy, then we understand that the capacity to program knowledge based informational systems provides tremendous power to construct and maintain alternative working systems of all conceivable kinds.

I consider in fact backward chaining systems of inference to be so cybernetically important, especially in terms of the possible automation of artificial systems, that once we have achieved a global generalized solution set, all other possible problem sets may be logically and functionally integrated in an adaptive manner. This is perhaps my own specialized bias as an anthropologist, but it remains quite evident that the integration of human reality, and all reality is, from an anthropological standpoint, humanly filtered reality, is cybernetically organized and ordered in such a manner that is both good to think and good to do.

To compare this to conventional approaches to systems problem solving, which are based primarily upon empirical and experiential expertise through specialization and the division of labor and the implicit kind of structural-functional organization this entails, we may refer to this fundamentally as a forward chaining inferential approach, which relies upon a series of selections of known choices and progressive delimitation to a final selection. It is called the coke-machine approach to cybernetic problem solving, and works well with small ranges of choice that are in keeping with natural cognitive limitations of people. Such a system does not work well though with very large sets of alternatives or very complex systems.

The sciences have largely been articulated and organized on an empirical and analytical basis. This by itself is nothing bad, but it does represent by and large a tendency towards forward chaining solutions from particulars to generalities, rather than backward chaining from generalizations to particulars. Of course, science is not strictly speaking a forward-chaining affair even if it is mostly taught and idealized in this manner--the greatest contributions in science have been largely backward chaining theories that represent general systems solutions to basic problem sets, like the theory of evolution and the general theory of evolution. Careful and tedious observation to detail may have preceded the formulation of these theories, but by no means did the theories themselves depend or hinge upon such observation alone.

The basis for the Lewis Works framework has been the understanding of the universal applicability of general systems principles, and the potential value that can be derived from such understanding. It stands to reason that the studied application of such principles to general and special problem solving endeavors would in part serve the purposes of achieving relatively integrated solution sets at various levels of organization of reality. But this is not a problem that can be directly attacked or arbitrarily by the deliberate application of systems principles. It is a problem that can only be achieved through creative insight and intuition, through experience with different kinds of systems in all ways and at all levels, and through the process of discovery associated with the recognition and appreciation of the developmental emergence of systems.

A final proviso must also be remarked upon. Though Lewis Works has adopted a general systems perspective as a comprehensive framework for problem solving and project application, a systems perspective by itself is not the only or exclusive point of view that carries any relevance to the understanding of different kinds of things or phenomena in the world. The differences of each thing, or each kind of thing, must be appreciated for what they are, and understood in the unique terms that they represent by their design, whether this is conceived in a systems framework or not.  In fields like ecology where systems perspectives are almost automatic and therefore quite obvious, there is always an on-going debate between the analytic approach and a systems or holistic approach. Ultimately, it is the holistic approach that is capable of comprehending and incorporating the analytical perspective, and not the other way around. This kind of debate is really a hen or egg dilemma, once again, or rather a mind-brain dichotomy or a ghost in the machine kind of paradox. In terms of anything we may study or approach for study, the analytical or holistic perspective is neither privileged over nor exclusive of the other approach, whatever our manifest values or predilections in scholarship.

Announcements & Updates

Announcements of recent updates in our framework

* The book Robidoux Chronicles: French-Indian Ethnoculture in the Trans-Mississippi West is now available for purchase through www.trafford.com. Just follow the links to their online bookstore and search with this title or my name. They have marked the price up too high, and therefore if you want to buy a copy for about a third of the cost, get in touch with me instead.

*We have reassigned the function of http://www.lewismicropublishing.com, which has been an alternate "DBA" business name of the Lewis Works framework, for the purpose of developing a viable front-end system. The contents and links found within our old:

www.lewismicropublishing.com  

have been redirected instead to a close alternate, at:

www.lewispublications.com. 

This site is currently under construction, but we invite in the future your attention to this set of modifications to our framework. I searched for an alternative name for our front-end, but since good, unclaimed URL domain names are so hard to come by, we have decided to go with what we have and know about instead. An alternative would have been another "DBA" name, www.omniprise.net, as this was the original name for the overall framework, but the name "Omniprise" is shared by several companies in the world and it has largely been discontinued to prevent any conflict of interest occurring.

* A note about the "Lewis" prefix in naming the domains within my web-system. It has proven very difficult to come up with good, few syllable domain names that are not already claimed. Using the "Lewis" prefix in domain names has served to kill three birds with one stone: 1. it has been relatively easy to secure appropriate domain names utilizing this prefix, especially .com and .net tlds; 2. it has created a useful memory device for people to associate with the framework, especially in relation to long multi-syllable domain names; 3. using the family name was felt a positive thing to do to foster a sense of branding and association of personal identity with business and professional interests. I feel I have little other attachment to the name or to my own sense of ego in this regard, though others may see this differently. Actually using the prefix has given me a degree of flexibility in naming for web-system development that I probably wouldn't have otherwise had, and this has assisted in the planning and development of the framework, at least in as much as it is articulated upon the web, which brings me to the next point.

* A further note about the enumeration of domains names in the Lewis Works framework. This framework was developed conceptually, largely from the top down and from the back end towards the front. Because the web-system was from the start conceived as of central strategic importance in the development of this framework, the inexpensiveness of domain names provided a low-budget means of creating leverage and credibility via the web where no other means has existed. At the same time, promotion of websites on the Internet becomes a numbers game primarily, and one must be willing to gamble and spin if one wants to win. Of course, the framework must be more than primarily web-based if it is to proceed in any sense of its primary mission statement.

*We have set up a site at http://www.lewismicropublishing.us primarily for the purpose of fostering political dialog and commentary.

* For Americans and others in need of moral edification about what it truly means to be an American, I've republished on-line the American Declaration of Independence. I suggest strongly reading beyond the first line.

* We have set our mission statement on a separate page to be accessible from other points in our web system. It can be found at:

 http://www.lewismicropublishing.com/MissionStatement

Mission Statement

Lewis Works is dedicated to realizing new human adaptive possibilities in order to create alternative long-term frameworks for human & biological systems development on earth and beyond.

The primary mission of Lewis Works is to fundamentally empower all human beings, without regard or reference to their individual or cultural differences, so that they may function in a more constructive and non-violent manner by means of their integration within an applied systems framework that enables them to contextualize and focus their independent developmental efforts toward comprehensive solutions to common problems in resource distribution, environmental adaptation, and social-structural interaction.

Lewis Works Ten Point Mission Statement

• 1. Lewis Works seeks alternative meta-systems based development through applied general systems with the main goals of:

• a. Achieving a mutually stable and harmonic balance between future human systems and earthbound biological systems.

• b. Providing all human beings in unbiased structural or cultural contexts the alternative systems-based frameworks for their individual & social development by means of increased opportunities, productivity, security and resource availability that they would not otherwise have in conventional frameworks.

• c. Developing the infra-structural context and means for the regular extension of human and biological systems beyond the boundaries of the earth.

• 2. Lewis Works is dedicated to achieving a better world for all people and for all life-forms through the implementation and articulation of an applied general systems framework to general and specific problem sets that occur in the adaptive organization of human behavior in a shared natural environment.

• 3. Lewis Works is non-exclusive, open, non-authoritarian, philanthropic and pacifist in orientation.

• 4. Lewis Works pursues a combination of both profit and non-profit programs and projects to the achievement of its main goals.

• 5. Lewis Works protects and promotes universal human rights and human responsibilities throughout its various programs and projects by the systematic pursuit of human development strategies.

• 6. Lewis Works is law abiding and honest in all its dealings and transactions in all contexts, and respects and honors the customs and manners of all peoples and all ethnocultural groupings.

• 7. Lewis Works protects and promotes the confidentiality and legitimate interests of its clients and customers under all circumstances and in all cases.

• 8. Lewis Works seeks to efficiently provide a comprehensive range of profit-based services and related product lines within an open, web-based forum of exchange that is global in scope, regional in character, and local in focus, and that serves as the basis for the development of a structurally open meta-systems based context in the world transcending local, regional and national identities and affiliations.

• 9. Lewis Works seeks to promote non-profit programs in alternative human development for the sake of alleviating human suffering, educating people openly and in an unbiased manner, and promoting pro-social human development.

• 10. Lewis Works seeks to create trans-national meta-cultural orientations in the world through various organizational frameworks that promote open, democratic principles of government, fair-play and the rule of just law, and through the development of anti-structural multi-media based systems that provide humanity a common symbolic context for their meta-cultural integration.

Products & Services

Lewis Works strives to offer a genuinely comprehensive range of services and products for the global e-consumer in an informed, non-aggressive manner. It has taken us time to develop our resources into an integrated framework that will provide largely automated self-service to our members and other customers, bolstered by one-on-one account management and attention to personal details. But persistence & a great deal of patience is finally beginning to pay-off in terms of the emergence of a real web-system with an active presence on the Internet.

We act both as a reseller for other providers, and we also are increasing the product range that we actually own or buy ourselves wholesale and then resell. We also provide a range of peripheral options through associate/affiliate accounts. 

We seek to be as honest and transparent in our dealings and relations with the world as possible, putting as a premium in our transactions building the values of trust and reliability.

We also recommend our current Link Palette for related links & portals, though most of these are as yet unfinished.

For external topic-organized links, we recommend Hugh's Hot Links

For popular, top-search links, we recommend Haut Lynx

Query us for advertising on our Advertising Pages that are shown throughout our web-system on more than a eleven hundred distinct URLs.

Feedback

This Newsletter will be published at 4:30 PST each Friday afternoon. 

Contact

Subscribe to our Newsletter below: