“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” — Aristotle
“Thinking in Systems emphasizes finding the goals of the system. As Meadows put it, we discover these goals by asking, “What is the system trying to achieve?” ― Leidy Klotz, Subtract: The Untapped Science of Less
六頂思考帽 (Six Thinking Hats)
- 紅帽
- 黃帽
- 綠帽
- Anti Yesterday
- 白帽
- 黑帽
- 藍帽
Think Holistically
- All systems are part of larger systems, and every system is defined by its function in the larger system.
- See the overall picture rather than the individual parts.
The Hermeneutic Circle
The Hermeneutic Circle describes a cyclical process of understanding where one’s comprehension of the whole is informed by their understanding of the parts, and vice versa. It highlights the iterative nature of interpretation, where understanding develops through a back-and-forth movement between the individual components and the overall context. True understanding is not a linear process but a dynamic interplay of perspectives.
- Parts and Whole: The core idea is that understanding a text (or any meaningful entity) involves recognizing the relationship between its individual parts and the overall meaning of the whole.
- Cyclical Process: Interpretation is not a one-time event but a continuous process of moving between the parts and the whole. As you understand the parts better, your understanding of the whole may change, which in turn can refine your understanding of the parts, and so on.
- Preconceptions: The hermeneutic circle also acknowledges that our interpretations are always influenced by our prior knowledge, experiences, and assumptions, which serve as our initial “whole” from which we approach the text. These preconceptions can be challenged and revised as we engage with the text.
Complex Systems Emerge From Iterations On Simple Designs
More Is Different
Emergence: When complexity increases, new rules and patterns appear that are qualitatively different — and often unpredictable — compared to those at simpler levels.
In [@andersonMoreDifferentBroken1972], physicist Philip W. Anderson argues that reductionism — the idea that all complex systems can be fully understood by studying their smallest parts — is incomplete. While understanding fundamental laws (like those of particle physics) is essential, each level of complexity in nature gives rise to entirely new behaviors and principles that cannot be predicted or explained by the lower levels alone.
Anderson illustrates this with examples from physics:
- The laws of chemistry cannot be derived straightforwardly from particle physics.
- The behavior of solids, superconductors, or living organisms depends on emergent properties — collective phenomena that arise only when many components interact.
He famously concludes that “the whole becomes not only more, but very different from the sum of its parts.”