Currently, there is no unity in the definition of the concept “system”. The first definitions in one form or another stated that a system is elements and connections (relationships) between them. For example, the founder of systems theory, Ludwig von Bertalanffy, defined a system as a complex of interacting elements or as a set of elements that are in certain relationships with each other and with the environment. A. Hall defines a system as a set of objects together with connections between objects and between their characteristics. There are discussions about which term, “relationship” or “connection,” is better to use.
Later, the concept of goal appears in system definitions. Thus, in the “Philosophical Dictionary” a system is defined as “a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other in a certain way and form some kind of integral unity.”
Recently, in the definition of the concept of a system, along with elements, connections and their properties and goals, they are beginning to include an observer, although for the first time the need to take into account the interaction between the researcher and the system under study was pointed out by one of the founders of cybernetics, W. R. Ashby.
M. Masarovich and Y. Takahara in the book “General Theory of Systems” believe that a system is “a formal relationship between observable signs and properties.”
Thus, depending on the number of factors taken into account and the degree of abstraction, the definition of the concept “system” can be presented in the following symbolic form. We denote each definition by a serial number that coincides with the number of factors taken into account in the definition.
OPR. 1. A system is something whole:
This definition expresses the fact of existence and integrity. The binary judgment A(1,0) reflects the presence or absence of these qualities.
OPR. 2. A system is an organized set (Temnikov F. E.):
org - operator of the organization;
M - set.
OPR. 3. A system is a set of things, properties and relationships (Uemov A.I.):
S=((m).(n).(r]),
n - properties,
r - relations.
OPR. 4. A system is a set of elements that form a structure and ensure a certain behavior under environmental conditions:
S=(e, ST, BE, E),
e - elements,
ST - structure,
BE - behavior,
E - Wednesday.
OPR. 5. A system is a set of inputs, a set of outputs, a set of states characterized by a transition operator and an output operator:
S=(X, Y, Z, H, G),
X - inputs,
Y - outputs,
Z - states,
N - transition operator,
G is the output operator.
This definition takes into account all the main components considered in automation.
OPR. 6. This six-term definition, like those that follow, is difficult to formulate in words. It corresponds to the level of biosystems and takes into account the genetic (ancestral) origin of GN, the conditions of existence of KD, metabolic phenomena of MB, development of EV, functioning of FC and reproduction (reproduction) of RP:
S=(GN, KD, MB, EV, FC, RP).
OPR. 7. This definition operates with the concepts of model F, coupling SC, recalculation R, self-learning FL, self-organization FO, conductivity of bonds CO and excitation of JN models:
S=(F, SC, R, FL, FO, CO, JN).
This definition is convenient for neurocybernetic research.
OPR. 8. If the definition of OPR. 5 is supplemented with the time factor and functional connections, we obtain the definition of the system, which is usually used in the theory of automatic control:
S=(T, X, Y, Z, v, V, h , j ),
T – time,
X – inputs,
Y – outputs,
Z – states,
v – class of output operators,
V – values of operators at the output,
h - functional connection in the equation y(t2)=?,
j – functional connection in the equation z(t2)=?.
OPR. 9. For organizational systems, it is convenient to consider the following when defining a system:
S=(PL, RO, RJ, EX, PR, ODP. T, SV, ROP. , EF),
PL – goals and plans,
RO – external resources,
RJ – internal resources,
EX – performers,
PR is a process
OPR. T-interference,
SV – control,
ROPR. – management,
EF – effect.
The sequence of definitions can be continued up to the ODP. N (N=9, 10, 11, ...), which would take into account such a number of elements, connections and actions in real system, which is necessary for the task being solved, to achieve the goal. The following is often considered as a “working” definition of the concept of a system in the literature on systems theory: a system is a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, which forms a certain integrity, unity.
material from the book “System Theory and System Analysis: Textbook for Universities” Volkova V.N..
The fundamental concept of the TS is the concept of “system” (gr. systema - a connection made up of parts).
System- a set (set) of elements between which there are connections (relationships, interaction). Thus, a system is understood not as any totality, but ordered(due to the presence of relationships).
Terms " attitude" And " interaction» are used in in a broad sense, including the whole set of related concepts such as limitation, structure, organizational connection, connection, dependence, etc.
System S represents an ordered pair S=(A, R), where A is a set of elements; R is the set of relations between A.
System- this is a complete, holistic set of elements (components), interconnected and interacting with each other so that the function of the system can be realized.
System- this is an objective part of the universe, including similar and compatible elements that form a special whole that interacts with the external environment. Many other definitions are also acceptable. What they have in common is that the system has some the right combination the most important, essential properties of the object being studied.
If you put together (combine) similar or dissimilar elements (concepts, objects, people), then this will not be a system, but only a more or less random mixture. Whether or not to consider a particular set of elements as a system also largely depends on the goals of the study and the accuracy of the analysis, determined by the ability to observe (describe) the system.
The concept of “system” arises where and when we materially or speculatively draw a closed boundary between the unlimited or some limited set elements. Those elements with their corresponding mutual conditionality that fall inside form a system.
Those elements that remain outside the boundary form a set called in systems theory the “system environment” or simply “environment” or “external environment”.
From these considerations it follows that it is impossible to consider a system without its external environment. The system forms and manifests its properties in the process of interaction with the environment, being the leading component of this influence.
Any human activity is purposeful. This can be seen most clearly in the example of work activity. The goals that a person sets for himself are rarely achievable only through his own capabilities or external means available to him at the moment. This combination of circumstances is called “ problematic situation" The problematic nature of the existing situation is realized in several “stages”: from a vague feeling that “something is wrong”, to awareness of the need, then to identifying the problem and, finally, to formulating a goal.
Target is a subjective image (abstract model) of a non-existent but desired state of the environment that would solve the problem that has arisen. All subsequent activities that contribute to solving this problem are aimed at achieving the set goal, i.e. like the work of creating a system. In other words: system There is means to an end.
Here are a few simplified examples of systems designed to achieve certain goals.
In this article we will look at the definition of a system as a device made up of various structural elements. Here the issue of classification of systems and their characteristics will be touched upon, as well as the formulation of Ashby's law and the concept of general theory.
Introduction
The definition of a system is a multiple series of elements that are in a certain connection with each other and form an integrity.
The use of system as a term is determined by the need to emphasize various characteristics anything. As a rule, we are talking about a complex and huge structure of an object. It is often difficult to unambiguously disassemble such a mechanism, which is another reason for using the term “system”.
The definition of a system has a characteristic difference from “set” or “totality”, which manifests itself in the fact that the main term of the article tells us about order and integrity in a certain object. The system always has a certain pattern of its construction and functioning, and it also has specific development.
Definition of the term
There are various definitions of a system, which can be classified according to a wide variety of characteristics. This is a very broad concept that can be used in relation to almost everything and in any sciences. The content of the context about the system, the field of knowledge and the purpose of study and analysis also greatly influence the definition of this concept. The problem with exhaustive characterization lies in the use of both objective and subjective terms.
Let's look at some descriptive definitions:
- A system is a complex formation of interacting fragments of an integral “mechanism”.
- A system is a general accumulation of elements that are in some relation to each other, as well as related to the environment.
- A system is a set of interconnected components and parts, isolated from the environment, but interacting with it and working as a single whole.
The first definitions of a descriptive system relate to early period development of systems science. This terminology included only elements and a set of connections. Then they began to include various concepts, such as functions.
The system in everyday life
A person uses the definition of a system in the most various fields life and activities:
- When naming theories, for example Plato's philosophical system.
- When creating a classification.
- When creating a structure.
- When naming a set of established life norms and behavioral rules. An example is a system of legislation or moral values.
Systems research is a development in science that is studied in a wide variety of disciplines such as engineering, systems theory, systems analysis, systems science, thermodynamics, system dynamics, etc.
Characterization of a system through its constituent components
The basic definitions of a system include a number of characteristics, through the analysis of which one can, in one way or another, give it a comprehensive description. Let's consider the main ones:
- The limit of dividing a system into fragments is the definition of an element. From the point of view of the aspects considered, the tasks to be solved and the goal set, they can be classified and differ in different ways.
- A component is a subsystem that is presented to us in the form of a relatively independent particle of the system and at the same time possesses some of its properties and sub-goal.
- Communication is the relationship between the elements of a system and what they limit. Communication allows you to reduce the degree of freedom of fragments of the “mechanism”, but at the same time acquire new properties.
- Structure is a list of the most essential components and connections that are little changed during the current functioning of the system. It is responsible for the presence of the main properties.
- The main concept in defining a system is also the concept of goal. Goal is a multifaceted concept that can be defined depending on the context data and the stage of cognition at which the system is located.
The approach to defining a system also depends on concepts such as state, behavior, development and life cycle.
Presence of patterns
When analyzing the main term of the article, it will be important to pay attention to the presence of certain patterns. The first is the presence of limitations from the general environment. In other words, this is integrativeness, which defines the system as an abstract entity with integrity and clearly defined limits of its boundaries.
The system has synergy, emergence and holism, as well as a systemic and super-additive effect. Elements of the system may be interconnected between specific components, and with some they may not interact in any way, but the influence in any case is all-encompassing. It is produced through indirect interaction.
System definition is a term closely related to the phenomenon of hierarchy, which is the definition of various parts of a system as separate systems.
Classification data
Almost all publications studying systems theory and system analysis, are engaged in a discussion of how to properly classify them. The greatest diversity among the list of opinions about this distinction concerns the definition of complex systems. The majority of classifications are arbitrary, which are also called empirical. This means that most often authors arbitrarily use this term if necessary, characterize a specific problem to be solved. The distinction is most often made by defining the subject and the categorical principle.
Among the main properties, people most often pay attention to:
- The quantitative value of all components of the system, namely monocomponent or multicomponent.
- When considering a static structure, it is necessary to take into account the state of relative rest and the presence of dynamism.
- Relation to closed or open type.
- Characteristics of a deterministic system at a specific point in time.
- It is necessary to take into account homogeneity (for example, the population of organisms in a species) or heterogeneity (the presence various elements with different properties).
- When analyzing a discrete system, the patterns and processes are always clearly limited, and in accordance with their origin they are distinguished: artificial, natural and mixed.
- It is important to pay attention to the degree of organization.
The definition of a system, types of systems and the system as a whole is also associated with the issue of perceiving them as complex or simple. However, here is greatest number disagreements when trying to give an exhaustive list of characteristics according to which it is necessary to differentiate them.
The concept of a probabilistic and deterministic system
The definition of the term “system” created and proposed by Art. Beer, has become one of the most widely known and widespread throughout the world. He put a combination of levels of determinism and complexity into the basis of the differences and got probabilistic and deterministic. Examples of the latter are simple structures such as window shutters and machine shop designs. Complex ones are represented by computers and automation.
A probabilistic arrangement of elements in a simple form can be the toss of a coin, the movement of a jellyfish, the presence of statistical control in relation to product quality. Among complex examples of a system, one can recall inventory storage, conditioned reflexes etc. Super complex forms of probabilistic type: the concept of economics, brain structure, company, etc.
Ashby's Law
The definition of the concept of a system is closely related to Ashby's law. In the case of creating a certain structure in which the components have connections with each other, it is necessary to determine the presence of problem-solving ability. It is important that the system has diversity that exceeds that of the problem being worked on. The second feature is that the system has the ability to create such diversity. In other words, the design of the system must be regulated so that it can change its properties in response to changes in the conditions of the problem being solved or the manifestation of disturbance.
In the absence of such characteristics in the phenomenon under study, the system will not be able to satisfy the requirements for management tasks. It will become ineffective. It is also important to pay attention to the presence of diversity in the list of subsystems.
The concept of general theory
The definition of a system is not only its general characteristics, but also a set of various important aspects. One of them is the concept of general systems theory, which is presented in the form of a scientific and methodological concept for studying objects that form a system. It is interconnected with such a terminological unit as the “systems approach”, and is a list of its specified principles and methodologies. The first form of the general theory was put forward by L. Von Bertalanffy, and his idea was based on the recognition of the isomorphism of the fundamental statements responsible for the control and functionality of system objects.
SYSTEM
Adequate general philosophy. The basis of S.'s research is the principles of materialism. (the universal connection of phenomena, development, contradictions and etc.) . The most important role in this regard is played by dialectical materialism. system, which includes Philosopher ideas about the integrity of objects in the world, the relationship between the whole and parts, and the interaction of the environment with the environment (which is one of the conditions for the existence of S.), about general patterns functioning and development of systems, the structuring of each system object, the active nature of the activities of living and social systems, and T. n. The works of K. Marx, F. Engels, V. I. Lenin contain a wealth of material on Philosopher methodology for studying S. - complex developing objects (cm. Systematic approach).
For starting with 2nd floor. 19 V. penetration of the concept of S. into various areas of concrete science. knowledge was important in the creation of evolution. theories of Charles Darwin, theory of relativity, quantum physics, structural linguistics and etc. The task arose of constructing a strict definition of the concept of S. and developing operational methods for analyzing S. Intensive research in this direction began only in the 40-50s gg. 20 V., however, a number of specific scientific. the principles of S. analysis were formulated earlier in the tectology of A. A. Bogdanov, in the works of V. I. Vernadsky, in the praxeology of T. Kotarbinsky and etc. Proposed in con. 40's gg. L. Bertalanffy's program for constructing a “general theory of systems” was one of the attempts at a generalized analysis of system problems. In addition to this program, closely related to the development of cybernetics, in the 50-60s gg. a number of general system concepts and definitions of the concept S. (in the USA, USSR, Poland, Great Britain, Canada and etc. countries).
When defining the concept of system, it is necessary to take into account its close relationship with the concepts of integrity, structure, connection, element, relationship, subsystem and etc. Since the concept of S. has an extremely wide scope of application (virtually everyone can be considered a S.), to the extent that it is sufficiently complete, it presupposes the construction of a family of correspondences. definitions - both substantive and formal. Only within the framework of such a family of definitions is it possible to express basic system principles: integrity (the fundamental irreducibility of the properties of a system to the sum of the properties of its constituent elements and the irreducibility from the latter properties of the whole; each element, property and relationship of the system from its place, functions and T. d. within the whole), structure (descriptions of S. through the establishment of its structure, i.e. networks of connections and relationships S.; the conditionality of S.’s behavior is not so much her behavior dept. elements, how many properties of its structure), interdependence of S. and environment (S. forms and manifests its properties in the process of interaction with the environment, being the leading active component of interaction), hierarchy (each S. in turn can be considered as a S., and the S. studied in this case is one of the components of a broader S.), the multiplicity of descriptions of each S. (due to the fundamental complexity of each system, its adequate requires the construction of many different models, each of which describes only a specific system.) And etc.
Each system is characterized not only by the presence of connections and relationships between its constituent elements, but also by its inextricable unity with environment, in interaction with which S. demonstrates its integrity. Hierarchy, multi-level, structural properties are properties not only of the structure and morphology of S., but also of its behavior: dept. S. levels determine the determination. aspects of its behavior, and holistic functioning is the result of the interaction of all its sides and levels. Important feature most S., especially living ones, technical. and social systems, is the transfer of information in them and the presence of management processes. The most complex types of S. include purposeful S., which is subject to the achievement of a certain goal. goals, and self-organizing systems, capable of modifying their structure in the process of functioning. Many complex living and social systems are characterized by the presence of goals of different levels, often inconsistent with each other.
Creatures An aspect of revealing the content of the concept of S. is to highlight various types S. In the most general sense, S. can be divided into material and abstract. First (integral collections of material objects) in turn are divided into S. inorganic. nature (physical, geological, chemical and etc.) and living S., which they include as protozoa. S., and very complex biology, objects such as an organism, species, ecosystem. Special material living systems form social systems, which are extremely diverse in their types and forms. (starting from the simplest social associations and up to the socio-economic structure of society). Abstract S. are a human product. thinking; they can also be divided into different types (special S. represent concepts, hypotheses, theories, sequential change scientific theories and T. d.). Abstract symbols include scientific knowledge about S. of various types, as they are formulated in the general theory of S., specialist. theories of S. and etc. In science 20 V. Much is given to the study of language as S. (linguistic S.); As a result of the generalization of these studies, a common sign emerged - . The problems of substantiating mathematics and logic have caused intensive development of the principles of construction and the nature of formalizations., logical. WITH. (metal geek, metamathematics). The results of these studies are widely used in cybernetics, computing. technology and etc.
When using other bases for classifying systems, static and dynamic systems are distinguished. For static system, it is characteristic that it remains constant over time (e.g. gas in a limited volume - in a state of equilibrium). Dynamic S. changes its state over time (eg live). If knowledge of the values of the variables of a system at a given time makes it possible to establish the state of the system at any subsequent or any previous moment in time, then such a system is uniquely determined. For probabilistic (stochastic) C. knowledge of the values of variables at a given point in time allows us only to predict the distributions of the values of these variables at subsequent points in time. According to the nature of the relationship between S. and the environment, S. are divided into closed - closed (does not enter or release from them, only energy exchange occurs) and open - unclosed (there is a constant input of not only energy, but also matter). According to the second law of thermodynamics, each closed system ultimately reaches a state of equilibrium, in which all macroscopic particles remain unchanged. S. values and all macroscopic ones stop. processes (state of max, entropy and min free energy). The stationary state of open S. is a mobile equilibrium, in which everything is macroscopic. the quantities remain unchanged, but the macroscopic ones continue continuously. processes of input and output of substances.
In the process of developing systems research in 20 V. the tasks and functions of various forms of theoretical theory were more clearly defined. analysis of the entire complex of systemic problems. Basic task of specialists. theories S. - construction of concrete scientific. knowledge about different types and various aspects of S., while the main problems of the general theory of S. are concentrated around logical and methodological. principles of analysis of systems, construction of a metatheory of systems research.
Marx K. and Engels F., Works, T. 20; T. 26, part 2; T. 46, part 1; Lenin V.I., PSS, T. 18, T. 29; Rapoport A., Different approaches to the general theory of S., lane With Polish, V book: Systems research. Yearbook 1969, M., 1969; Gvishiani D. M., Organization and, M., 19722; Ogurtsov A.P., Stages of interpretation of systematic knowledge, in book: Systems research. Yearbook 1974, M., 1974; Sadovsky V.N., Foundations of the general theory S., M., 1974; Zakharov V. ?., ?ospelov D. ?., Khazatsky V. E., S. management, M., 1977; Uemov A.I., System approach and general theory S., M., 1978; Mesarovich M., Takahara Y., General theory of S.: Math. basics, lane With English, M., 1978; Afanasyev V.G., Systematicity and, M., 1980; Kuzmin V.P., The principle of consistency in the theory and methodology of K. Marx, ?., 19802; Modern systems research for the behavioral scientist. A sourcebook, ed. by W. Buckley, Chi 1968; Bertalanffy L. ?., General system theory. Foundations, development, applications, N.Y., 19692; Zadeh L A Polak E., System theory, ?. ?., 1969; Trends in general systems theory, ed. by G. J. Klir, N.Y., 1972; Laszlo E., Introduction to systems philosophy, N.Y., 1972; Sutherland J. W., Systems: analysis, administration and architecture, N.Y., 1975; Mattessich R., Instrumental reasoning and systems methodology, Dordrecht - Boston, 1978;
V. N. Sadovsky
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editor: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .
SYSTEM
(from Greek systema - whole)
the unification of some diversity into a clearly dissected whole, which in relation to the whole and other parts occupy their corresponding places. A philosophical system is a combination of fundamental and fundamental knowledge into some organic integrity, doctrine; cm. Method. In modern times, in particular thanks to Husserl’s phenomenology, they began to pay attention to the danger of the so-called. “system-creating thinking”, when they first try to create a system, and then, on its basis, construct and imitate, instead of cognizing it. Thinkers such as Kant and Hegel did not avoid this danger. It is a fair observation that quite often the most valuable thing in the philosophy of great system creators is what does not fit into their systems.
Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .
SYSTEM
(from the Greek σύστημα - a whole made up of parts; connection) - a set of elements with relationships and connections between them, forming a definition. integrity. This does not express everything, but only certain ones that are most common in modern times. literary aspects of the concept S.
The concept of S. is found for the first time among the Stoics, who interpreted it in ontological terms. sense, as global. Subsequently, the systematic nature of being was one of the foundations of the concepts of Schelling, Hegel, and others. However, the predominant use of the concept of S. in relation to knowledge, in epistemology and logic, the subjects of which were S. knowledge and methods of its construction. Kant pointed out the systematic nature of knowledge, demanding that knowledge should form not a system, but a system, in which the whole is more important than the parts. The same position was taken by Condillac, Schelling, and Hegel. Name "WITH." applied to philosophy. concepts, within the framework of which concepts are united according to a more or less consistently followed principle, as well as to certain scientific. theories (such as Euclid's geometry, S. formal logic).
Another aspect of the concept of systematization is associated with problems of systematization that arise in almost every science to define. stage of its development (such as Linnaeus’ systematics in biology, systematics in crystallography, etc.). This is due to the fact that the systematic nature of knowledge, i.e. its rather rigid organization by definition. rules, always acts as creatures. science.
The second birth of the concept of S., which made it one of the centers. categories of modern science can be classified as ser. 19th century, when Marx and Darwin put scientific the basis for a holistic study of such complex objects as society (organic socialism, according to Marx’s definition) and biology. . Philosophy the prerequisites for such an approach began to form. classic , subjected radical criticism mechanistic principles worldview and put forward the task of transition to new forms of science. thinking. Economical teachings of Marx and evolution. Darwin's theory developed these premises and implemented them in a specific scientific context. material. Methodologically, the most important thing in these concepts was the rejection of elementarism, i.e. from the search for the “last”, further indivisible parts, from which the whole can and should be explained. New principles of approach to complex objects were further developed in connection with the penetration of probabilistic methods into science, which significantly expanded the understanding of causality and destroyed the idea of unambiguous determinism as the only possible scheme for explaining the structure and “life” of complex objects.
At the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. Attempts arise to apply these new principles in the construction of specially scientific ones. concepts, especially in the field of biology and psychology (see Organismic theories). This also penetrates into other sciences. Saussure, who laid the foundation for structuralism in linguistics, relied on the consideration of language as a structure. Analysis of formal S. took means. in modern mathematics and math. logic. In cybernetics, the concept of cybernetics has become one of the central ones since the very emergence of this discipline. From ser. 20th century the approach to objects of research as S. is beginning to be applied in economics. science, semiotics, history, pedagogy, geography, geology and certain other sciences. At the same time, the center entered the S. era. place is occupied by the creation and operation of complex systems such as communication control, traffic control, modern technology. defense S., space devices, etc. The systems approach is becoming a serious factor in the organization of modern technology. production
The transition of science and technology to systematic studying complex objects and the obvious development of new principles and methods of analysis for this already in the first quarter. 20th century gave rise to attempts to create systemic concepts of a generalizing nature. One of the first concepts of this kind was A. A. Bogdanova, which for a number of reasons did not receive sufficient recognition during the period of its creation. The system-theoretical movement developed widely after the publication of L. Bertalanffy in the 50s. “general systems theory”, in contrast to this, a number of researchers put forward their own versions of general system concepts (W. Ross Ashby, O. Lange, R. Akof, M. Mesarovich, A. I. Uemov, A. A. Malinovsky, A. A. Lyapunov and others).
Intensive study of the diverse types of systems, carried out at different levels of analysis, from the purely empirical to the most abstract, has turned systems into a special direction in the development of modern science. science, ch. tasks of which in the present. time is the search and systematization of specific. principles systematic approach to the objects of study and the construction of analytical apparatuses adequate to such principles. However, the extremely wide framework of modern systems studies make effective generalizations in this area difficult.
Difficulties arise even when trying to construct a definition of the concept S. Firstly, this concept is extremely widely used in a variety of scientific and practical fields. activities with clearly different meanings: formalized symbolic symbols studied in logic and mathematics, and such symbols as a living organism or modern. S. management can hardly be considered as types of the same concept S. Secondly, epistemological. the goals of attributing the properties of a system to one or another object are not always obvious and justified: almost any object, material or ideal, can be represented as a system by identifying many elements in it, the relationships and connections between them and fixing it holistic characteristics; however, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to find such non-trivial problems, for the solution of which there would be a need to represent such objects as, for example, a pencil or a department. spoken language. At the same time, understanding as S. a wide variety of complex objects - biological, psychological, socio-economic, etc. – undoubtedly opens up new opportunities in their research. The search for a general, “standard” definition of the concept of system requires detailed ideas about different types of system objects, their specific and general properties; however, in the present At the time, such ideas are far from complete. Therefore, the most effective way to explicate the content of the concept of S. is for modern. stage of system research contains. considering the variety of meanings of the concept of S. The starting point for such consideration can be taken to understand S. as an integral set of interconnected elements. Typological such sets allows one to obtain a family of meanings for the concept of S., and some of them characterize not the concept of S. in general, but a specific definition. species C. Taken together, these meanings not only highlight all creatures. signs of S., but also contribute to the revelation of the creature system method knowledge. It is obvious that such a consideration, carried out on a content-intuitive plane, should be supplemented formal constructions, strictly describing at least certain features of S.
Like any other cognitive concept, the concept of S. is intended to characterize a certain and ideal object. The starting point for its construction is a set of elements, on the nature of No restrictions are imposed on them and they are considered as further indivisible, with this method consideration, unit of analysis. This implies the possibility, with other goals and methods of research, of a different division of the same object with the identification of other elements within the framework of a system of another level and, at the same time, the possibility of understanding the system under consideration as an element (or subsystem) of a system of a higher level. This means that when approaching an object as a S. any department. the system representation of this object is relative. It also follows that S. is usually characterized by a hierarchy of structure - consistency. S. of a lower level into S. of a higher level.
The elements of the set that forms the system are defined among themselves. relationships and connections. Systemic research involves not only establishing ways to describe these relationships and connections, but - what is especially important - identifying those of them that are system-forming, i.e. . ensure integrity - regarding the isolated functioning and, in some cases, the development of the system. Relationships and connections in the system are defined. in S.'s representation, they themselves can be considered as its elements, subject to the corresponding hierarchy. This makes it possible to construct different, non-coinciding sequences of inclusion of S. into each other, describing the object under study from different sides.
The set of interconnected elements that form the structure opposes the environment, and in interaction with the structure of the structure, it manifests and creates all its properties; this interaction is very different. In general, a distinction is made between strictly causal and statistical, probabilistic influences of the environment on the environment. The functioning of the environment in the environment is based on a definition. the orderliness of its elements, relationships and connections. Structurally and functionally, various aspects of ordering form the basis for identifying its subsystems in a system, and the division (decomposition) of a system into subsystems is relative and can be determined both by certain objective properties of the system and by the specifics of the research procedures used. The development of the concept of orderliness is the concepts of structure and organization S. A. A. Malinovsky proposed S. according to their structure, depending on the nature and “strength” of the connection of elements, into rigid, corpuscular (discrete) and stellar (mixed) (see, for example ., A. A. Malinovsky, Some issues of the organization of biological systems, in the book: Organization and management, M., 1968).
As an ordered, integral set of interconnected elements that has structure and organization, structure in its interaction with the environment demonstrates certain characteristics. behavior, which can be reactive (i.e. determined in all main points by environmental influences) or active (i.e. determined not only by the state and influences of the environment, but also by one’s own goals S., involving the transformation of the environment, its subordination to one’s needs). In this regard, in S. with active behavior, the most important place is occupied by the target characteristics of S. herself and her department. subsystems and the relationship of these characteristics (in particular, goals may be consistent with each other or contradict each other). Behavior is considered as a fundamental property of biological S. in the concept of activity physiology. Target (teleological) S. can only act as a means of analysis if we are talking about S. that are deprived of their own. goals. Distinguishing between synchronic and diachronic. aspects of behavior leads to the distinction between functioning and evolution, development of S.
Specific A feature of complexly organized systems is the presence in them of control processes, which, in particular, give rise to the need for an information approach to the study of systems, along with approaches from the visual field. matter and energy. It is management that ensures S.’s behavior and his purposeful direction. character, but specific. management features lead to the identification of multi-level, multi-purpose, self-organizing classes, etc. systems
Naturally, attempts formal definitions S.'s concepts take into account only some of the listed ones. signs of this concept, and the highlighted ones contain. the property determines the classification of a system carried out in a particular case. The desire to cover in the definition of the concept of a system the widest possible class of objects that are meaningfully and intuitively attributable to a system leads to the definition of a system as a relationship. For example, M. Mesarovic defines the concept of a system as a direct (Cartesian) product of an arbitrary family of sets SV1×. . . ×Vn, i.e. as defined on this family. In essence, this definition means the specification of S. by sequential. establishing relationships connecting the values that Vi-attributes of the object under study can take. Depending on the number of places of the relation that defines the system, a classification of system is established. Within the framework of the introduced formalism, Mesarović defines the concept of multi-level multi-purpose system, for which he formalizes the concept of the goal of system (see M. Mesarović, General systems theory and its mathematical foundations, "IEEE transactions on systems science and cybernetics", 1968, v. 4).
An understanding of S. close to Mesarovich’s definition was formulated by A. Hall and R. Fagen: S. is a set of objects together with the relationships between objects and between their attributes (see A. D. Hall, R. E. Fagen, Definition of system, “General Systems” , 1956, v. 1, p. 18). Since the attributes of objects can also be considered as objects, this definition comes down to understanding systems as relationships defined on a set of objects.
Understanding S. as a relationship is associated with the inclusion in the class of S. of such objects that are not conceptually and intuitively considered as S. Therefore, narrower definitions of S. are formulated in the literature, imposing more stringent requirements on the content of this concept. For example, Bertalanffy defines S. as elements in interaction (see L. von Bertalanffy, Allgemeine Systemtheorie, "Deutsche Universitätszeitung", 1957, H. 12, No. 5–6, S. 8–12), and distinguishes between closed (in which only an exchange of energy is possible) and open (in which an exchange of energy and matter occurs) S., and the stationary state of an open S. is defined as a state of mobile equilibrium, when everything is macroscopic. S.'s values are unchanged, but microscopically continue continuously. processes of input and output of substances. General equation open S., according to Bertalanffy, is an equation of the form dQi/dt=Ti+Pi(i=1, 2, ... n), where Qi is the definition. characteristic of the i-th element of the system, Ti – describing the speed of transfer of elements of the system, Pi – function describing the appearance of elements inside the system. At Τi=0, the equation turns into the equation of a closed system.
Based in fact on Bertalanffy's definition, Art. Beer proposed to classify systems simultaneously on two grounds - the degree of complexity of systems and the nature of their functioning, deterministic or probabilistic (see St. Beer, Cybernetics and production management, translated from English, M., 1963, pp. 22–36 ).
Defining a system using the concept of connection encounters difficulties in defining this concept itself (in particular, identifying system-forming connections) and the obviously narrower scope of the class of corresponding systems. Taking this into account, A. I. Uemov proposed defining a system as a set of objects on which rum is sold in advance. a relation with fixed properties, i.e. S= P, where m is a set of objects, P is a property, R is a relation. The order of transition from P to R and m is important here. In its dual definition S=R[(m)Р] S. is considered as a set of objects that have a predetermined. properties with fixed relationships between them. Based on the nature of m, P and R and the relationships between them, a classification of systems is carried out (see A.I. Uemov, S. and system parameters, in the book: Problems of formal analysis of systems, M., 1968).
In understanding the content of the concept of S., the definitions of the department play an important role. classes of S. One of the most studied classes is formal S., formalized languages studied in logic, metamathematics and certain branches of linguistics. Uninterpreted represents syntactic. S., interpreted – semantic. S. In logic and the methodology of science, methods for constructing formalized systems have been studied in detail (see the axiomatic method), and such systems themselves are used as a means of modeling reasoning (natural and scientific), natural. languages and for the analysis of a number of linguistics. problems arising in modern times. technology (computer language, human-computer communication, etc.). Various types of cybernetic systems are being widely studied. For example, G. Grenevsky introduces the concept of a relatively isolated system, the impact on which the rest of the Universe occurs only through the inputs of the system, and its impact on the Universe only through the outputs of the system (see. G. Grenevsky, Cybernetics without mathematics, translated from Polish, M., 1964, pp. 22–23). A. A. Lyapunov and S. V. Yablonsky define the concept of a control system through the indication of inputs and outputs, states, transition mode and the implementation of certain internal functions. information processing algorithm; mathematically, a control system is an oriented graph, the properties of which model the properties of the corresponding real systems (see "Problems of Cybernetics", issue 9, Moscow, 1964). Modern needs technology stimulated attempts to determine and study the properties of self-governing, self-optimizing, self-organizing systems (see Self-organizing system), as well as machine systems, large systems, and complex automated control systems. The specificity of large systems, in which other types of systems can be included as subsystems, is as follows: 1) large sizes– by the number of parts and functions performed; 2) the complexity of behavior as a very large number of relationships between elements of the system; 3) availability common goal WITH.; 4) statistical distribution of income in S. external influences; 5) competitive, adversarial nature of plural. large S.; 6) extensive automation based on the use of modern technology. will calculate. funds required human participation (operator); 7) long time frames for creating such systems.
The variety of substantive and formal definitions and uses of the concept of S. reflects the obvious creation and development of new principles of scientific methodology. cognition, focused on the study and construction of complex objects, and the diversity of these objects themselves, as well as possible tasks for their study. At the same time, the fact that all these developments use the concept of S. as a central one makes it possible to combine them within the framework of a systems approach as a special direction in the development of modern science. science. At the same time, the complexity and novelty of the problem give rise to the need at the same time. development of a systematic approach in several spheres. These include:
1) Development of philosophy. foundations and prerequisites of the systems approach (L. Bertalanffy, A. Rappoport, K. Boulding, R. Ackoff, W. Ross Ashby, etc.; this area is also being developed by researchers who take the position of dialectical materialism - O. Lange, A. I. Uemov, Y. Kamarit, etc.). The subject of analysis here is both S., i.e. attempts
constructing a systemic “picture of the world”, identifying the general properties of system objects, and epistemological. aspects of research C – construction, analysis and systematization of the categorical apparatus of the systems approach.
2) Construction of the logic and methodology of systemic research, carried out by decree. authors, as well as M. Mesarovic, M. Toda and E. Shuford, a number of owls. logicians. Basic The content of work in this area consists of attempts to formalize the concepts of a systems approach, the development of specific. research procedures and construction of corresponding logical. calculus.
3) Special scientific system developments – application of the principles of a systems approach to various industries knowledge, both theoretical and empirical. This one is present. time the most developed and extensive.
4) Construction of various variants of general systems theory in the narrow sense. After the discovery of the inconsistency of the global claims of Bertalanffy’s “general theory of systems”, work in this area is aimed rather at creating a more or less generalized concept that formulates the principles of research of S. definition. kind, than on the construction of a universal theory, relating in principle to any S. Apparently, over qualities. concepts of S. theory (similar, for example, to Bertalanffy’s concept) will build on formalized representations to varying degrees generalities, from more general and abstract to particular ones, dealing with departments. tasks and problems of theory S. If in the present. Nowadays there is a noticeable diversity of qualities in this area. understanding of the theory of logic and the formal apparatuses used (set theory, algebra, probability theory, mathematical logic, etc.), then at subsequent stages of development the task of synthesis will become a priority.
Lit.: Bogdanov A. A., Essays on General Organizational Science, Samara, 1921; Schelling F.V.I., S. transcendental idealism, M., 1936; Condillac E. B., Treatise on S. ..., M., 1938; Good G. X., Makol R. E., Systems Engineering, trans. from English, M., 1962; Khailov K.M., Problems of systemic organization in theoretical science. biology, "Journal of General Biology", 1963, v. 24, No. 5; Afanasyev V.G., The problem of integrity in philosophy and biology, M., 1964; Shchedrovitsky G.P., Problems of system research methodology, M., 1964; Ashby W.R., S. and, "VF", 1964, No. 3; Problems of research of structures and structures. Materials for the conference, M., 1965; Sadovsky V.N., Methodological. problems of studying objects that represent S., in the book: Sociology in the USSR, vol. 1, M., 1965; General theory S., trans. from English, M., 1966; Blauberg I.V., Yudin E.G., System approach in social research, "VF", 1967, No. 9; Studies on the general theory of S., Sat. translations, M., 1969; System research - 1969. Yearbook, M., 1969; Blauberg I.V., Sadovsky V.N., Yudin E.G., System approach: prerequisites, problems, difficulties, M., 1969; Kremyansky V. I., Structural levels living matter, M., 1969; Problems of systems research methodology, ed. I. V. Blauberga et al., M., 1970; Vertalanffу L. von [a. o.], General system theory: a new approach to unity of science, "Human biology", 1951, v. 23, No. 4; General systems. Yearbook of the society for general systems research, v. 1–13–, Ann Arbor, 1956–68–; Mathematical systems theory, v. 1–4–, N.Y., 1965–68–; IEEE transactions on systems science and cybernetics, v. 1–, 1965–; Bertalanffy L. von, General system theory. Foundations, development, applications, N.Y., 1968; Systems theory and biology, ed. M. Mesarovic, N.Y., 1968; Unity and diversity of systems, ed. R. D. S. Jones, N. Y., 1969.
V. Sadovsky, E. Yudin. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .
SYSTEM
SYSTEM (from the Greek σύστεμα - a whole made up of parts, a connection) is a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, which forms a certain integrity, unity. Having undergone a long historical evolution, the concept of “system” from the middle. 20th century becomes one of the key philosophical, methodological and special scientific concepts. In modern scientific and technical knowledge, the development of problems related to the research and design of systems various kinds, is carried out within the framework of the systems approach, general theory of systems, various special theories of systems, system analysis, in cybernetics, systems engineering, synergetics, catastrophe theory, thermodynamics of nonequilibrium systems, etc.
The first ideas about the system arose in ancient philosophy, which put forward an ontological interpretation of the system as orderliness and integrity of being. In ancient Greek philosophy and science (Plato, Aristotle, Stoics, Euclid) the idea of systematic knowledge (integrity of knowledge, axiomatic construction of logic, geometry) was developed. The ideas about the systematic nature of being, received from antiquity, developed both in the systemic-ontological concepts of Spinoza and Leibniz, and in the constructions of scientific systematics of the 17-18 centuries, which strived for a natural (rather than teleological) interpretation of the systematic nature of the world (for example, the classification of K. Linnaeus) . In modern philosophy and science, the concept of a system was used in the study of scientific knowledge; At the same time, the range of proposed solutions was very wide - from the denial of the systemic nature of scientific- theoretical knowledge(Condillac) to the first attempts at philosophical substantiation of the logical-deductive nature of knowledge systems (I. G. Lambert and others).
The principles of the systemic nature of knowledge were developed in German classical philosophy: according to Kant, scientific knowledge is a system in which the whole dominates the parts; Schelling and Hegel interpreted the systematic nature of cognition as essential requirement theoretical thinking. In Western philosophy, the 2nd half. 19-20 centuries contains formulations, and in some cases, solutions to some problems of systemic research: the specifics of theoretical knowledge as a system (neo-Kantianism), features of the whole (holism, Gestalt psychology), methods for constructing logical and formalized systems (neopositivism). Certain contributions to the development of philosophical and methodological grounds systems research contributed .
For those starting from the 2nd floor. 19th century penetration of the concept of a system into various areas of concrete scientific knowledge important had the creation of the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin, the theory of relativity, quantum physics, and later structural linguistics. The task arose of constructing a strict definition of the concept of a system and developing operational methods for analyzing systems. The undisputed priority in this regard belongs to the work developed by A. A. Bogdanov in the beginning. 20th century concepts of tektology - universal organizational science. This theory did not receive worthy recognition at that time and only in the 2nd half. 20th century the significance of Bogdanov’s tectology was adequately assessed. Some concrete scientific principles of systems analysis were formulated in the 1930s and 40s. in the works of V.I. Vernadsky, in the praxeology of T. Kotarbinsky. Proposed in the late 1940s. L. Bertalanffy's program for constructing a “general theory of systems” was one of the attempts at a generalized analysis of system problems. It is this program of systems research that has gained the greatest popularity in the world scientific community of the 2nd half. 20th century and its development and modification is largely related to the systemic movement that arose at that time in science and technical disciplines. In addition to this program in the 1950-60s. a number of system-wide concepts and definitions of the concept of a system were put forward - within the framework of cybernetics, systems approach, systems analysis, systems engineering, theory of irreversible processes, etc.
When defining the concept of a system, it is necessary to take into account its close relationship with the concepts of integrity, structure, connection, element, relationship, subsystem, etc. Since the concept of a system has an extremely wide scope of application (almost every object can be considered as a system), its fairly complete understanding presupposes construction of a family of corresponding definitions - both substantive and formal. Only within the framework of such a family of definitions is it possible to express the basic system principles: integrity (the fundamental irreducibility of the properties of a system to the sum of the properties of its constituent elements and the irreducibility of the properties of the whole from the latter; the dependence of each element, property and relationship of the system on its place, functions, etc. within whole); structurality (the ability to describe a system through establishing its structure, i.e., a network of connections and relationships; the behavior of the system is conditioned not so much by the behavior of its individual elements as by the properties of its structure); interdependence of the system and the environment (the system forms and manifests its properties in the process of interaction with the environment, being the leading active component of the interaction); hierarchy (each component of the system, in turn, can be considered as a system, and the system being studied in this case is one of the components of a broader system); multiplicity of descriptions of each system (due to the fundamental complexity of each system, its adequate knowledge requires the construction of many different models, each of which describes only a certain aspect of the system), etc.
Each system is characterized not only by the presence of connections and relationships between its constituent elements, but also by its inextricable unity with the environment, in interaction with which the system manifests its integrity. Hierarchy is inherent not only in the structure and morphology of the system, but also in its behavior: individual levels of the system determine certain aspects of its behavior, and holistic functioning is the result of the interaction of all its sides and levels. An important feature of systems, especially living, technical and social ones, is the transfer of information into them; Management processes play a significant role in them. The most complex types of systems include goal-directed systems, the behavior of which is subordinated to the achievement of certain goals, and self-organizing systems that are capable of modifying their structure in the process of functioning. Many complex living and social systems are characterized by the presence of goals of different levels, often inconsistent with each other.
An essential aspect of revealing the content of the concept of a system is the identification of different types of systems. In the most general terms, systems can be divided into material and abstract. The first (integral sets of material objects) in turn are divided into systems of inorganic nature (physical, geological, chemical, etc.) and living systems, which include the simplest biological systems, and very complex biological objects type of organism, species, ecosystem. A special class of material living systems is formed by social systems, diverse in types and forms (from the simplest social associations to the socio-economic structure of society). Abstract systems are products of human thinking; they can also be divided into many different types (special systems are concepts, hypotheses, theories, sequential change scientific theories etc.). Abstract systems also include scientific knowledge about systems of various types, as they are formulated in the general theory of systems, special theories systems, etc. In science of the 20th century. great attention is devoted to the study of language as a system (linguistic system); As a result of the generalization of these studies, a general theory of signs emerged - semiotics. The problems of substantiating mathematics and logic gave rise to intensive development of the principles of construction and the nature of formalized systems (metalogics, mathematics). The results of these studies are widely used in cybernetics, computer technology, computer science, etc.
When using other bases for classifying systems, static and dynamic systems are distinguished. It is characteristic of a static system that its state remains constant over time (for example, a gas in a limited volume is in a state of equilibrium). Dynamic system changes its state over time (for example, a living organism). If knowledge of the values system variables at a given moment in time allows us to establish the state of the system at any subsequent or any previous moment in time, then such a system is uniquely determined. For a probabilistic (stochastic) system, knowledge of the values of variables at a given point in time allows us to predict the probability of the distribution of the values of these variables in the village
next moments in time. According to the nature of the relationship between the system and the environment, systems are divided into closed (there is no substance entering or leaving them, only energy is exchanged) and open (not only energy, but also matter is constantly entering). According to the second law of thermodynamics, every closed system ultimately reaches a state of equilibrium, in which all macroscopic quantities of the system remain unchanged and all macroscopic processes cease (state maximum entropy and minimum free energy). The stationary state of an open system is a mobile equilibrium, in which all macroscopic quantities remain unchanged, but macroscopic processes of input and output of matter continue.
The main task of specialized systems theories is to build concrete scientific knowledge about different types and different aspects of systems, while the main problems of general systems theory are concentrated around the logical and methodological principles of systems analysis and the construction of a meta-theory of systems research.
from Greek systema - connection, whole) - English. system; German System. 1. An ordered set of elements that are interconnected and form some kind of integral unity. 2. Order due to systematic, correct location parts in a certain connection, strict sequence actions, for example, at work; accepted established order 3. Form, method of arrangement, organization of parts. (for example, S. state, S. electoral). 4. Social system. 5. A set of economic units, institutions, related in their tasks and organizationally united into a single whole.
Great definition
Incomplete definition ↓
SYSTEM
Greek systema - composed of parts, connected) is a category denoting an object organized as an integrity, where the energy of connections between the elements of a system exceeds the energy of their connections with the elements of other systems, and defines the ontological core of the systems approach. The forms of objectification of this category in different versions of the approach are different and are determined by the theoretical and methodological concepts and means used.
Characterizing S. as such in the most general terms, they traditionally speak of the unity and integrity of interconnected elements. The semantic field of such a concept includes the terms “connection”, “element”, “whole”, “unity”, as well as “structure” - a diagram of connections between elements. Historically, the term S. originates in antiquity and is included in the context of philosophical searches general principles organization of thinking and knowledge. To understand the genesis of the concept of S., the inclusion of mythological ideas about the Cosmos, the World Order, the One, etc. is fundamental. in the context of philosophical and methodological reasoning itself. For example, the thesis formulated in antiquity that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts no longer had only a mystical meaning, but also fixed the problem of the organization of thinking. The Pythagoreans and Eleatics solved the problem of not only explaining and understanding the world, but also the ontological justification of the rational procedures they used (reducing one knowledge to another, using schematic images - drawings, introducing elements of evidence, etc.). Number and Being are principles that not so much explain and describe the world, but rather express the point of view of the becoming rational thinking and the requirement to think about the unity of the many. Plato expresses this requirement explicitly: “The existing one is at the same time one and many, both a whole and parts...”. Only the unity of the many, i.e. S. may, according to Plato, be an object of knowledge. The Stoics' identification of S. with the world order can only be understood taking into account all these factors. Thus, the genesis of the concept of socialism had mainly epistemological and methodological significance, setting the principle of organizing thinking and systematizing knowledge. In the subsequent history of philosophy, up to the beginning of the 19th century, a purely epistemological interpretation of the concept of socialism was established. In the 16th-18th centuries. S. called objects similar to Euclid's Elements. Kant wrote: “By S. I mean the unity of diverse knowledge, united by one idea.” However, starting from the 19th century. Ontological and naturalistic interpretations of S are spreading. Systematicity begins to be interpreted as a property of objects of knowledge, and connections between different layers of knowledge - as fixation of connections in the objects themselves. The question now is not so much about forming a S. of knowledge, but about reproducing an object in knowledge as a S. This turn gives rise to a number of completely new and specific problems. Are connections material? What can be considered an element? Can S. develop? How is S. related to historical processes? etc.
Development of engineering approach and technology in the 20th century. opens the era of artificial and technical development of solar power. Now solar power is not only being researched, but is being designed and constructed. At the same time, an organizational and managerial attitude is being formalized: management objects also begin to be considered as systems. This leads to the identification of more and more new classes of systems: goal-oriented, self-organizing, reflexive, etc. The term “S.” is included in the vocabulary of almost all professional fields. Since the middle of the 20th century. Research on the general theory of S. and developments in the field of a systems approach are being widely developed, and an interprofessional and interdisciplinary systems movement is taking shape. Nevertheless, the categorical and ontological status of “S. as such” remains largely uncertain. This is caused, on the one hand, by fundamental differences in the professional attitudes of supporters of the systems approach, on the other hand, by attempts to extend this concept to extremely wide circle phenomena and, finally, the procedural limitations of the traditional concept of S. At the same time, in all the diversity of interpretations of S., two approaches continue to be preserved. From the point of view of the first of them (it can be called ontological or, more strictly, naturalistic), systematicity is interpreted as a fundamental property of objects of knowledge. Then the task of systemic research becomes the study of specifically systemic properties of an object: identifying elements, connections and structures in it, dependencies between connections, etc. Moreover, elements, connections, structures and dependencies are interpreted as “natural”, inherent in the “nature” of the objects themselves, and in this sense objective. S. in this approach is considered as an object that has its own laws of life. Another approach (it can be called epistemological-methodological) is that S. is considered as an epistemological construct that does not have a natural nature and specifies a specific way of organizing knowledge and thinking. Then systematicity is determined not by the properties of the objects themselves, but by the purposefulness of activity and the organization of thinking. The difference in goals, means and methods of activity inevitably produces a multiplicity of descriptions of the same object, which in turn gives rise to an orientation toward their synthesis and configuration (system-mental-activity - SMD methodology).
The traditional point of view is that the behavior and properties of a system, its integrity and internal unity are determined primarily by its structure. The functioning of structure and the material realization of its elements in this case are secondary in relation to the structure and are determined by it. New production problems are caused, in turn, by the development of new areas human activity, primarily technical and social design. If in classical natural science analysis the research movement was carried out from materially identified objects to ideally represented processes and mechanisms inherent in these objects, then in design they go the opposite way: from function to the process of functioning and only then to the material that ensures functioning. The “process” and “material” of its implementation form the initial categorical opposition of the concept of S. in SMD methodology. Other categorical layers of structure arise along the way of “implementation” of the process on the material: “functional structure,” which specifies the spatial mode of the process and its synchrony; “organization of the material,” which represents the result of the “imposition” or “imprinting” of structure on the material; “morphology” is the material content of the functional places of the structure. The connections and relationships of these categories with each other are specified using a number of other categories, in particular, such as “mechanism”, “form”, “design”.
Thus, the concept "C." formalized as a specific organization and hierarchy of categories. From this point of view, to consider any object in the form of a system means to present it in four categorical layers: 1) processes; 2) functional structure; 3) organization of the material; 4) morphology. Then the layer of morphology can be again decomposed into layers of processes, structures and organizations, and this decomposition will form the second level of system description. And such an operation can be repeated until a representation of the object of the required level of specificity is obtained. On this basis, the SMD methodology has been sufficiently developed detailed diagram polysystem analysis, which has received a number of promising applications. First of all, this is an opportunity to combine any procedural ideas about S. with structural and organizational ones. Another advantage was the effective solution to the problem of interaction between structures.
Great definition
Incomplete definition ↓
