Want to be a better thinker?
"Thinking in Systems" by Donella Meadows is the top book on Amazon for System Theory with 1,000+ ratings.
Here are some highlights (thread ↓)
— Donella Meadows
— Diana Wright
— Donella Meadows
— Donella Meadows
— Donella Meadows
"Everything we think we know about the world is a model."
"Our models usually have a strong congruence with the world."
"However, and conversely, our models fall far short of representing the world fully."
"These are the take-home lessons, the concepts and practices that penetrate the discipline of systems so deeply that one begins, however imperfectly, to practice them not just in one’s profession, but in all of life."
— Donella Meadows
"Mental flexibility—the willingness to redraw boundaries, to notice that a system has shifted into a new mode, to see how to redesign structure—is a necessity when you live in a world of flexible systems."
"If I could, I would add an eleventh commandment to the first ten: Thou shalt not distort, delay, or withhold information."
"Honoring information means above all avoiding language pollution—making the cleanest possible use we can of language. Second, it means expanding our language so we can talk about complexity."
"Pretending that something doesn’t exist if it’s hard to quantify leads to faulty models."
"Especially where there are great uncertainties, the best policies not only contain feedback loops, but meta-feedback loops—loops that alter, correct, and expand loops."
"Aim to enhance total systems properties, such as growth, stability, diversity, resilience, and sustainability—whether they are easily measured or not."
"Aid and encourage the forces and structures that help the system run itself ... Before you charge in to make things better, pay attention to the value of what’s already there."
"'Intrinsic responsibility' means that the system is designed to send feedback about the consequences of decision making directly and quickly and compellingly to the decision makers."
"Systems thinking has taught me to trust my intuition more and my figuring-out rationality less, to lean on both as much as I can, but still to be prepared for surprises."
"Let’s face it, the universe is messy. It is nonlinear, turbulent, and dynamic ... That’s what makes the world interesting, that’s what makes it beautiful, and that’s what makes it work."
"In a strict systems sense, there is no long-term, short-term distinction. Phenomena at different time-scales are nested within each other."
"In spite of what you majored in, or what the textbooks say, or what you think you’re an expert at, follow a system wherever it leads. It will be sure to lead across traditional disciplinary lines."
"Living successfully in a world of complex systems means expanding not only time horizons and thought horizons; above all, it means expanding the horizons of caring."
"Systems thinking can only tell us to do that. It can’t do it ... but it can lead us to the edge of what analysis can do and then point beyond—to what can and must be done by the human spirit."
System Structure & Behavior
Why Systems Work So Well
Why Systems Surprise Us
8 System Traps & Opportunities
12 Leverage Points
15 General Systems Wisdoms
& More
https://t.co/0zK4KaaY11
More from Culture
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
