Re: Closed vs. Open Environments

Bruce Buchanan (buchanan@hookup.net)
Fri, 15 Sep 1995 10:17:22 -0500


Bruce Edmonds writes (15 Sep 1995):

> Closed vs. Open Environments:...Example: the Universe (i.e. all there is) is,
> by definition, closed ...

It seems to me fundamental to an adequate discussion of closed and open
systems to recognize that, while mental models or conceptual systems are
perhaps by definition closed, or at least fixed for purposes of
consideration at some point in time, the universe *as experienced* is in
fact always open in its potential - for more information and future action.

> The power of proof in formal systems, means that we can't wish away
> their limitations, because we can prove that they exist. We can't
> PROVE that similar limitations exist for us, life, etc. so the
> temptation is to pretend that they don't exist ...

It may depend upon how one interprets the term *informal* but in most
organizations the informal social structure is also infinitely open and
unpredictable. And it is always dangerous to pretend to a knowledge of
definitive truth. Among other hazards, this leads easily to authoritarian
political systems.

> The hubris of mankind (architypally associated with intellectual
> assupmtions at the beginning of this centuary in W.Europe) will
> always mean that we will seek to ignore that we are (and always will
> be) severly limited beings...

Right!

Cheers.

Bruce Buchanan
"We are all in this together!"