GENERAL SYSTEMS THEORY - THE TOPOLOGY OF MIND DEVELOPMENT
By Gregory MitchellSystems theory studies the structure and properties of systems in terms of relationships, from which new properties of wholes emerge. It was established as a science by Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Anatol Rapoport, Kenneth E. Boulding, William Ross Ashby, Margaret Mead, Gregory Bateson and others in the 1950's. Systems theory, in its transdisciplinary role, brings together theoretical principles and concepts from ontology, philosophy of science, physics, biology and engineering. Applications are found in numerous fields including geography, sociology, political science, organizational theory, management, psychotherapy and economics among others.
The concept of system, though it seems to be intrinsic to human thinking, has been extensively employed and developed over the last few decades, due in a large measure to contributions made by Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972), a Viennese professor of biology. He worked to identify structural, behavioral and developmental features common to particular classes of living organisms. One approach was to look over the empirical universe and pick out certain general phenomena which are found in many different disciplines, and to seek to build up general theoretical models relevant to these phenomena, e.g., growth, homeostasis, evolution. Another approach was to arrange the empirical fields in a hierarchy of complexity of organization of their basic 'individuality' or units of behavior, and to try to develop a level of abstraction appropriate to each. Examples are generalizations on the levels of cells, simple organs, open self-maintaining organisms, small groups of organisms, society and the universe. The latter approach implies a hierarchical "systems of systems" view of the world.
Bertalanffy's ideas were developed into a General Systems Theory. He defined a general system as any theoretical system of interest to more than one discipline. This new vision of reality is based on awareness of the essential interrelatedness and inter-dependence of all phenomena - physical, biological, psychological, social and cultural. It transcends orthodox disciplinary and conceptual boundaries.
The systems view looks at the world in terms of relationships and integration. Systems are integrated wholes whose properties cannot be reduced to those of smaller units. Instead of concentrating on bsic building blocks or substances, the systems approach emphasizes the principles of organization. Every organism, from the smallest bacterium through the range of plant, animals and human beings - plus the family, society and the planet as whole - is an integrated whole and thus a living system.
Another important aspect of systems is their intrinsically dynamic nature. Their forms are not rigid structures but are flexible yet stable manifestations of underlying processes. Systems thinking is process thinking; form becomes associated with process, interrelation with interaction, and opposities are unified through oscillation.
Human survival, in Bertalanffy's view, was the paramount purpose for cultivating the uncommon sense of General Systems Theory. Our civilization is experiencing enormous difficulties due to lack of ethical, ethological and ecological criteria in the manifestation of human affairs, which are currently only concerned with the management of larger profits for a small minority of privileged humans. Bertalanffy believed that the need for a general systems consciousness was a matter of life and death, not just for ourselves but also for all future generations on our planet. He advocated a new global morality, an ethos which does not center on individual values alone, but on the adaptation of Mankind, as a global system, to its new environment... "We are dealing with emergent realities; no longer with isolated groups of men, but with a systemically interdependent global community."
The influence of Systems Theory on Mind DevelopmentThe hierarchical structure of Mind Development has its roots in the General Systems Theory of von Bertalanffy; thus the structure of Mind Development can only be fully grasped from the perspective of his theory of systems. 30 years in advance of other scientists, Bertalanffy became dissatisfied with reductive (merely mechanical) explanations of the behavior of living organisms. Bertalanffy's answer to these observations, was that life is first and foremost a system of self-organization, a developmental unfolding at progressively higher levels of differentiation and organised complexity. These wholes are not reducible to their parts, since the factor of life depends upon the interaction of the parts as a system: the whole is more than the sum of the parts. The organism, moreover, is dynamic, not static, open not closed, and searches spontaneously and actively for stimulation, rather than waiting passively to respond.
However, Bertalanffy was not content to limit his theory to biology. If the organism was an open system interacting with its environment, could biology as a discipline do anything less? He joked about psychologists who claimed that their discipline was at a crossroads. Psychology is always at a crossroads and the mind of Man a meeting point for symbolic systems. From this conviction, General Systems Theory was founded: a discipline of disciplines, with especial emphases on psycho-biology and ecology.
Mind Development is a system, and as such, it reflects the concept of system that has gained pivotal influence in psychology. Many of the psychologists that we have drawn from have referred to General Systems Theory, or some part of it. This trend in modern psychology has appeared as a reaction to the sterility of behaviorism. General Systems Theory represents an expanded paradigm for psychology, without which much of present-day psychology would be in a state of arrested development. The applied science of Mind Development is cognitive psychology at the level of System. The expanded contextual field provided by General Systems Theory has elevated cognitive psychology from the level of description to the level of prescription.
The malaise of behavioristic psychologyOver much of the last century American psychology was dominated by the concept of the reactive organism, or by the model of man as robot. Until quite recently, this conception was common to all major schools of American psychology, including behaviorism, learning and motivation theories, cybernetics, the concept of the brain as a computer, and so on. According to a leading personality theorist (Murray, '62):
"Man is described as a computer, an animal, or an infant. His destiny is determined by genes, instincts, accidents, early conditionings and reinforcements, cultural and social forces. Love is a secondary drive based on hunger and oral sensations, or a reaction formation to an innate underlying hate. In the majority of our models of personality, there are no provisions for creativity, and no fitting recognition of the power of ideals."
By reducing the concept of human nature to its lowest common denominator, no margins of freedom for voluntary decisions remain; no ground at all for any hope that the human race can save itself from the fatality that continuing socio-economic trends would seem to predict. Systemic properties are destroyed when a system is dissected, either physically or theoretically, into isolated elements. Although we can discern individual parts in any system, the nature of the whole is always different from the mere sum of its parts.
The tenets of robot psychology have been extensively criticized; the theory nevertheless has remained dominant for obvious reasons. The concept of Man as robot was the basis for behavioral engineering in commercial, economic and political propaganda; the expanding economy of the 'affluent society' could not subsist without such manipulation. By manipulating humans into homeostatically adjusted conformists, consumers and opportunists, the principles of academic psychology were identical with those of the commercialisation of Man.
Modern society provided a large-scale experiment in manipulative psychology. If the principles of robot psychology are correct, conditions of tension and stress should lead to increase of mental disorder. Likewise, mental health should improve with better material standards and by avoiding the repression of infantile instincts through the use of permissive education in the context of a self-indulgent society.
This behavioristic experiment led to results contrary to expectation. World War II - a period of extreme physiological tension and psychological stress - did not produce an increase in neurotic disorders, apart from direct shock effects such as combat neurosis. In contrast, 'the affluent society' produced an unprecedented number of mentally ill. The superficial reduction of tension and the immediate gratification of instinct gave rise to novel forms of mental disorder; for example, 'existential' neurosis. This form of mental dysfunction originates not from repressed drives, unfulfilled survival needs or from imposed stress, but from an inner conflict: the meaninglessness of life caused by a suppression of self-actualization. There is a suspicion that the recent increase in schizophrenia may be caused by the 'other-directedness' of Man in modern society. A new type of juvenile delinquency has appeared: crime that is committed, not for want or need, but 'for the fun of it', born from the emptiness of life.
Theoretical and applied psychology were led into a malaise regarding basic principles. This discomfort, and the trend towards a new orientation, were expressed in many ways, such as the neo-Freudian schools and Piaget's child psychology; however the one common principle in all of these trends is that Man is an active personality system: not a reactive automaton or robot.
Mind is an essential property of living systems. As Gregory Bateson said, "Mind is the essence of being alive." From the systems point of view, life is not a substance or force and mind is not an entity interacting with matter. Both life and mind are manifestations of the same set of systemic processes, a set of processes that represent the dynamics of self-organization. The human mind is a multi-leveled and integrated pattern of processes that represent the dynamics of human self-organization; this complex system is the nature of consciousness.
The current interest in General Systems Theory is sustained by the hope that it may contribute towards a more adequate conceptual framework for psychology. In Mind Development, that hope has become an actuality. Following are some of the principle concepts of systems theory and their application to psychology...
EquifinalityThe principle of Equifinality states that in any closed system the final state is determined by the initial conditions: e.g., the motion of a planetary system where the position of the planets at a certain point in time are unequivocally determined by their positions at time zero. Or in a chemical equilibrium, the final concentrations of the reactants depend on the initial concentrations. If either the initial conditions or the process is altered, the final state will be changed. This is not so in Open Systems. Here the same final state may be reached from varying initial conditions and in different ways. The ends remain the same while the means differ.
In psychology, equifinality refers to how different early experiences in life (e.g., parental divorce, physical abuse, parental substance abuse) can all lead to a similar outcome (e.g., childhood depression). In other words, there are many different early experiences that can lead to the same psychological disorder.
Organism and PersonalityIn contrast to physical forces like gravity or electricity, the phenomena of life are found only in individual entities called organisms. Any organism is a system, that is, a dynamic order of parts and processes, standing in mutual interaction. Likewise, psychological phenomena are found only in individualized entities, which in Man are called personalities. Whatever else personality may be, it has the properties of a system.
The concept of the psycho-physical organism as system contrasts with its conception as a mere collection of units such as reflexes, sensations and drives. Psycho-pathology clearly shows mental dysfunction as a system disturbance, rather than as a loss of single functions.
The Active OrganismEven without external stimuli, the organism is not a passive but an intrinsically active system. Behaviorist theory presupposed that the primary element of behavior is response to external stimuli; recent research however, demonstrates with increasing clarity that autonomous activity of the nervous system, residing in the system itself, is to be considered primary. In evolution and development, reactive mechanisms appear to be super-imposed upon primitive, innate rhythmic-locomotor activities (breathing, walking, etc.). But the stimulus does not cause a process in an otherwise inert or 'closed' system; it only modifies processes in an independently active system.
The living organism maintains a dis-equilibrium called the steady state of an open system, and thus is able to dispense existing potential or 'tension' in spontaneous activity or in response to releasing (freeing) stimuli; it even advances towards higher order and organization. The robot model of a closed system considers response to stimuli and the reduction of tension, as re-establishment of an equilibrium disturbed by outside factors. The robot model, however, only partly covers animal behavior and does not cover an essential portion of human behavior at all.
Even at the most primitive level of life, autonomous (independent) activity is primary; it is found in brain function (the Reticular Activating System) and in psychological processes. Even rats seem to 'look' for problems, and the healthy child or adult extend themselves far beyond the reduction of tensions or gratification of basic needs. Natural behavior encompasses innumerable activities beyond the stimulus-response scheme, from exploring, play and rituals in animals to self-realizing creative, economic, intellectual, aesthetic and religious pursuits in Man.
The complete relaxation of tensions, as in sensory-deprivation experiments, is not an ideal state but is apt to produce insufferable anxiety, hallucinations and other psychosis-like symptoms. Prisoner's psychosis, and retirement or weekend neuroses, demonstrate that the psycho-physical organism needs an amount of tension and activity for healthy existence.
It is a symptom of mental disease that spontaneity is impaired. The patient increasingly becomes a stimulus-response machine, is pushed by biological drives and obsessed with the need for immediate gratification. The model of the passive organism is a quite adequate description of the stereotype behavior of compulsives, people with brain damage and incipient catatonics. But by the same token, this emphasizes that normal behavior is different.
HomeostasisAlthough many psycho-physiological systems are regulated according to the principle of Homeostasis (maintaining constant levels), there are apparent limitations to this principle. Generally, the principle of homeostasis is not applicable to:
Dynamic regulations - i.e., regulations not based upon fixed mechanisms, as with a robot, but taking place within a system functioning openly as a whole, with independent inference and motivation;
Spontaneous activities;
Processes whose goal is not reduction of tension but the building up of tensions; and
Processes of autonomous learning and development, i.e. processes beyond those serving the primary needs of self-preservation and survival. The homeostasis model is applicable in psycho-pathology because non-homeostatic functions, as a rule, decline in mental patients. The progress of mental disease may be described as a series of defense mechanisms, settling down at ever lower homeostatic levels until mere preservation of life is left. Arieti's (1959) concept of progressive teleological regression (reduction of free will) in schizophrenia is similar.
DifferentiationDifferentiation is a transformation from a more general and homogeneous condition, to a more specialized and heterogeneous condition - i.e. made up of unlike components or factors. Development proceeds from a state of relative globality and lack of differentiation to a state of increasing differentiation, articulation and hierarchic order.
This principle is fundamental to living organisms and is clearly demonstrated in the evolution and development of the nervous system. Mental functions generally progress from a syncretic state - where percepts, motivation, feeling, imagery, symbols, concepts and so forth are an amorphous unity - toward an ever clearer distinction of functions. In perception, the primitive state seems to be one of synesthesia out of which visual, auditory, tactile and other experiences are separated.
The perception of objects without emotional-motivational undertones is a late achievement of mature civilized man. The origins of language are obscure, but it would seem that proto-language was 'holophrastic' - i.e. utterances and thoughts with a broad aura of associations, preceded separation of meanings and articulate speech. Likewise, categories such as the distinction of 'I' and objects, space, time number and causality, etc. evolved from a perceptual-conceptual-motivational continuum, represented by the 'palaeological' (Stone Age) perception of infants, primitives and schizophrenics.
As human beings we shape our environment very effectively because we are able to represent the outer world symbolically, to think conceptually, and to communicate our symbols, conceots and ideas to others. We do so with the help of abstract language, but also nonverbally through paintings, music and other forms of art. In our thinking and communication, we not only deal with the present but can also refer to the past and anticpate the future, which gives us a degree of autonomy far beyond any other species. The development of abstract thinking, symbolic language and the various other human capabilities all depend crucially on a phenomenon that is characteristic of the human mind, a complex self-organizing system. Human beings possess conciousness; we are aware not only of our sensations but also of ourselves as thinking and experiencing individuals. And in reverse, the application of our thinking ability serves to further develop and refine our consciousness.
The concepts 'I' and 'the world', 'mind' and 'matter' are the final outcome of a long process in biological evolution, cognitive development of the child, cultural and linguistic history. The perceiver is not simply a receptor of stimuli, but in a very real sense creates his world. 'Things' and 'self' emerge by a slow build-up of innumerable factors of gestalt dynamics, of learning processes, and of social, cultural and linguistic determinants. The full distinction between 'public objects' and 'private self' is certainly not achieved without naming and language, i.e. processes at the symbolic level, and perhaps this distinction presupposes a language of the Indo-Germanic type, as adopted by civilized societies. (It is only in Indo-European languages that distinctions between past, present and future have been fully developed. For example, Old English, as it was spoken before the Norman Conquest, contained no distinct words for the future tense. A confused or missing future tense is both cause and effect of living mainly in the present, with a low regard for long-term consequences.)
In psycho-pathology, all these primitive states may reappear by way of regression, in which there are bizarre arbitrary combinations of archaic elements, both among themselves and mixed with the more sophisticated thought processes. On the other hand, artificial languages (such as the specialized terminology of sciences), representing in certain ways the evolutionary step beyond the Indo-Germanic family of languages, produce even further differentiation: among thought processes, among perceptions and between thought processes and perception.
CentralizationOrganisms are not machines; but they can to a certain extent become machines - though never completely. A thoroughly mechanized organism would be incapable of reacting to the incessantly changing conditions of the outside world. The transition from undifferentiated wholeness to higher functions, is made possible by specialization and 'division of labour'. This principle implies also, loss of potentialities in the components alone, and of regulatability in the whole, since a system is made up of entities that both need each other and at the same time, have independence of action. Hence the tragedy of the lobotomized patient whose distinctive individuality has been removed (the frontal lobes of the cortex) in order to make him regulatable in society.
Mechanization frequently leads to the establishment of 'leading parts', that is components dominating the behavior of the system. Such centers may exert 'trigger causality': a small change in a leading part, may, by the way of amplification mechanisms, cause large changes in the total system. In this way an hierarchic order of parts or processes may be established.
In the brain, as well as in mental function, centralization and the hierarchic ordering of stratification, the higher layers take the role of leading parts. Three major layers or evolutionary steps, can be distinguished in the brain; these are: (1) the paleoencephalon (paleo-cortex), corresponding to the evolutionary stage of lower vertebrates, (2) the neoencephalon (neo-cortex), evolving from reptiles to mammals, and (3) certain higher centres such as the motoric speech (Broca's) region and the large association areas (frontal lobes), found only in Man.
This stratification of the mental system may be roughly circumscribed as the domains of instincts, drives, emotions, the 'primeval depth personality'; perception and voluntary action; and the symbolic activities characteristic of Man. Although these problems need further clarification, it is incorrect when Stratification is rejected for being 'philosophical', or when critics insist that there is no fundamental difference between the behavior of rats and that of Man. Such an attitude simply ignores elementary zoological facts.
RegressionPsychosis is sometimes referred to as "regression to infantile forms of behavior." This is incorrect: the regression is essentially a disintegration of the personality, i.e. a decentralization of the hierarchy of mental functions. In the extreme, decentralization is the functional dys-encephalization of the schizophrenic, i.e. where the cortex is either too aroused to function or totally shut off. In a milder form, such as neurotic complexes, it is a loosening of the hierarchic mental organization.
BoundaryAny system, as an entity which can be investigated in its own right, must have boundaries - either spatial or dynamic. Although spatial boundaries appear to exist in naïve observation, all organismic boundaries are ultimately dynamic. One cannot exactly draw the boundaries of an organism, which are changeable and continually exchange materials with the environment.
In psychology, the boundary of the Ego is both fundamental and precarious. It originates in proprioceptive experience and in the body-image; but self-identity is not completely established before the 'I', 'Thou', and 'It' are named, i.e. the differentiation of other personalities and forces. Psycho-pathology shows the paradox that the Ego boundary is at once too fluid and too rigid. Confused perception, animalistic feeling, delusions and hallucinations, etc. make for insecurity of the Ego boundary; but within this self-created universe, the schizophrenic lives 'in a shell'.
In contrast to the animal's 'encapsulation' in a limited perception of the potential of its surroundings, Man is 'open to the world' and has his own 'universe'; i.e. his world widely transcends biological bondage and even the limitations of his senses. To him, encapsulation - from the specialist to the neurotic, and in the extreme, to the schizophrenic - is a limitation of potentialities that amounts to illness. These limitations have their basis in man's symbolic functions.
Symbolic ActivityExcept for the immediate satisfaction of biological needs, Man lives in a world not of things but of symbols. Man's symbolic universes, which distinguish human cultures from animal societies, are the most important part of Man's behavior. It can be justly questioned whether Man is a rational animal; but it cannot be questioned that he is a symbol-creating and symbol-dominated being throughout.
Symbolism is recognized as the unique criterion of Man by physiologists of the Pavlovian School, and by many philosophers. However, until relatively recent times this was not found even in leading textbooks of psychology, in consequence of the predominant behaviorist philosophy. In fact, it is because of Man's symbolic functions that motives in animals are not an adequate model for motives in Man.
Probably all notions used to characterize 'human' behavior are consequences, or different aspects, of symbolic activity. Time-binding (the progressive expansion of knowledge); anticipation of the future; purpose and intention as conscious planning; dedication to a cause; truth and lies; conscience, values and morality; culture and civilization - these all stem from creative symbolic processes and cannot therefore be reduced solely to biological factors. The distinction between biological and specifically human values, is that the former concern the maintenance of the organism and the survival of the species, whereas the latter always concern symbolic functions. In consequence, mental disturbances in man, as a rule, involve disturbances of symbolic functions. In humans, the distorting impact of highly charged experiences at an early age, underlies the distortion of symbolic functions in later life.
Whilst animals can have trauma, and display any number of perceptual, motoric and mood disturbances, they cannot have the disturbances of symbolic functions that are essential ingredients of human psycho-pathology. In animals there cannot be disturbance of ideas (delusions of grandeur or persecution, etc.) because there are no ideas to start with. Hence animal neurosis is only a partial model of human psychiatric disturbance; behavioral psychology needs a systemic approach that includes, but is much wider than, the original behaviorist model based on animal research. There may be conflict between biological drives and a symbolic value or belief system: this is the situation of psycho-neurosis. Or there may be conflict between beliefs, or a loss of value orientation; this is the situation when existential neurosis arises. Cultural factors are therefore an intrinsic factor in the systems approach.
As we have seen, psychiatric disturbances can be neatly defined in terms of system functions. Our perception of the world is shaped by emotional, motivational, social, cultural and linguistic factors. And without the mechanism of illusion - our inner mind space - a consistent world image would be impossible.
Of great interest to Mind Development, is that similar considerations apply to motivation. Normal motivation implies autonomous activity, integration of behavior towards a consistent goal, adaptability to changing situations, and free use of symbolic anticipation, decision-making, and so forth. This emphasises the hierarchy of functions, especially the higher symbolic levels of beliefs and values, superimposed (as with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs) on the lower level organismic requirements of life. The concept of spontaneity draws the borderline between organismic behavior and higher human cognition. Evocation of creative potentialities is therefore senior to passive adjustment.
Dealing with psycho-neurosis is only part of the systemic approach of Mind Development. Attempts at re-integration, insight into present conflicts, orientation towards goals and the future, deal with the symbolic levels of the human psyche, and in so doing, resolve the existential problems of life.
UpshotThe system concept provides a context for Mind Development that is psycho-physically neutral; both the concepts of mind and brain can be discussed meaningfully within the same framework. Within the framework of General Systems Theory, we have been able to take the ideas of Adler as representing the embryonic form of a system of Mind Development in the implicit recognition of teleology - the belief that individual are guided not only by mechanical forces but that they also move toward certain goals of self-realization - and from these seminal concepts, put together a workable system of Mind Development.
The Cartesian dualism between spirit and matter, mind and body, consciousness and brain, and so on, is a conceptualization derived from seventeenth-century physics which is obsolete. The modern Systems viewpoint is holistic, and offers a framework in which a 'unified' theory can be formed. The first beginnings of a common language can be found in the work of Jean Piaget and several of the Structuralist philosophers who analyze the structure or content of conscious mental states by introspective methods.
Extending this way of thinking to the universe as a whole, it is not too far-fetched to assume that all its structurs - from subatomic particles to galaxies and from bacteria to human beings and the ecology of the earth - are manifestations of the universe's self-organizing dynamics, which can be identified with the term "cosmic mind." The systems view of nature seems to provide a meaningful scientific framework for approaching the age-old questions about the nature of life, mind and consciousness. In conjunction with the findings of our own Mind Development research, we will eventually have a unified theory from which all Man's dualities can be derived or reconciled.

What is Systems Theory?


Systems Theory: the transdisciplinary study of the abstract organization of phenomena, independent of their substance, type, or spatial or temporal scale of existence. It investigates both the principles common to all complex entities, and the (usually mathematical) models which can be used to describe them.

GENERAL SYSTEM THEORY
The notion of a system may be seen as simply a more self-conscious and generic term for the dynamic interrelatedness of components.Von Bertalanffy
Ludwig Von Bertalanffy was a Hungarian biologist educated in Vienna, a member of the famed "Vienna School." He fathered an organismic approach to biology as a reaction to the vitalism-reductionism arguments that were rampant in his day. More important for the purpose of this thesis, he founded the science of "General System Theory". The idea of the whole as more than the sum of its parts is as old as Aristotle, but that there are characteristics of systems that are homologous to all systems simply because they are systems can be traced directly to Von Bertalanffy.
Von Bertalanffy explained that he thought of the idea of General System Theory back in 1936 but hesitated until 1948 when the intellectual climate was more receptive. However, William Johnston showed that the basic elements were in his mind as far back as the twenties,
A forgotten episode in Von Bertalanffy's apprenticeship is the culture-criticism which he wrote during the 1920's. Where the seeds of General System Theory are already visible. In reviewing books by the Viennese art historians, Josef Strzygowski and Max Dvorak, Von Bertalanffy lauded Oswald Spengler for having interpreted culture as an integrated system, wúithin any culture, ideas and artistic forms interact with one another and with social institutions to simulate a common style. It is this process of interaction rather than its separate components which a historian of culture must study, For Spengler and for Strzygowski, a culture is what Von Bertalanffy would later call an "open system", digesting influences from without while undergoing interactions among its various levels.
Growing as it does, out of the reductionist-vitalist arguments in biology, Von Bertalanffy's greatest emphasis was on the meaning of life, on the differences between organisms and purely physico-chemical processes. In theoretical biology, he proposed a general model of an "open system" to describe the contradiction between the thermodynamics of living organisms and the second law of thermodynamics. As he put it "an open system that imports free energy or negative entropy from the outside can legitimately proceed toward states of increasing heterogeneity and order. From this he elaborated in another paper, "we must conceive living systems as systems of elements in mutual dynamic interaction, and discover the laws that govern the pattern of parts and processes," The concepts of organization, non-summative wholeness, control, self-regulation, equifinality, and self-organization, he said, are as valid in the social and behavioral sciences as they are in the biological. This led Von Bertalanffy to postulate a new discipline called, "General System Theory," its subject matter being the formulation and derivation of those principles which are valid for systems in general. In the words of systems philosopher, Ervin Laszlo:
Thus, if one can show that the schemes are isomorphic in regard to the basic underlying invariances then these invariances (or uniformities) can be held to "signify a unity of the observed universe and hence of science. Their presence does not mean that all areas of reality are reduced to a single level, e.g., that of biological or sociological organized complexity, but that the various levels of reality, ranging from the atomic to ecological nature are "vertically" interrelated by means of properties lending themselves to isomorphic models, i,e., those which exhibit fundamental invariances of basic constructs, conserved throughout a range of transformations. It is not the analogy of phenomena, nor yet the identity of properties, which signifies the possibility of General System Theory, but the isomorphy of invariant constructs, such as laws of development, structure and self-maintenance, occurring in differentiated form in the manifold realms of nature.
The term "system", "systems approach", and "systems theory" are all currently recognized as legitimate scientific concepts, We must be sure we do not construe these disciplines as part of the subject of this thesis, We are interested in theories of complex systems as subdisciplines of General System Theory. As Mesarovic put it, "General System Theory uses the weakest mathematical structure which is compatible with the intuitive meaning of the concept." This is opposed to "Systems Theory", which is a deductive principle of mathematics.