The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision by Fritjof Capra (PDF)

Description

Over the past thirty years, a new systemic conception of life has emerged at the forefront of science. New emphasis has been given to complexity, networks, and patterns of organisation, leading to a novel kind of ‘systemic’ thinking. This volume integrates the ideas, models, and theories underlying the systems view of life into a single coherent framework. Taking a broad sweep through history and across scientific disciplines, the authors examine the appearance of key concepts such as autopoiesis, dissipative structures, social networks, and a systemic understanding of evolution. The implications of the systems view of life for health care, management, and our global ecological and economic crises are also discussed. Written primarily for undergraduates, it is also essential reading for graduate students and researchers interested in understanding the new systemic conception of life and its implications for a broad range of professions from economics and politics to medicine, psychology and law.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Review “Partly an enjoyable survey of exciting new developments in systems biology, valuable to any student of biology or science, and partly a bold blueprint for how we might preserve our future on Earth.” New Scientist”A magisterial study of the scientific basis for an integrated worldview grounded in the wholeness that generations of one-eyed reductionists could not see. The authors succeed brilliantly!” David W. Orr, Oberlin College”Gives us a sound synthesis of the best science and theory on the connectedness of all living things, the dynamics of emergence and self-organization as conceived by Francisco Varela. This volume offers a profound framework for understanding our place on the planet, for better or worse. And if we apply the insights offered by Capra and Luisi, it will be for the better should be required reading for today’s young, tomorrow’s leaders, and anyone who cares about life on this planet.” Daniel Goleman, author of Emotional Intelligence and Ecological Intelligence”What is life? What is a human being? How can new discoveries about nature and ourselves keep us from becoming the first self-endangered species? Capra and Luisi’s dazzling synthesis explains how moving beyond mechanistic, linear, reductionist habits is revealing startling new answers to perennial questions of philosophy and practice. Sir Francis Bacon’s goal of ‘the enlargement of the bounds of Human Empire, to the effecting of all things possible’ has put humanity in serious trouble. But today, rebuilding our thinking, language, and actions around Darwin, not Descartes, and around modern biology, not outmoded physics, creates rich new options. Driven by the co-evolution of business with civil society, these can build a fairer, healthier, cooler, safer world. The Systems View of Life is a lucid, wide-ranging guide to living maturely, kindly, and durably with each other and with other beings on the only home we have.” Amory B. Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute”This book feels like a Rosetta stone for me, unlocking connections and roots of a panoply of different ideas and concepts. It starts walking us through the history of science – and how scientific models influenced most aspect of cultures. This book pulls the big changes together and integrates them, across disciplines into a glorious big picture, for each field. As I was reading the portion of the book covering the history of systems thinking I realized that I was suddenly feeling very excited, like I was in a movie, sitting on the edge of my seat. This is what a great writer and a great book are supposed to do It has had a huge impact on my way of thinking about so many things. It doesn’t matter what your area of work or interest is. This book is essential reading to face the future with eyes wide open.” Rob Kall, OpEdNews.com”A valuable overview of the discipline.” Stephen Lewis, The Biologist’What a fine, erudite, synoptic, lovely book!’ Stuart Kauffman, University of Pennsylvania and the Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle Book Description The first volume to integrate life’s biological, cognitive, social, and ecological dimensions into a single, coherent framework. About the Author Fritjof Capra is a founding director of the Center for Ecoliteracy in Berkeley, California, and serves on the faculty of Schumacher College, Devon. He is a physicist and systems theorist, and has been engaged in a systematic examination of the philosophical and social implications of contemporary science for the past 35 years.Pier Luigi Luisi is Professor in Biochemistry at the University of Rome 3. He started his career at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (ETHZ) where he became full professor in Chemistry and initiated the interdisciplinary Cortona Weeks. His main research focuses on the experimental, theoretical and philosophical aspects of the origin of life and self-organisation of synthetic and natural systems. Read more

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐This is a refreshing look at life based on a simple premise: that life is a self-regulating network in which essential properties arise not from the constituent parts themselves, but from the configuration of relationships within the integrated system as a whole. The authors guide us through an incredible range of scientific disciplines, revealing the uncanny ramifications of this subtle change in perspective. In the systems view, the parts have no meaning as isolated entities; they are defined only by their interconnections; they are inseparable patterns within the larger web. This approach is an eye-opening contrast to the mainstream viewpoint of reductionistic analysis, and the authors explain how reductionism had shaped our culture to the detriment of the environment we cohabit.The Systems View of Life treats readers to a rational expansion of self towards unity with the fabric of life and oneness with the universe, much like the monism of Advaita Vedanta or Monistic Idealism. Every distinction we presuppose as individuals, as nations, and as a species breaks down under this unflinching scrutiny. When we let go of our individual pride, we allow room instead for inclusive cooperation. Nothing less than this kind of fundamental shift of identity will prepare us to face the multifaceted global crises we have created for the biosphere.This book exhibits the systems view of life within the context of numerous academic disciplines including: history, philosophy, economics, physics, genetics, mathematics, ecology, biology, evolution, chemistry, cognitive linguistics, spirituality, sociology, medicine, and climatology. It is written for undergraduates but approachable to casual readers willing to delve deep into several different scientific fields. It is not an easy read, nor is it short, but the vision is beautiful, and the elevated viewpoint is worth every page. My only serious critique is that the systemic solutions to our global threats proposed in the last chapter seem generally unrealistic. However, to be fair, I couldn’t do better.The very notion of “I” is an emergent property arising from the simultaneous occurrence and resonance of feelings, memories, and thoughts, so that the “I” is not localized anywhere, but rather is an organized pattern without a center.When we look at the world around us, we find that we are not thrown into chaos and randomness but are part of a great order, a grand symphony of life. Every atom in our body was once a part of previous bodies – living or nonliving – and will be a part of future bodies. In this sense, our body will not die but will live on, again and again, because life lives on. Moreover, we share not only life’s molecules, but also its basic principles of organization with the rest of the living world. And since our mind, too, is embodied, our concepts and metaphors are embedded in the web of life together with our bodies and brains. Indeed, we belong to the universe, and this experience of belonging can make our lives profoundly meaningful.”

⭐I cannot possibly recommend this book enough. We live in a time where all current systems of human thought from physics to politics are dominated by a set of underlying assumptions, that are mostly outdated and no longer work in a very different world that is more interdependent and connected than ever before in human history.It is in this context that Fritjof Capra presents many ideas and concepts involved in systems thinking, involving a holistic approach that recognizes the organic unity and interconnection between all things. It calls for a complete paradigm shift in our understanding of reality that takes entire systems in account, rather than only considering their component parts.A must read for anyone that is increasing confused by all of the seeming chaos and madness present in today’s world.

⭐This book is an intellectual tour de force. Capra and Luisi furnish us with an integrative and scientifically defensible worldview — the only credible, holistic, contemporary account that I am aware of—from a transdisciplinary perspective, spanning physics, working through biology, then through human cognition, ecological systems, social systems, and economic systems. Of special note is the foregrounding of the Santiago school of cognition, after Maturana and Varela; I believe greater awareness of this school of thinking is vital for reconstructing cognitive psychology into a credible discipline, weaning it away from its cognitivistic, information processing roots. Underlying this matter is the key issue of the legacy of Cartesian dualism and Newtonian mechanistic thinking, a paradigm that continues to engender adverse side effects on human well-being, evident in the practice of reductive “scientific management” principles and the purported “scientific management of education.” This book is essential reading for all university undergraduates as well as graduate students.

⭐Very happy to see this book in a textbook format so that the knowledge is passed along as a new way of approaching science to solve societal problems. You’ll find more depth in Professor Capra’s other works on the subjects introduced and covered here. It sets up a nice situation where the reader is introduced to a number of unique ways of seeing topics that most do not know or appreciate yet. This will be the thinking of the future. I only hope it comes sooner rather than later. Get the book. If you’re a professor – use the book for your class. Spread the messages it contains and we’ll have more luck solving our problems moving forward.

⭐This book bridges the subjects of natural connections and spiritual science from a numbers perspective. A good read for those areas.

⭐This is not light reading. It its a textbook and it is essential reading for anyone hoping to understand the paradigm shift in science today and the move towards systems thinking. This should be required reading at every college and university in the world.

⭐Covers a wide variety of topics but with enough depth as to not be superficial. A great introduction to systems thinking and the many ideas discussed within.

⭐At 498 pages, this is no small tome. I have not finished it, but Capra and Luisi scan a huge swath of scientific thinking and delve into human behavior to propose a new paradigm for living with eco-literacy as its core. This book is the “text” for the Capra Course. If you want a brief overview, this isn’t it. However, a brief overview is impossible when the objective is a huge shift in your worldview. I have a very similar program, and this is a great resource book. Capra and Luisi have dug into aspects of our environmental crises that I did not find by digging on my own — not enough time.

⭐This is an interdisciplinary book which presents ”a unified systemic vision that includes and integrates life’s” different dimensions (p.xii). All living systems are ”highly nonlinear” networks where there are ”countless interconnections” (p.xii). Here is a summary of the book together with some conclusions.Introduction (pp.1–16)The systems view of life is ”a change from seeing the world as a machine to understanding it as a network” (p.4). Greek philosophy, in the sixth century BC, ”understood the order of the cosmos to be that of a living organism” (p.5). The shift from an organic to a mechanistic worldview ”was initiated by … René Descartes (1596-1650)” who is ”regarded as the founder of modern philosophy” (p.8).A living system is “an integrated whole whose … properties cannot be reduced to its parts” (p.10). These properties “arise from the interactions and relationships between the parts” (p.10). Outlines of a “coherent theory of living systems … are now emerging” (p.12). This is the subject of the book.We need to “question … the old paradigm” (p.12). The “paradigm shift also involves … changes of values” (p.13). There is a “striking connection between changes of thinking and of values” (p.13). The “connection between an ecological perception of the world and corresponding behavior is not a logical but a psychological connection” (p.14). “Logic does not lead us from the fact that we are an integral part of the web of life to certain norms of how we should live (p.14). However, if we have a “deep ecological experience of being part of the web of life, then we will … be inclined to care for all living nature” (p.15). “The paradigm shift … at its deepest level, involves a perceptual shift” (p.15).The mechanistic worldview (pp.17–60)As the organic view of nature was replaced by the metaphor of the world as a machine, “the goal of science became … to dominate and control nature” (p.21). All “scientific theories are reductionist in the sense that they need to reduce the phenomena described to a … number of characteristics” (p.24). Scientists “in treating living organisms as machines, tended to believe that they are nothing but machines” (p.26). The adverse consequences of this “have become especially apparent in medicine” (p.26). “Economists [also] generally fail to recognize that the economy is merely one aspect of the whole ecological and social fabric” (p.56). Unlimited growth “on a finite planet can only lead to disaster” (p.56).As the “metaphor of organizations as machines” has taking hold, it has generated “mechanistic theories of management” with “clearly defined lines of command and communication” (p.58). During the Industrial Revolution “efficient operation of the new machines required major changes in the organization of the workforce” (p.58). The workforce was disciplined “to accept the rigorous routines [required] by factory production” (p.58).Interestingly, Max Weber (1864-1920) “was very critical of the development of mechanistic forms of organization” (p.58). Weber observed “the parallels between the machination of industry and bureaucratic forms of organization” (p.58). He was concerned about “the mechanization of human life, the erosion of human spirit, and the undermining of democracy” (p.58). Weber’s contemporary, Frederick Taylor (1856-1915), “perfected the engineering approach to management” (p.58). The organization’s “structure and goals are designed by management … and are imposed on the organization” with “top-down control” (p.59). The “design of formal structures, linked by clear lines of communication, coordination, and control, has become almost second nature” (p.59).Transcending “the mechanistic conceptions of health, the economy, or biotechnology” and “the mechanistic view of organizations” is “critical for the survival of or human civilization (p.59).The rise of systems thinking (pp.61–126)”Throughout the living world, we find living systems nesting within other living systems” (p.65). Living systems act both as “parts and wholes” (p.65). There is both “an integrative” and “a self-assertive” tendency (p.65). The “essential properties” of living systems are “properties of the whole” (p.65). “The great chock of twentieth-century science has been that living systems cannot be understood by analysis” (p.66).There are “three kinds of living systems – organisms, parts of organisms, and communities of organisms” (p.67). Living systems “at all levels are networks” and consists of “networks within networks” (p.68). “Whenever we look at life, we look at networks” (p.95). Nature shows us “a complex web of relationships between … parts of a unified whole” (p.68). “There is stability, but this stability is one of dynamic balance” (p.75). All living systems are “open systems” which need “a continual flux of matter and energy” (p.86).Norbert Wiener (1894–1964) introduced the term “cybernetics,” from the Greek kybernetes (“steersman”), in the 1940s. Wiener defined cybernetics as the science of “control and communication in the animal and the machine” (p.87). “All major achievements of cybernetics originated … in mechanistic models of living systems” (p.89). Interestingly, Norbert Wiener made “a clear distinction between a mechanistic model and the non-mechanistic living system it represents” (p.93). Ross Ashby (1903–1972), who was “the leading theorist of the cybernetics movement” in the 1950s and 1960s, had, on the other hand, a “strictly mechanistic outlook” (p.93). For Ashby, there was “no creativity, no development, no evolution” (p.97).Even “the simplest living system … is a highly complex network” (p.98). “Nonlinear dynamics … represents a qualitative rather than a quantitative approach to complexity and … systems thinking” (p.99). The systems view is a shift of perspective “from objects to relationships, from measuring to mapping, from quantity to quality” (p.99). Nonlinear phenomena are “an essential aspect of the network patterns of living systems” (p.105). Nonlinearity has brought about a “shift of emphasis from quantitative to qualitative analysis” (p.105).The “spontaneous emergence of order at critical points of instability” is “one of the hallmarks of life” (p.116). The “understanding of pattern[s] is crucial to understand the living world” (p.126).A new conception of life (pp. 127–339)Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela coined the term “autopoiesis”, which means “self-making”, in the 1970s (p.129). The main characteristic of life is “self-maintenance” (p.129). A living organism “does not need any information from the outside to be what it is, but it is … dependent on outside materials in order to survive” (p.134). Life can be seen as “a system of interlocked autopoietic systems” (p.135). “Autopoiesis is the particular self-organization of life” (p.135).There is “a clear difference between the ways living and nonliving systems interact with their environments” (p.136). If you “kick a stone, it will react” (p.136). If you “kick a dog, it will respond” (p.136). “The interaction with the environment … is determined by the internal organization of the living organism” (p.141). A living organism is “capable of cognition (the process of knowing)” (p.142). The “living organism and the environment become one through cognitive interactions” (p.143). “A particular combination of self-organization and emergence gives rise to self-reproduction” (p.145).Dynamic systems “generally operate far from equilibrium, and yet are … stable, self-organizing structures” (p.158). In static systems, “self-organization and the resulting emergent properties are relatively simple concepts” (p.180). In dynamic systems, however, “self-organization and emergence are subtle and complex” (p.180). “New structures … and forms of organization may arise … in situations of instability, chaos, or crisis” (p.180).The “appropriate way of approaching nature … is not through domination and control but through respect, cooperation, and dialogue” (p.180). In the living world, “history plays an important role” and “the future is uncertain” (p.180). “Life … cannot be explained in reductionistic terms” (p.181). All living forms “are linked together to each other by a network of parenthood” (p.182). “Cooperation is clearly visible … at many levels of living organisms” (p.202). “The planetary network of bacteria,” for example, “has been the main source of evolutionary creativity” (p.192). Another example is “symbiosis, the tendency of different organisms to live in close association with one another” (p.202).In living organisms, “there is no easy way to separate instructions from the way they are carried out, to distinguish plan from execution” (p.206). The “principle of structural determinism, … implies that only those changes can be accepted that are consistent with the existing inner structure and organization of the living organism” (p.214). The change must also be consistent with the organism’s “self-maintenance” (p.214). Evolution is “complex, highly ordered, and ultimately cognitive” (p.215). It is “an integral part of life’s self-organization” (p.215).One important implication of “the new systemic understanding of life” is a new understanding of “the nature of mind and consciousness” (p.252). The “phenomenon of mind” is connected with the “phenomenon of life” (p.253). In other words, “cognition is the very process of life” (p.254). “The organizing activity of living systems, at all levels of life, is mental activity” (p.254). “Mind – or, more accurately, mental activity – is immanent in matter at all levels of life” (p.254).”Every living organism continually renews itself” while maintaining “its overall identity or pattern of organization” (p.255). Living organisms create “new structures – new connections in the network” (p.255). “Living systems are autonomous” (p.255). Living organisms respond “to environmental changes,” and “these changes” alter future responses. This “modification of behavior on the basis of previous experience” is learning (p.255). Continuing “adaptation, learning, and development” are key characteristics of all living beings (p.255). “We can never direct a living system; we can only disturb it” (p.256). A living system has the “autonomy to decide what to notice and what will disturb it” (p.256).”Describing cognition as the breath of life seems to be a perfect metaphor” (p.256). Mind is “the process of cognition, which is identified with the process of life” (p.257). At all levels of life, “mind and matter, process and structure, are inseparably connected” (p.257). Consciousness “emerges when cognition reaches a certain level of complexity” (p.257). Consciousness is “a cognitive process” (p.260) which “involves self-awareness” (p.258). Conscious experience is “an expression of life, emerging from complex neural activity” (p.265). Mind and body “are two complementary aspects of life” (p.273). Primary, or core, consciousness “provides the organism with a transient sense of self (the core self) in the act of perception” (p.274), while “reflective consciousness” is “the process of cognition … we experience as thought” (p.274).The “pattern of organization of any system … is the configuration of relationships among the system’s components” (p.301). This “configuration of relationships” gives the system “its essential characteristics” (p.301). The “structure of a system” is its “physical embodiment of its pattern of organization” (p.302). The “process of life” is the “continual embodiment of the system’s pattern of organization” (p.302). These are three perspectives on life: “organization, structure, and process” (p.302). This is the “trilogy of life” (p.303).The trilogy of life can, in more general terms, be expressed as “form (or pattern of organization), … matter (or material structure), and … process” (p.304). Meaning is added to “the other three perspectives” in order to “extend the systemic understanding of life to the social domain” (p.304). Meaning is “a shorthand notation for the inner world of reflective consciousness, which contains a multitude of interrelated characteristics” (p.304). Human action “flows from the meaning that we attribute to our surroundings” (p.304). Human language “involves the communication of meaning” (p.304).Living systems “exhibit similar patterns of organization” (p.305). “The network pattern, in particular, is … very basic” (p.305). “All living systems are … networks within networks” (p.306). “A social network, too, is a nonlinear pattern of organization” (p.306). However, “organisms and human societies are very different types of living systems” (p.307). “Human beings can choose whether and how to obey a social rule; molecules cannot choose” (p.307). “Meaning is essential to human beings” (p.309). In “acting with intention and purpose … we experience human freedom” (p.309). The “behavior is constrained but not determined by outside forces” (p.309). As human beings, “we experience this … as the freedom to act according to our own choices and decisions” (p.309).”Bringing life into human organizations … increases their flexibility, creativity, and learning potential” (p.320). People need to “feel that they are supported … and do not have to sacrifice their integrity to meet the goals of the organization” (p.320). However, the economic environment today “is not life-enhancing but increasingly life-destroying” (p.320). We need to “change our economic system so that it becomes life-enhancing rather than life-destroying (p.321). This change will “be imperative not only for the well-being of human organizations but also for the survival … of humanity as a whole” (p.321). The “new unifying vision of life … has important implication for almost every field of study and every human endeavor” (p.322).”From a systems point of view, … illness results from patterns of disorder” (p.327). Health is “a multidimensional and multileveled phenomenon” (p.327). “Lack of flexibility manifests itself as stress” (p.356). “Loss of flexibility means loss of health” (p.328). From a systems view of life “the current health revolution can be seen as part of a global movement dedicated to creating a sustainable world” (p.338).Sustaining the web of life (pp. 339–452)There are different meanings of “self-organization” (p.346). “To cyberneticists … self-organization meant the … emergence of order in machines featuring feedback loops” (p.346). In complexity theory self-organization is the “emergence of new order … governed by nonlinear dynamics” (p.346). And, in ecosystems self-organization is understood as “dissipative structures operating far from equilibrium” (p.346). There is, however, “almost total silence on the question of autopoiesis in ecosystems” (p.347). We need to “understand the principles of [self-]organization that ecosystems have evolved” (p.353). Ecology is of “paramount practical importance” (p.361).The “major problems of our time … cannot be understood in isolation” (p.362). The fundamental dilemma is “the illusion that unlimited growth is possible on a finite planet” (p.363). “Social and environmental costs” are not included in economic activities (p.363). There is “a widening gap between the rich and the poor” (p.363). All “ethical dimensions are excluded” (p.378). “Global capitalism … exacerbates” poverty and social exclusion (pp. 384–385). There are also “actively misleading” campaigns that “systematically create doubt and confusion … concerning the threat of global warming” (p.388). “This is why the systems view of life” is very important and “has tremendous practical relevance” (p.392). There are “hundreds of systemic solutions being developed all over the world” (p.393).It seems as a “more fluid system of global governance would be more appropriate for today’s world,” where power is increasingly shifted “to regional and local levels” (p.398). This includes the “shift from governments serving corporations to governments serving people and communities,” as well as respect for “core labor, social and other human rights” (p.397).The most important reformation of “the corporation will be to expose the core myth that shareholder returns must be maximized at the expense of human and ecological communities” (p.400). This means “reviving the traditional purpose of the corporation to serve the public good” (p.400). A “fundamental issue … is ownership” (p.401). “Conventional corporate ownership” is an example of “extractive ownership” (p.401). A new “generative ownership” is needed, which “generates well-being and real, living wealth” (p.401).”Unfortunately, … systemic thinking is still very rare among … corporate and political leaders” (p.407). The “world has to act now or face devastating … consequences,” but there is “lack of political will” (p.411). There is an “erroneous belief that nature can be subjected to human control” (p.437). We “need to honor, respect, and cooperate with nature” (p.442). And “we can learn valuable lessons from nature’s ecosystems” (p.442). “We have the knowledge and the technologies to build a sustainable world” (p.452). What is needed is “political will and leadership” (p.452). “Major breakthroughs” are needed “to turn the tide” (p.452).ConclusionsFritjof Capra och Pier Luigi Luisi’s book is truly impressive! The amount of materials covered is broad indeed. The Systems View of Life: A Unified Vision is an attempt to integrate life’s biological, cognitive, and social dimensions in a unified systems view of life. In a way, I think Capra and Luisi are brave in taking such a broad sweep across so many different areas. Even if you take a broad sweep, it will still be too narrow. And what you gain in breadth, you risk losing in depth. Overall, I think Capra and Luisi have succeeded in integrating many different perspectives. The book certainly broadened my own perspectives. The main value of the book is the integration of the different ideas, models, and theories into a single framework.

⭐I had high hopes of this book co-written by one of the great self-proclaimed exponents of systems thinking. There are some hugely worthwhile and interesting chapters that are well worth reading, most particularly where the authors clearly summarize well established concepts from other research – for example chapters on the principles of non-linearity and on self-organisation. These parts are a very stimulating read and justify the cost and effort.However I was in the end disappointed. The authors don’t seem to have used systems thinking on their own thinking and without this conceptual clarity I didn’t find their book an easy or well-organised read. It wasn’t clear to me anyway why they wrote the book, what the case is that they want to make, whether anyone disagrees with them, and if so why. As a result there is no conclusion summarizing their argument, which for a book of this length feels outrageous. It means they are leaving it to their poor exhausted readers to join the dots!

⭐Gregory Bateson wisely made the point about what he called logical types or levels of abstraction. He was able to argue that quantitative measures are of a lower level of abstraction than what is considered qualitative or patterned, relational and contextual and to try to understand the former with the latter leads to distortion and ugliness.The author starts out well demonstrating how the determinist mechanistic worldview of Descartes and Newton eventually ran into blocks leading to the use of probabilistic methods to overcome limitations in nonlinear physical phenomena. All to the general good of the reader but then he continues with this approach that works so well for physical systems to explain living systems and the result is ugliness and a rather deadening tome giving the same old impression that we can understand and control the nature of which we are only a part. The author just isn’t able to let go of his left brain purposive approach and accept Gregory Bateson’s point about the tragic double bind facing humanity on this planet i.e. that mother nature has given us humans purposiveness which is inherently destructive to the very nature we are dependent upon. In the end the author thinks we can purposively rethink our way out of this dead end through a better way of organizing things. But without making the double bind that defines everything we do front and center of a systemic view of ‘life’ the author misses the point. His use of the term empowerment gives the game away-he still believes in power although in a nicer form and that if only we followed the lead of nice good natured scientists like him we could get out of the bind we are now facing. Oh well continue on studying fractals and strange attractors etc. and thinking up more rational ways of managing things. The author is a physicist and he should stick to his last. There is a better way of writing about a systems view of life than this hodgepodge of the non living and living. And there are pockets of life where we are quite spontaneously thriving as a species although we don’t notice these. As Gregory Bateson’s father William Bateson, the famous biologist and coiner of the term genetics; said; ‘Treasure your exceptions’. In the end the book confuses levels of abstraction and leads to nothing short of destruction and ugliness despite the obvious good intentions of the author.

⭐This a wonderful book! It took me ages to read; not any fault of the style which is both lucid and compelling, raising issues requiring more than a quick flick through. I even broke off halfway through and read Capra’s Tao of Physics which I highly recommend as an introduction to The Systems View of Life. Tao will help the reader to understand where Capra’s philosophical sentiments lie and while he manages to keep his feet firmly on the ground and doesn’t sway too far into metaphysical speculations his sympathies become very apparent.I am certainly no expert on Eastern philosophy but I note that it has one salient feature common to all religious/spiritual cosmic explanations in that it relies on a notion of the ‘ineffable’ which is used as a catch-all license to say any old gobblygook secure that, given a receptive audience, whatever tosh is said will be interpreted favourably. Moreover, gobblygook has an added cachet if it is ancient gobblygook where it then masquerades as ancient wisdom espoused, not by the run of the mill supernatural speculators but venerable ancient sages.Why can’t we just be satisfied to acknowledge that humans are forever trapped in a semantic web whereby such questions as to whether the set of all sets is a member of itself is inherently unanswerable and thereby avoid mulling sagacious sounding but ultimately indecipherable aphorisms.However, The System View of Life doesn’t underpin its argument on the parallels with the wisdom of ancient religions but does, in my opinion, give this coincident undue prominence whereas the Systems argument stands firmly on its own rational merits without being cluttered with metaphysical mumbo jumbo.

⭐“[T]he Zeitgeist (“spirit of the age”) of the early twenty-first century is being shaped by a profound change of paradigms, characterized by a shift of metaphors from the world as a machine to the world as a network. The new paradigm may be called a holistic worldview, seeing the world as an integrated whole rather than a dissociated collection of parts”The Systems View of Life – A Unifying Vision (Fritjof Capra and Pier Luigi Luisi) is the kind of book I wish I could write. As the industrial age, which began in the period of the European Enlightenment, draws to maturity through the end of the 20th century and beyond, its very fruits have given humanity the tools to move beyond the industrial and mechanical, and into a higher conception of the nature of existence.Thus we have the insights of quantum physics and fractal mathematics which were only made possible by going through the Newtonian / Cartesian phase. Or the interconnected, networked world that is forming today, that came about through incremental phases of industrial, machine-based progress. The recent giant leaps in computing power that today enables us to study and model complexity and chaos, leave us perhaps with more questions than answers, but evolved through essentially linear statistical methods over the preceding 200-years.Where Capra and Luisi take us therefore, is into a place that we I think, already know to be instinctively know we need to be. Namely that as a society we are perhaps grown up enough to be able to once again emphasise the qualitative over the quantitative, the observation over the explanation, the process rather than the outcome. The prize, they argue, is a great one:“As we move further into the twenty-first century, transcending the mechanistic view of organizations will be as critical for the survival of human civilization as transcending the mechanistic conceptions of health, the economy, or biotechnology. All these issues are linked, ultimately, to the profound scientific, social, and cultural transformation that is now under way with the emergence of the new systemic conception of life.”Personally I would add a caveat to this: the developed or industrialised world in primed for this transition; the developing world is still undergoing its industrialisation phase through which many hundreds of millions of people are being lifted out of food poverty. Capra and Luisi hint that this can be short-circuited (“The root causes of hunger around the world are unrelated to food production. They are poverty, inequality, and lack of access to food and land”) – my view is that they need to take their time to evolve societally, having now moved away from a land / organic-based existence – they will not need 500 years like we did, but they will need decades. This is important, because the transitions implied in the book will likely remain imperceptible at the level of all humanity for rest of the century.Moving back to the book itself, the authors do well to delve into science well enough to give the reader a sense of rigour, without crossing the line into incomprehensibility for the layman. A consistent theme is the rationalist, and currently prevailing tendency to break down our existence into building blocks and compartments, whether that be measurements of economic growth, medical diagnosis, legal systems, industrial production. But modern physicists have taught us that at that quantum level “matter” (in the non-technical sense) is fundamentally interconnected and cannot be reduced to infinitesimally small building blocks:“An electron is neither a particle nor a wave, but it may show particle-like aspects in some situations and wave-like aspects in others. While it acts like a particle, it is capable of developing its wave nature at the expense of its particle nature, and vice versa, thus undergoing continual transformations from particle to wave and from wave to particle…The discovery of the dual aspect of matter and of the fundamental role of probability has demolished the classical notion of solid objects. At the subatomic level, the solid material objects of classical physics dissolve into wave-like patterns of probabilities. These patterns, furthermore, do not represent probabilities of things, but rather of probabilities of interconnections…The laws of atomic physics are statistical laws, according to which the probabilities for atomic events are determined by the dynamics of the whole system. Whereas in classical mechanics the properties and behavior of the parts determine those of the whole, the situation is reversed in quantum mechanics: it is the whole that determines the behavior of the parts.”And the recently evolving discipline of fractal geometry provides us with the basis to extend this principle of interconnectedness and probability both upwards and downwards:More obviously upwards – the functioning of the human body; the development of societies and economies; ecological phenomena; the space-time of the universe. Less obviously downwards, but reaching into the spiritual and philosophical (think of the buddhist and other eastern philosophies which emphasise the oneness of zero and infinity).We arrive here through the property of fractal geometry known as self-similarity. The authors tell us how the inventor of fractal geometry Benoit Mandelbrot demonstrates this by breaking a piece of a cauliflower and showing that it looks just like a small cauliflower. Every part looks like the whole vegetable at every level of scale.So if such interconnectedness and self-similarity exists at the quantum level, why have we organised our societies in such a compartmentalised, non-holistic way ? The answer set out in the book can be summarised by two phenomena.First, the focus on responding to, and treating, observed outcomes rather than rather than understanding the underlying processes that lead to those outcomes. An obvious example would be politicians who create new government policies based on “events” rather than a qualitative appraisal of the world around them. Or alternatively the diagnostic approach of modern medicine:“The conceptual foundation of modern scientific medicine is the so-called biomedical model, which is firmly grounded in Cartesian thought …[T]he conceptual problem at the center of contemporary healthcare is the confusion between the origins of disease and the processes through which it manifests itself…A systemic approach, by contrast, would broaden the scope from the levels of organs and cells to the whole person – to the patient’s body and mind, as well as his or her interactions with a particular natural and social environment. Such a broad, systemic perspective will enable health professionals to better understand the phenomenon of healing, which today is often considered outside the scientific framework. Although every practicing physician knows that healing is an essential part of all medical care, the phenomenon is presently not part of scientific medicine. The reason is evident: it is a phenomenon that cannot be understood when health is reduced to mechanical functioning.”The second is the sense of connection that humans once had with the physical world, the land, nature and eco-systems, and which has been lost through in the industrial society that we inhabit. This connection is, the authors tell us, real and rooted in science. Indeed that very epitome and oft-cited champion of the rationalist scientific school, Charles Darwin gives us our route back to nature. For at the end of day all living organisms share a common ancestor. Organic and inorganic matter evolved to produce living cells which then evolved to produce water, air and land-borne species, of which we are but one.“There is nothing more holistic and systemic than this notion of Darwinian biological evolution”Studies of the number of proteins that form all of life suggest that there around 1014 different types (or 100,000 billion). A lot, you might think. However, the mathematically possible number of proteins that could exist based on chains of so-called “residues”, or amino acids, is 10130. Some of those would be energetically impossible, but even if 1 in a billion of those are “permitted” the resulting number of all possible proteins would be 10120. By way of comparison if the actual number of proteins in existence were a single grain of sand, then all the other possible combination representing those that don’t exist, would be the equivalent of the Sahara Desert. And we still do not understand very much the process by which that “one grain of sand”, representing all of life, was selected, over and above all of the other mathematically possible combinations.And delving into space-time, planets such as our own, have also been part of a cosmic evolution of the universe, the concept of a universe “pregnant with life”. The authors quote the physicist Freeman Dyson (1985):“As we look out in the universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known that we were coming.”So where does that leave us and where do we go from here ? Rationalist science cannot yet (and may not ever) give us the answers to the true origins of life ? Does it matter ? Yes, it does matter, One the one hand it matters to adherents of organised religion, searching for a way to become closer to a god as creator.And it also matters to the finest scientific minds seeking out the origins of life and the universe, whether to through Big Bang or more recent theories. Take Stephen Hawking, in A Brief History of Time, and his binary test for whether or not there is a creator:“So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?”Capra and Luisi push us to gaining an understanding of the nature of consciousness, and the signposts point to philosophies of the east:“From our point of view, the apparent dichotomy dissolves when we move from organized religion to the broader realm of spirituality, and when we recognize that both spiritual experience and the mystery we find at the edge of every scientific theory transcend all words and concepts…[S]cientists [such as Oppenheimer, Bohr and Heisenberg] published popular books about the history and philosophy of quantum physics, in which they hinted at remarkable parallels between the worldview implied by modern physics and the views of Eastern spiritual and philosophical traditions.”As physicists delve deeper into the material world they come to realise that their own consciousness is part of the unity of all natural phenomena. Mystics arrive there from the opposite direction, with an understanding that outer world is essentially one and the same as the inner world which is their starting point. Thus there is an increasing recognition, observable as we move into a new century that we are “part of a great order, a grand symphony of life”. Every molecule in our body was once part of a previous body, non-living or living, and the same will apply to all life forms that come after us.Indeed, the authors point out the origin of spirituality. The word “spirit” is derived from the Latin for “breath”, see also the related Latin “anima”, Greek “psyche”, and Sanskrit “atman”. Allowing us to posit that this notion of the spirit, being breath as the source of life, is common across the ancient schools of thought in both east and west:“Spiritual teachers throughout the ages have insisted that the experience of a profound sense of connectedness, of belonging to the cosmos as a whole, which is the central characteristic of mystical experience, is ineffable – incapable of being adequately expressed in words or concepts – and they often describe it as being accompanied by a deep sense of awe and wonder together with a feeling of great humility”This, say Capra and Luisi, is the true sense of “ecology” (derived from the Greek “oikos” meaning “Earth Household”) – a oneness with the natural world around us, being a member of a “global community of living beings”, and not interfering with ability of the earth to sustain life. The reader is not surprised at this point that authors take on a quick detour into Gaia theory as well.Practically, achieving this oneness means that current and future generations of politicians, scientists, business leaders, teachers and professionals will need an understanding of the nature of sustainability. An education programme, in other words.Modern social networks have the ability to achieve this. Social networks can be (and have typically in the past) used as instruments of control and authority, through bringing together and influencing people of similar mindsets. But in the future they can also be a means of empowerment, dissipating common views about the importance of sustainability, and a systemic or holistic way of thinking.Examples include: holistic therapies that connect physical well-being to mental well-being; a recognition that an individual’s well-being is determined by diet, and environment and social interaction; an understanding of the self-healing properties of many systems, including the human body and its surrounding ecology; the importance of human and ecological well-being for any corporate entity, arguably over and above its financial and profitability measure.So, the network, technological and philosophical ingredients are in place in the 21st century. What are the policy implications ? Is there some new world order that needs to be created ? The book takes the obligatory diversion through the well-trodden path of the economic and environmental unsustainability of our current existence, culminating in a now-familiar walk-through of the global financial crisis, its causes and effects. We also hear about various bodies, movements and NGOs that have sprung up before and since to address and promote sustainability.The book then concludes with a number of possible visions for a more sustainable future, and presents a number of overlapping strategies. The authors note in particular that economic globalisation, which has accelerated in the last 100 years or so, is now essentially characterised by a global network of machines (computers, factories, communication lines, financial systems) that are pre-programmed to maximise profit.The financial motive is the current “human value” which dominates. It would not, they argue, be too much of a leap of imagination to re-programme the machines to have other values built into them. This would also involve moving from quantitative measures of economic growth, such as GDP, to what may be termed “qualitative growth”. Whilst growth is a characteristic of all life, it is not linear and not unlimited – at the same time as some organisms and ecosystems grow others will shrink and release their components which can become resources for new growth. Qualitative growth is “growth which enhances life”. Quantities can be measured, but qualities need to be mapped, and new mathematical and computing disciplines are allowing us now to do this.Linked to this, the authors contend, should be a programme for corporate reform. The obligation to maximise shareholder return is etched into the contractual structure of a company, its board and the underpinning legal system. The fiduciary duty owed by a company and its managers to its shareholders overrides all other duties. This profit maximising duty makes the same assumption that economists currently do, namely that social costs, resource ownership, ecological sustainability should not be the goal of a corporation. The authors recommend extending or even replacing this fiduciary duty to include the well-being of the corporation’s employees, of local communities and of future generations, and creating new forms of ownership. And arguably this need not be in conflict with a market-based economy.The next area for change is where I am most sceptical – namely a number of suggestions around poverty eradication, stabilising population growth, and empowering of women. The last, in particular is seen to be important as a way of tempering the male, power-based, private ownership-based, accumulative cultures that predominate today, with a more feminine approach: conservation, co-operation, and community. More yin, less yang. I am sceptical not because these aims are not highly laudable (though limiting population growth sounds a tad Malthusian), but because it seems apparent to me, having witnessed the rise of China, the tiger economies and some Latin American countries, that the quickest way to eliminate poverty is rapid industrialisation. As I mentioned, their time for an ecological approach will come, and it will come within decades rather than centuries, but they will have to learn the hard way !Finally, energy transformation. In particular the systemic view advocates a shift away from coal, oil and other fossil fuels. We are at a moment of perfect technological alignment for an energy revolution, because of advances in both energy and communications technology, enabling the a “Third Industrial Revolution” with five pillars:1. shifting to renewables (solar, wind, hydro)2. transforming building stock into power plants, collecting energy on-site3. deploying hydrogen and other storage technologies4. using the internet to transform electricity grids into “inter-grids”5. transforming automobiles to electric plug in and fuel cell vehiclesThe argument is that this can be achieved in the context of a market economy generating viable returns for investors. Couple this with reductions in industrial waste and inefficiency (estimates are that we can save up to 90% of energy and materials currently used in industrial design), and we can become truly sustainable:“Imagine fuel without fear. No climate change. No oil spills, dead coal miners, dirty air, devastated lands, lost wildlife. No energy poverty. No oil-fed wars, tyrannies, or terrorists. Nothing to run out. Nothing to cut off. Nothing to worry about. Just energy abundance, benign and affordable, for all, for ever”This is a great book gets a 5* rating from me. I like it because it provides a coherent scientific, philosophical and technological underpinning for the ideas presented. I do agree that we are seeing signs of systemic rather than linear phenomena, and I do think that current conditions can provide the impetus for this transition. What I don’t understand, and I don’t think the authors do yet either, is whether this transition will be itself a systemic process, or whether some top-down “policies” or “new forms of government” will be required to push the process.

Keywords

Free Download The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision in PDF format
The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision PDF Free Download
Download The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision 2016 PDF Free
The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision 2016 PDF Free Download
Download The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision PDF
Free Download Ebook The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision