I have a kind of love/hate relationship with "systems" philosophies, or philosophies which try to systematize all that has been written and synthesize them into a unified pattern. My love of such philosophies is that they provide road maps to contextualizing whole theories of thought, while also providing some humility. Knowing that my resistances to some things may be an allergy to a key component in an overall system, I can approach such things with more balance and humility. I am not building a wall around something which is meant to be integrated into a totality.
On the other hand, I am hesitant that sometimes systems offer an illusion of completeness that never fully translates into experience. Systems don't often factor the need for people to take things piecemeal or even to stay in a particular rung for a long time. A system sometimes interprets staying in one place as "not seeing the trees for the forest"---getting mired in one place without seeing its purpose in the grand whole. But a system that overlooks the intricacy of the parts is also not quite right; systems are meaningless unless they factor the living processes or "pieces" that come together to make the whole. That is, even if one were to comprehend the entire universe as a single unified organism, that insight is essentially "lifeless" unless one comprehends how each part is actively unfolding according to an inner principle. Without parts, wholes could not be wholes. Similar to the body, if each part functioned the same way, they would not survive for long. Not every cell in the body can and should function as a heart cell, even though the heart is essential to the overall survival of the organism.
I would say that systems need to be complemented with sideways moments that defy systems--to remind us that even systems are vehicles that operate in specific contexts, and in themselves are empty. If they are valuable, by all means use them, but it seems important not to think that systems are reality itself. No map ever fully captures the territory it describes.
No comments:
Post a Comment