Complex Adaptive Systems/Living Systems

Post your thoughts on what the CAS/LS materials mean to you? Have these ideas influenced your thinking? How? Is there an idea or concept that really stands out? Please reflect on this...

I found the CAS/LS materials to be the most fascinating and intriguing of the materials presented during the course. It seems to be a field that explains so much---if CAS can't explain it, then surely math can, and then what's left to explain other than emotion? I feel like the CAS materials explain so much of ecology, evolution, and life, and I walked away thinking this field is highly understudied (probably just my ignorance, but I have never heard of CAS before this course!).

CAS has greatly influenced my thinking, and it is an area I long to learn more and more about.

There were a few points in the materials that I want to focus on because they really stood out to me:

Chaotic Systems: This seems so pertinent to describing so many things I've studied in my career as a computer modeler, a biologist, and other related fields, it's almost overwhelming. I remember when I was younger, and I used to believe in God as the Catholic Church perceived God. I would struggle with the idea of the holy trinity. It is something like the mind's struggle to accept a system can generate order and disorder simultaneously. I also came away with the fact that ecologists and evolutionary biologists are GREATLY misusing the term random. I look forward to learning more about chaotic systems in nature.

Autopoiesis: I still struggle with the definition of this. My struggle is due to my determination to distinguish between living and non-living systems. When I first read about this term in Capra, I didn't want to apply it to computer programs. I am ok with saying a non-living system can be autopoietic-like, but I don't like applying autopoiesis to machines. I have more understanding to gain here.

Single-vs-Double Loop Learning: Wow. What can I say? This is getting posted somewhere I can see it all the time. I strive for double loop learning, but of course, fall short in so many ways.

The Edge of Chaos: Like-wise, the edge of chaos had a profound effect on me. I can see why some many things are not changing, that we hope would. American politics comes to mind- until citizens approach that edge of chaos, we are never going to emerge at a higher level. Think of all the "New Emerging Possibilities?"

Diagramming Systems

Post your thoughts and impression about systems diagrams and diagramming. Do CLDs make sense to you? What seem to be their uses & advantages. What about Stock and FLow diagrams? Do they make sense? How are they different and similar to CLDs; what are their strengths? (all from your perspective)

I think it's good that put this assignment off, really, because my perspective on Causal Loop Diagrams has ebbed and flowed throughout the creation of our CLD for our ALP project. Although the creation of the diagram was not easy, and even painful (metaphorically of course) at times, my hindsight is much clearer on their value. My overall feelings on Causal Loop Diagrams:

Pros:

*They force those involved to listen to and consider the perspectives of the other people assisting in the diagram process.

*They bring unanticipated variables/relationships to the surface.

*They really do highlight leverage points! We changed our entire perspective after wallowing through our CLD.

*You can't enter the CLD process, and later exit knowing the same amount of information. You WILL learn about your system.

Cons:

*Only a very simple diagram would be good for the uninitiated.

*They are difficult to make "pretty".

*They can lead to interpersonal conflict.

I wish we could have spent more time dealing with Stock and Flow diagrams, but there are only so many hours in the day. They seem very useful, because they're easier to understand. From an analogy perspective: I understand a draining bathtub more than a ecosystem. I am still unclear about some of the diagramming aspects of Stock and Flow diagrams (the arrows are not always clear to me, especially the ones that loop back on themselves). However, I get a sense of their utility. The thing I like about Stock and Flow diagrams, and the idea that we live in a finite world with finite resources is absolutely integrated into the diagramming process. You can often try an explain to someone that a particular resource will eventually run out, but a diagram helps illustrate this point very effectively.

I wanted to look at some examples of Stock and Flow, and I found this one below from a quick google search. It is a stock and flow diagram meant to model new product use. I immediately though, heck--this could model all sorts of things in Sustainability! The model below only has word of mouth as a way of increase adoption. However, why does the diagram have double arrows coming from Adopters? Seems like this could be even further simplified?

So this brings me to comparing CLD and S & F D. At first I thought, well, S & F D are simpler, but after seeing the examples on the world wide web, I am not so sure! I do like that they are centered around processes (flows), and I like that you can center your eyes to that process easily and quickly. I think both CLDs and S & F D tells stories, and diagram behaviors. I am definitely unclear on the decision making process for choosing a CLD or a S & F D. It seems that S & F D have much stricter boundaries, which may not be useful when dealing with a complex system.

Because of the ALP, I definitely have a better grasp on CLDs than S & F Ds. I would not have said the same thing 6 weeks ago!