What a systematic approach contributes to. Systems approach

The essence of the systems approach as the basis of systems analysis

Research is carried out in accordance with the chosen goal and in a certain sequence. Research is an integral part of the organization's management and is aimed at improving the basic characteristics of the management process. When conducting research on control systems object research is the management system itself, which is characterized by certain characteristics and is subject to a number of requirements.

The effectiveness of the study of control systems is largely determined by the selected and used research methods. Research methods are methods, techniques for conducting research. Their competent use contributes to obtaining reliable and complete results of the study of problems that have arisen in the organization. The choice of research methods, the integration of various methods during research is determined by the knowledge, experience and intuition of the specialists conducting the research.

To identify the specifics of the work of organizations and develop measures to improve production and economic activities, it is used system analysis. The main goal system analysis is the development and implementation of such a control system, which is selected as a reference, to the greatest extent corresponding to all the requirements of optimality.

To comprehend the laws governing human activity, it is important to learn to understand how, in each specific case, the general context of perception of the next tasks is formed, how to bring into the system (hence the name - “system analysis”) initially scattered and redundant information about the problem situation, how to reconcile and deduce one of the other ideas and goals of different levels related to a single activity.

Here lies a fundamental problem that affects almost the very foundations of the organization of any human activity. The same task in a different context, at different levels of decision making, requires completely different ways of organizing and different knowledge.

The systems approach is one of the most important methodological principles of modern science and practice. Systems analysis methods are widely used to solve many theoretical and applied problems.

SYSTEM APPROACH is a methodological direction in science, the main task of which is to develop research methods and design complex objects - systems of different types and classes. The systems approach represents a certain stage in the development of methods of cognition, methods of research and design activities, methods of describing and explaining the nature of analyzed or artificially created objects.

At present, the systematic approach is increasingly being used in management, experience is accumulating in constructing system descriptions of research objects. The need for a systematic approach is due to the enlargement and complication of the studied systems, the needs of managing large systems and the integration of knowledge.

"System" is a Greek word (systema), literally meaning a whole made up of parts; a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other and form a certain integrity, unity.

Other words can be formed from the word "system": "systemic", "systematize", "systematic". In a narrow sense, the systemic approach is understood as the application of systemic methods to study real physical, biological, social and other systems.

The systems approach is applied to sets of objects, individual objects and their components, as well as to the properties and integral characteristics of objects.

A systematic approach is not an end in itself. In each specific case, its application should give a real, quite tangible effect. A systematic approach allows you to see gaps in knowledge about a given object, to detect their incompleteness, to define tasks scientific research, in some cases - by interpolation and extrapolation - to predict the properties of the missing parts of the description.

Exists several varieties of a systematic approach: complex, structural, holistic.

It is necessary to define the scope of these concepts.

A complex approach suggests the presence of a set of components of an object or applied research methods. In this case, neither the relationships between objects, nor the completeness of their composition, nor the relationship of components as a whole are taken into account. Mainly the tasks of statics are solved: the quantitative ratio of components and the like.

Structural Approach offers the study of the composition (subsystems) and structures of the object. With this approach, there is still no correlation between subsystems (parts) and the system (whole). The decomposition of systems into subsystems is not carried out in a single way. The dynamics of structures is usually not considered.

At holistic approach the relationship is studied not only between the parts of the object, but also between the parts and the whole. The decomposition of the whole into parts is unique. So, for example, it is customary to say that "the whole is that from which nothing can be taken away and to which nothing can be added." The holistic approach offers the study of the composition (subsystems) and structures of an object not only in statics, but also in dynamics, i.e., it offers the study of the behavior and evolution of systems. a holistic approach is not applicable to all systems (objects). but only to those that are characterized by a high degree of functional independence. Among the most important tasks of the systems approach relate:

1) development of means for representing the objects under study and designed as systems;

2) construction of generalized models of the system, models of different classes and specific properties of systems;

3) study of the structure of systems theories and various system concepts and developments.

In a systemic study, the analyzed object is considered as a certain set of elements, the interrelation of which determines the integral properties of this set. The main emphasis is on identifying the variety of connections and relationships that take place both inside the object under study and in its relationship with the external environment, the environment. The properties of an object as an integral system are determined not only and not so much by the summation of the properties of its individual elements, but by the properties of its structure, special system-forming, integrative connections of the object under consideration. To understand the behavior of systems, first of all purposeful, it is necessary to identify the control processes implemented by this system - forms of information transfer from one subsystem to another and the methods of influence of some parts of the system on others, coordination of the lower levels of the system by the elements of its higher level, control, influence on the latter all other subsystems. Significant importance in the systematic approach is attached to identifying the probabilistic nature of the behavior of the objects under study. An important feature of the systems approach is that not only the object, but also the research process itself acts as a complex system, the task of which, in particular, is to combine various models of the object into a single whole. Finally, system objects, as a rule, are not indifferent to the process of their study and in many cases can have a significant impact on it.

The main principles of the systematic approach are:

1. Integrity, which allows considering the system at the same time as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

2. The hierarchy of the structure, i.e. the presence of a set (at least two) of elements located on the basis of subordination of the elements of the lower level to the elements of the highest level. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible on the example of any particular organization. As you know, any organization is the interaction of two subsystems: managing and controlled. One obeys the other.

3. Structuring, allowing you to analyze the elements of the system and their interrelationships within a specific organizational structure... As a rule, the process of functioning of a system is determined not so much by the properties of its individual elements as by the properties of the structure itself.

4. Plurality, allowing the use of a variety of cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

As noted above, with a systematic approach, it is important to study the characteristics of an organization as a system, i.e. characteristics of "input", "process" and characteristics of "output".

With a systematic approach based on marketing research, the "exit" parameters are firstly investigated, i.e. goods or services, namely what to produce, with what quality indicators, with what costs, for whom, at what time to sell and at what price. Answers to these questions must be clear and timely. As a result, the “output” should be a competitive product or service. Then the parameters of the input are determined, i.e. the need for resources (material financial, labor and information) is investigated, which is determined after a detailed study of the organizational and technical level of the system under consideration (level of technology, technology, features of the organization of production, labor and management) and parameters of the external environment (economic, geopolitical, social, environmental and etc.).

And, finally, no less important is the study of the parameters of the process that transforms resources into finished products. At this stage, depending on the object of research, a production technology or control technology, as well as factors and ways of its improvement, are considered.

Thus, the systematic approach allows us to comprehensively assess any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help to analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the problems of entry, process and exit.

The use of a systematic approach allows you to best organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system. An integrated approach involves taking into account both the internal and the external environment of the organization in the analysis. This means that it is necessary to take into account not only internal, but also external factors - economic, geopolitical, social, demographic, environmental, etc.

Factors are important aspects when analyzing organizations and, unfortunately, are not always taken into account. For example, social issues are often overlooked or postponed when designing new organizations. When introducing new technology Ergonomics indicators are not always taken into account, which leads to an increase in worker fatigue and, as a result, to a decrease in labor productivity. When forming new labor collectives, socio-psychological aspects, in particular, problems of labor motivation, are not properly taken into account. Summarizing what has been said, it can be argued that an integrated approach is a prerequisite for solving the problem of analyzing an organization.

The essence of the systems approach has been formulated by many authors. In expanded form, it is formulated V. G. Afanasyev, which identified a number of interrelated aspects, which together and together make up a systematic approach:

- system-element, answering the question of what (what components) the system is formed from;

- system-structural, revealing the internal organization of the system, the way of interaction of its constituent components;

System-functional, showing what functions the system and its constituent components perform;

- system-communication, revealing the relationship of this system with others, both horizontally and vertically;

- system-integrative, showing the mechanisms, factors of preservation, improvement and development of the system;

System-historical, answering the question of how, how the system arose, what stages in its development passed, what are its historical prospects.

The rapid growth of modern organizations and the level of their complexity, the variety of operations performed have led to the fact that the rational implementation of leadership functions has become extremely difficult, but at the same time even more important for successful work enterprises. To cope with the inevitable increase in the number of operations and their complexity, a large organization must base its activities on a systems approach. Within this approach, the leader can more effectively integrate his actions in managing the organization.

The systematic approach contributes, as already mentioned, mainly to the development correct method thinking about the management process. The leader must think in accordance with a systematic approach. Learning the systems approach instills a mindset that, on the one hand, helps to eliminate unnecessary complexity, and on the other hand, helps the leader to understand the essence of complex problems and make decisions based on a clear understanding of the environment. It is important to structure the task, to outline the boundaries of the system. But it is just as important to consider that the systems that a leader has to deal with in the course of his work are part of larger systems, perhaps involving an entire industry or several, sometimes many, companies and industries, or even society as a whole. These systems are constantly changing: they are created, operate, reorganized and, sometimes, liquidated.

Systems approach is the theoretical and methodological basis system analysis.

Systems approach - direction of philosophy and methodology scientific knowledge, which is based on the study of objects as systems.

The peculiarity of the systems approach is that it is focused on disclosing the integrity of the object and the mechanisms that provide it, on identifying the various types of connections of a complex object and bringing them together into a single theoretical picture.

The concept of "systems approach" (from the English - systems approach) began to be widely used in the 1960s - 1970s, although the very desire to consider the object of research as an integral system arose back in ancient philosophy and science (Plato, Aristotle). The idea of ​​a systemic organization of knowledge, which arose in ancient times, was formed in the Middle Ages and was most developed in German classical philosophy (Kant, Schelling). The classic example of a systemic study is Karl Marx's Capital. The principles embodied in it for the study of the organic whole (ascent from the abstract to the concrete, the unity of analysis and synthesis, logical and historical, the identification of different-quality connections and their interactions in the object, the synthesis of structural-functional and genetic ideas about the object, etc.) were the most important component dialectical materialist methodology of scientific knowledge. Charles Darwin's theory of evolution serves as a vivid example of the application of the systems approach in biology.

In the XX century. the systems approach occupies one of the leading places in scientific knowledge. This is primarily due to a change in the type of scientific and practical problems. In a whole number of fields of science, the central place is beginning to be occupied by the problems of studying the organization and functioning of complex self-developing objects, the boundaries and composition of which are not obvious and require special research in each individual case. The study of such objects - multilevel, hierarchical, self-organizing biological, psychological, social, technical - required the consideration of these objects as systems.

A number of scientific concepts arise, which are characterized by the use of the basic ideas of the systems approach. Thus, in the teachings of V. I. Vernadsky about the biosphere and the noosphere, a new type of objects is proposed to scientific knowledge - global systems. A. A. Bogdanov and a number of other researchers begin to develop the theory of organization. The selection of a special class of systems - information and control systems - served as the foundation for the emergence of cybernetics. In biology, systemic ideas are used in environmental studies, in the study of higher nervous activity, in the analysis of biological organization, in systematics. In economic science, the principles of the systems approach are used in the formulation and solution of problems of optimal economic planning, which require the construction of multicomponent models. social systems different levels. In the practice of management, the ideas of the systems approach are crystallized in the methodological tools of system analysis.

Thus, the principles of the systems approach apply to almost all areas. scientific knowledge and practice. At the same time, the systematic development of these principles begins in the methodological terms. Initially, methodological research was grouped around the problems of constructing a general theory of systems (the first program for its construction and the term itself were proposed by L. Bertalanffy). In the early 1920s. the young biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy began to study organisms as specific systems, summarizing his views in the book " Modern theory development "(1929). He developed a systematic approach to the study biological organisms... In the book "Robots, People and Consciousness" (1967), the scientist transferred the general theory of systems to the analysis of processes and phenomena of social life. In 1969 another book by Bertalanffy, General Systems Theory, was published. The researcher turns his systems theory into a general disciplinary science. He saw the purpose of this science in the search for the structural similarity of laws established in various disciplines, based on which it is possible to deduce system-wide laws.

However, the development of research in this direction has shown that the totality of problems in the methodology of systems research significantly exceeds the scope of problems of general systems theory. To designate this broader sphere of methodological problems, the term "systems approach" is used, which has been used since the 1970s. firmly entered scientific use (in scientific literature different countries use other terms to denote this concept - "system analysis", "system methods", "system-structural approach", "general systems theory"; at the same time, a specific, narrower meaning is also assigned to the concepts of systems analysis and general systems theory; taking this into account, the term "systems approach" should be considered more accurate, moreover, it is the most common in the literature in Russian).

The following stages in the development of the systems approach in the XX century can be distinguished. (Table 6.1).

Table 6.1. The main stages in the development of a systems approach

Period	Researchers
	L. A. Bogdanov		General organizational science (tectology) - general theory of organization (disorganization), the science of universal types of structural transformation of systems
1930-1940s		L. von Bertalanffy	General systems theory (as a set of principles for the study of systems and a set of individual empirically identified isomorphisms in the structure and functioning of heterogeneous system objects). System - a complex of interacting elements, a set of elements that are in certain relationships with each other and with the environment
			Development of cybernetics and design of automated control systems. Wiener discovered the laws of information interaction between elements in the process of managing the system
1960-1980s		M. Mesarovich, P. Glushkov	Concepts of the general theory of systems, provided with their own mathematical apparatus, for example, models of multilevel multipurpose systems

The systems approach does not exist in the form of a strict methodological concept, but rather a set of research principles. The systems approach is an approach in which the object under study is considered as a system, i.e. a set of interconnected elements (components) that has an output (goal), input (resources), communication with the external environment, feedback. In accordance with the general theory of systems, an object is considered as a system and at the same time as an element of a larger system.

The study of an object from the standpoint of a systems approach includes the following aspects of:

• - system-element (identification of the elements that make up a given system);
• - systemic-structural (the study of internal connections between the elements of the system);
• - system-functional (identification of system functions);
• - system-target (identifying the goals and sub-goals of the system);
• - system-resource (analysis of the resources required for the functioning of the system);
• - system-integration (determination of the set of qualitative properties of the system, ensuring its integrity and different from the properties of its elements);
• - system-communication (analysis of external relations of the system with the external environment and other systems);
• - systemic-historical (studying the emergence of a system, stages of its development and prospects).

Thus, the systems approach is a methodological direction in science, the main task of which is to develop methods for researching and constructing complex objects - systems of different types and classes.

You can find a twofold understanding of the systems approach: on the one hand, it is the consideration and analysis of existing systems, on the other hand, the creation, design, synthesis of systems to achieve goals.

As applied to organizations, the systems approach is most often understood as a complex study of an object as a whole from the standpoint of system analysis, i.e. clarification of a complex problem and its structuring into a series of problems solved using economic and mathematical methods, finding criteria for their solution, detailing goals, designing an effective organization to achieve goals.

System analysis is used as one of the most important methods in the systems approach, as an effective means of solving complex, usually not clearly formulated problems. Systems analysis can be considered a further development of the ideas of cybernetics: it examines general laws related to complex systems that are studied by any science.

Systems engineering - applied science, which investigates the problems of real creation of complex control systems.

The system building process consists of six stages:

• 1) system analysis;
• 2) system programming, which includes the definition of current goals: scheduling and work plans;
• 3) system design - the actual design of the system, its subsystems and components to achieve optimal efficiency;
• 4) creation of software programs;
• 5) putting the system into operation and checking it;
• 6) system maintenance.

The quality of the organization of the system is usually expressed in the synergy effect. It manifests itself in the fact that the result of the functioning of the system as a whole is higher than the sum of the results of the same name for the individual elements that make up the totality. In practice, this means that from the same elements we can obtain systems of different or identical properties, but different efficiency, depending on how these elements are interconnected, i.e. how the system itself will be organized.

Organization, which is an organized whole in its most general abstract form, is the ultimate extension of any system. The concept of "organization" as an ordered state of the whole is identical to the concept of "system". The concept opposite to "system" is the concept of "non-system".

A system is nothing more than a static organization, i.e. some fixed on this moment state of order.

Considering an organization as a system allows you to systematize and classify organizations according to a number of common characteristics. So, according to the degree of complexity, nine levels of the hierarchy are distinguished:

• 1) the level of static organization, reflecting the static relationship between the elements of the whole;
• 2) the level of a simple dynamic system with preprogrammed mandatory movements;
• 3) level information organization, or "thermostat" level;
• 4) self-preserving organization - an open system, or the level of the cell;
• 5) genetically public organization;
• 6) an organization of the "animal" type, characterized by the presence of mobility, purposeful behavior and awareness;
• 7) the level of the individual human body- "human" level;
• 8) social organization, which is a variety of public institutions;
• 9) transcendental systems, i.e. organizations that exist in the form of various structures and relationships.

The use of a systematic approach to the study of an organization allows you to significantly expand the understanding of its essence and development trends, to reveal more deeply and comprehensively the content of the ongoing processes, to reveal the objective laws of the formation of this multidimensional system.

The systems approach, or the systemic method, is an explicit (explicitly, openly expressed) description of procedures for determining objects as systems and methods of their specific systemic study (descriptions, explanations, predictions, etc.).

A systematic approach to the study of the properties of an organization allows us to establish its integrity, consistency and organization. With a systematic approach, the attention of researchers is directed to its composition, to the properties of elements that are manifested in interaction. Establishment in the system of stable interconnection of elements at all levels and steps, i.e. the establishment of the law of connections between elements, is the discovery of the structure of the system as the next step in the concretization of the whole.

Structure as an internal organization of a system, a reflection of its internal content is manifested in the orderliness of the interrelationships of its parts. This allows you to express a number of essential aspects of the organization as a system. The structure of the system, expressing its essence, is manifested in the totality of the laws of a given area of ​​phenomena.

Exploring the structure of an organization - important stage knowledge of the variety of connections that take place within the investigated object. This is one of the aspects of consistency. The other side consists in identifying intra-organizational relations and relationships of the object under consideration with other components of a higher-level system. In this regard, it is necessary, firstly, to consider the individual properties of the investigated object in their relation to the object as a whole, and secondly, to reveal the laws of behavior.

Systems approach- the direction of the methodology of scientific knowledge, which is based on the consideration of an object as a system: an integral complex of interrelated elements (I. V. Blauberg, V. N. Sadovsky, E. G. Yudin); a set of interacting objects (L. von Bertalanffy); a set of entities and relationships (Hall A.D., Feijin R.I., late Bertalanffy)

Speaking of a systematic approach, we can talk about a certain way of organizing our actions, such that it covers any kind of activity, identifying patterns and relationships in order to use them more efficiently. At the same time, the systematic approach is not so much a method for solving problems as a method for setting problems. As the saying goes, "A correctly asked question is half the answer." This is a qualitatively higher, than just objective, way of cognition.

Basic principles of the systems approach

Integrity, allowing to consider simultaneously the system as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

Hierarchy of structure, that is, the presence of a set (at least two) of elements arranged on the basis of the subordination of the elements of the lower level to the elements of the highest level. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible on the example of any particular organization. As you know, any organization is the interaction of two subsystems: managing and controlled. One obeys the other.

Structuring, allowing you to analyze the elements of the system and their relationship within a specific organizational structure. As a rule, the process of functioning of a system is determined not so much by the properties of its individual elements as by the properties of the structure itself.

Plurality, which allows you to use a variety of cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

Consistency, the property of an object to have all the features of the system.

Features of the systems approach

Systems approach- this is an approach in which any system (object) is considered as a set of interrelated elements (components), which has an output (goal), input (resources), connection with the external environment, feedback. This is the most difficult approach. The systems approach is a form of application of the theory of knowledge and dialectics to the study of processes occurring in nature, society, and thinking. Its essence lies in the implementation of the requirements of the general theory systems, according to which each object in the process of its research should be considered as a large and complex system and at the same time as an element of a more general system.

The detailed definition of the systematic approach also includes the obligatory study and practical use of the following eight aspects:

- system-element or system-complex, consisting in identifying the elements that make up a given system. In all social systems, one can find material components (means of production and consumer goods), processes (economic, social, political, spiritual, etc.) and ideas, scientifically conscious interests of people and their communities;

- systemic, which consists in clarifying the internal connections and dependencies between the elements of a given system and allowing you to get an idea of ​​the internal organization (structure) of the system under study;

- system-functional, involving the identification of functions for the implementation of which the corresponding systems have been created and exist;

system-target, meaning the need for a scientific definition of the goals and sub-goals of the system, their mutual coordination;

- system resource, which consists in a thorough identification of the resources required for the functioning of the system, for the system to solve a particular problem;

- system integration, consisting in determining the set of qualitative properties of the system, ensuring its integrity and peculiarity;

- system communication, meaning the need to identify the external connections of this system with others, that is, its connections with the environment;

- system-historical, which allows you to find out the conditions in the time of the emergence of the system under study, the stages passed by it, the current state, as well as possible development prospects.

Almost all modern sciences are built according to the system principle. An important aspect of the systematic approach is the development of a new principle of its use - the creation of a new, unified and more optimal approach (general methodology) to cognition, to apply it to any cognizable material, with the guaranteed goal of getting the most complete and holistic idea of ​​this material.

Systems approach is a direction of the methodology of scientific knowledge and social practice, which is based on the consideration of objects as systems.

The essence of the joint ventureconsists, firstly, in understanding the object of research as a system and, secondly, in understanding the process of researching an object as systemic in its logic and applied means.

Like any methodology, the systems approach implies the presence of certain principles and methods of organizing activities, in this case, activities related to the analysis and synthesis of systems.

The systems approach is based on the principles: goals, duality, integrity, complexity, plurality and historicism. Let us consider in more detail the content of the listed principles.

Purpose principle focuses on the fact that when studying an object it is necessary primarily identify the purpose of its functioning.

First of all, we should be interested not in how the system is built, but for what it exists, what is the goal in front of it, what is it caused by, what are the means of achieving the goal?

The goal principle is constructive if two conditions are met:

The goal should be formulated in such a way that the degree of its achievement can be assessed (set) quantitatively;

The system must have a mechanism to assess the degree to which a given goal has been achieved.

2. Duality principle follows from the principle of purpose and means that the system should be considered as a part of a higher-level system and at the same time as an independent part, acting as a whole in interaction with the environment. In turn, each element of the system has its own structure and can also be considered as a system.

The relationship with the goal principle is that the goal of the object's functioning should be subordinated to solving the problems of the functioning of a higher-level system. The goal is a category external to the system. It is assigned to it by a system of a higher level, where this system is included as an element.

3.Integrity principle requires to consider an object as something isolated from the totality of other objects, acting as a whole in relation to the environment, having its own specific functions and developing according to its inherent laws. At the same time, the need to study individual aspects is not denied.

4.Complexity principle indicates the need to study an object as a complex formation and, if the complexity is very high, it is necessary to consistently simplify the representation of the object in such a way as to preserve all its essential properties.

5.The principle of plurality requires the researcher to present a description of an object at many levels: morphological, functional, informational.

Morphological level gives an idea of ​​the structure of the system. The morphological description cannot be exhaustive. The depth of the description, the level of detail, that is, the choice of elements, into which the description does not penetrate, is determined by the purpose of the system. The morphological description is hierarchical.

The concretization of morphology is given at as many levels as they are required to create an idea of basic properties systems.

Functional Description associated with the transformation of energy and information. Any object is interesting primarily by the result of its existence, by the place it occupies among other objects in the surrounding world.

Information Description gives an idea of ​​the organization of the system, i.e. about informational relationships between the elements of the system. It complements functional and morphological descriptions.

Each level of description has its own specific patterns. All levels are closely related. When making changes at one of the levels, it is necessary to analyze possible changes at other levels.

6. The principle of historicism obliges the researcher to reveal the past of the system and identify trends and patterns of its development in the future.

Predicting the behavior of the system in the future is a prerequisite for the decisions made to improve the existing system or the creation of a new one ensures the effective functioning of the system for a given time.

SYSTEM ANALYSIS

System analysis represents a set of scientific methods and practical techniques for solving various problems based on a systematic approach.

The systems analysis methodology is based on three concepts: problem, problem solution and system.

Problem- this is a discrepancy or difference between the existing and the required state of affairs in any system.

The required position can be either the necessary or the desired. The necessary state is dictated by objective conditions, and the desired is determined by subjective prerequisites, which are based on the objective conditions for the functioning of the system.

Problems that exist in one system, as a rule, are not equal. Attributes are used to compare problems and determine their priority: importance, scale, generality, relevance, etc.

Identifying the problem carried out by identification symptoms determining the inadequacy of the system for its purpose or its insufficient efficiency. Systematically manifested symptoms form a tendency.

Symptom identification produced by measuring and analyzing various indicators of the system, the normal value of which is known. A deviation of the indicator from the norm is a symptom.

Solution consists in eliminating the differences between the existing and the required state of the system. The elimination of differences can be done either by improving the system, or by replacing it with a new one.

The decision to improve or replace is made subject to the following provisions. If the direction of improvement provides a significant increase in the life cycle of the system and the costs are incomparably small in relation to the cost of developing the system, then the decision to improve is justified. Otherwise, you should consider replacing it with a new one.

A system is being created to solve the problem.

The main system analysis components are:

1. The purpose of systems analysis.

2. The goal that the system must achieve in the process: functioning.

3. Alternatives or options for building or improving the system, through which it is possible to solve the problem.

4. Resources required to analyze and improve the existing system or create a new one.

5. Criteria or indicators that allow you to compare different alternatives and choose the most preferable.

7. A model that ties together purpose, alternatives, resources and criteria.

System analysis technique

1.System Description:

a) determination of the purpose of the system analysis;

b) determination of the goals, purpose and functions of the system (external and internal);

c) determination of the role and place in the system of a higher level;

d) functional description (input, output, process, feedback, constraints);

e) structural description (uncovering relationships, stratification and decomposition of the system);

f) informational description;

g) description of the life cycle of the system (creation, operation, including improvement, destruction);

2.Identification and description of the problem:

a) determination of the composition of performance indicators and methods of their calculation;

b) The choice of functionality for assessing the effectiveness of the system and setting the requirements for it (determining the necessary (desired) state of affairs);

b) determining the actual state of affairs (calculating the effectiveness of the existing system using the selected functionality);

c) establishing the discrepancy between the necessary (desired) and the actual state of affairs and its assessment;

d) history of inconsistency and analysis of the causes of its occurrence (symptoms and trends);

e) formulation of the problem;

f) identifying the links of the problem with other problems;

g) forecasting the development of the problem;

h) assessment of the consequences of the problem and a conclusion about its relevance.

3. Selection and implementation of the direction for solving the problem:

a) structuring the problem (highlighting subproblems)

b) identification of bottlenecks in the system;

c) study of the alternative “improving the system - creating a new system”;

d) determination of directions for solving the problem (choice of alternatives);

e) assessment of the feasibility of directions for solving the problem;

f) comparing alternatives and choosing an effective direction;

g) agreement and approval of the chosen direction for solving the problem;

h) highlighting the stages of solving the problem;

i) implementation of the chosen direction;

j) checking its effectiveness.

Knowledge of some principles easily replaces ignorance of some facts.

K. Helvetius

1. "Systems thinking? .. Why do you need it? .."

The systems approach is not something fundamentally new that has emerged only in recent years. This is a natural method for solving both theoretical and practical problems used for centuries. However, the rapid technological progress, unfortunately, gave rise to a flawed style of thinking - a modern "narrow" specialist on the basis of highly specialized "common sense" invades the solution of complex and "broad" problems, neglecting system literacy as unnecessary philosophizing. Moreover, if in the field of technology, systemic illiteracy is relatively fast (albeit with losses, sometimes significant, such as Chernobyl disaster) is revealed by the failure of certain projects, then in the humanitarian field this leads to the fact that whole generations of scientists "train" simple explanations for complex facts or cover up with complex, pseudo-scientific reasoning ignorance of elementary general scientific methods and tools, deriving results that ultimately cause , much more significant harm than the mistakes of "techies". A particularly dramatic situation has developed in philosophy, sociology, psychology, linguistics, history, ethnology and a number of other sciences, for which such a "tool" as a systems approach is extremely necessary due to the extreme difficulties object of research.

Once, at a meeting of the scientific and methodological seminar of the Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the project “Concept of empirical research of Ukrainian society” was considered. Having singled out six subsystems in society in a strange way, the speaker characterized these subsystems by fifty indicators, many of which are also multidimensional. After that, the seminar discussed for a long time the question of what to do with these indicators, how to obtain generalized indicators and which ones ... etc. were used explicitly in a non-systemic sense.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, the word "system" is used in literature and in everyday life in a simplified, "non-systemic" sense. So, in the "Dictionary foreign words"Out of six definitions of the word" system ", five, strictly speaking, have nothing to do with systems (these are ways, form, structure of something, etc.). At the same time, in the scientific literature, many attempts are still being made to strictly define the concepts of "system", "systems approach", to formulate systemic principles. This creates the impression that those scientists who have already realized the need for a systems approach are trying to formulate their own systemic concepts. We have to admit that we have practically no literature on the foundations of science, especially on the so-called "instrumental" sciences, that is, those that are used as a kind of "tool" by other sciences. The "instrumental" science is mathematics. The author is convinced that systemology should also become an "instrumental" science. Today the literature on systemology is represented either by "self-made" works of specialists in various fields, or by extremely complex, special works designed for professional systems scientists or mathematicians.

The author's systemic concepts were mainly formed in the 60s and 80s in the process of performing special topics, first at the Head Research Institute for Rocket and Space Systems, and then at the Research Institute of Control Systems under the leadership of the General Designer of Control Systems Academician V.S.Semenikhin. A huge role was played by participation in a number of scientific seminars of Moscow University, scientific institutes in Moscow and, especially, a semi-official seminar in those years on systems research. What is stated below is the result of analysis and comprehension of literature, many years of personal experience of the author, his colleagues - specialists in systemic and related issues. The concept of a system as a model was introduced by the author in 1966–68. and published in. The definition of information as a metric of systemic interactions was proposed by the author in 1978. Systemic principles are partially borrowed (in these cases there are references), partially formulated by the author in 1971–86.

It is unlikely that what is given in this work is "the ultimate truth", however, even if some approximation to the truth is already a lot. The presentation is deliberately popular, since the author's goal is to acquaint the broadest possible scientific community with systemology and, thereby, stimulate the study, as well as the use of this powerful, but still little-known "toolbox". It would be extremely useful to introduce into the programs of universities and universities (for example, in the section of general education in the first years) a lecture cycle of the basics of a systems approach (36 academic hours), then (in senior years) - to supplement a special course in applied systemology, focused on the field of activity future specialists (24–36 academic hours). However, so far these are only good wishes.

I would like to believe that the changes that are taking place now (both in our country and in the world) will force scientists, and just people, to learn a systemic style of thinking, that a systemic approach will become an element of culture, and system analysis will become a tool of specialists in both natural and humanitarian sciences. ... Having been advocating for this for a long time, the author once again hopes that the elementary systemic concepts and principles outlined below will help at least one person avoid at least one mistake.

Many great truths were at first blasphemy.

B. Shaw

2. Realities, models, systems

The concept of "system" was used by the materialist philosophers of ancient Greece. According to modern UNESCO data, the word "system" is in one of the first places in terms of frequency of use in many languages ​​of the world, especially in civilized countries. In the second half of the twentieth century, the role of the concept of "system" in the development of sciences and society rises so high that some enthusiasts of this direction began to talk about the onset of the "era of systems" and the emergence of a special science - systemology... For many years, the outstanding cyberneticist V.M.Glushkov fought actively for the formation of this science.

In the philosophical literature, the term "systemology" was first introduced in 1965 by I. B. Novik, and to denote a wide area of ​​systems theory in the spirit of L. von Bertalanffy this term was used in 1971 by V. T. Kulik. The emergence of systemology meant the realization that a number of scientific areas and, first of all, various areas of cybernetics, investigate only different qualities of one and the same integral object - systems... Indeed, in the West, until now, cybernetics is often identified with the theory of control and communication in the original understanding of N. Wiener. Having later included a number of theories and disciplines, cybernetics remained a conglomerate of non-physical areas of science. And only when the concept "system" became pivotal in cybernetics, giving it the missing conceptual unity, it became justified to identify modern cybernetics with systemology. Thus, the concept of "system" is becoming more and more fundamental. In any case, "... one of the main goals of searching for a system is precisely its ability to explain and put in a certain place even the material that was conceived and obtained by the researcher without any systematic approach."

And yet, what is it "system"? To understand this, you have to "start from the beginning."

2.1. Realities

Man in the world around him - at all times it was a symbol. That's just in different times the accents in this phrase shifted, which is why the symbol itself changed. So, until recently, the banner (symbol) not only in our country was the slogan attributed to IV Michurin: “You cannot expect favors from nature! It is our task to take them from her! " Do you feel where the accent is? .. Somewhere from the middle of the twentieth century, mankind finally began to realize: you cannot conquer Nature - you are dearer! A whole science has appeared - ecology, the concept of "human factor" has become commonly used - the emphasis has shifted to a person. And then a dramatic circumstance for humanity was revealed - a person is no longer able to understand the increasingly complex world! Somewhere at the end of the 19th century, DI Mendeleev said: "Science begins where measurements begin" ... But in those days there was still something to measure! Over the next fifty-seventy years, so many "intend" that to understand the colossal number of facts and dependencies between them seemed more and more hopeless. Natural sciences in the study of nature reached a level of complexity that turned out to be higher than the capabilities of man.

In mathematics, special sections began to develop to facilitate complex calculations. Even the appearance in the forties of the twentieth century of ultra-high-speed calculating machines, which computers were at first considered, did not save the day. The man turned out to be unable to understand what was happening in the world around him! .. This is where the "man's problem" comes from ... Maybe it was the complexity of the world that once served as the reason that the sciences were divided into natural and humanitarian, "exact" and descriptive ("Imprecise"?). Problems that can be formalized, that is, correctly and accurately posed, and, consequently, strictly and accurately solved, analyzed, the so-called natural, "exact" sciences - these are mainly problems of mathematics, mechanics, physics, etc. The rest of the tasks and problems, which, from the point of view of representatives of the "exact" sciences, have a significant drawback - phenomenological, descriptive, difficult to formalize and therefore loosely, "inaccurate", and often incorrectly formulated, constituted the so-called humanitarian direction of nature research - these are psychology, sociology, the study of languages, historical and ethnological research, geography, etc. (it is important to note that the tasks related to the study of man, life, in general - living!). The reason for the descriptive, verbal form of representation of knowledge in psychology, sociology and, in general, in humanities research is not so much in the poor acquaintance and mastery of mathematics in the humanities (which mathematicians are convinced), but in the complexity, multiparametry, variety of manifestations of life ... This is not fault humanitarians, it is rather a disaster, the "curse of complexity" of the object of research! .. But the criticism of the humanities nevertheless deserves - for conservatism in methodology and XX century general scientific "toolkit" for research, analysis and synthesis of complex objects and processes, diversity, interdependence of some facts on others. In this, we have to admit, the humanities research areas of the second half of the twentieth century lagged far behind the natural sciences.

2.2. Models

What provided the natural sciences in the second half of the twentieth century with such rapid progress? Without going into a deep scientific analysis, it can be argued that progress in the natural sciences has provided, mainly, a powerful tool that appeared in the middle of the twentieth century - model... By the way, computers, soon after their appearance, ceased to be considered as calculating machines (although they retained the word "computing" in their name) and all of them further development went under the sign of a modeling tool.

What is model? The literature on this topic is vast and varied; a fairly complete picture of the models can be given by the works of a number of domestic researchers, as well as the fundamental work of M. Wartofsky. Without complicating unnecessarily, you can define:

The model is a kind of "substitute" of the object of research, reflecting in a form acceptable for the purposes of research all the most important parameters and connections of the object under study.

The need for models arises, generally speaking, in two cases:

• when the object of research is inaccessible for direct contacts, direct measurements, or such contacts and measurements are difficult or impossible (for example, direct studies of living organisms associated with their dismemberment, lead to the death of the object of research and, as V.I. Vernadsky said, the loss of what distinguishes living from inanimate; direct contacts and measurements in the human psyche are very difficult, and even more so in that substrate that is still not very clear to science, which is called social psyche, an atom is inaccessible for direct research, etc.) - in this case, create a model, in a sense "similar" to the object of research;
• when the object of research is multi-parameter, that is, it is so complex that it does not lend itself to holistic comprehension (for example, a plant or institution, a geographical region or an object; a very complex and multi-parameter object is the human psyche as a kind of integrity, that is, an individual or personality, complex and multi-parameter are non-random groups of people, ethnic groups, etc.) - in this case, the most important (in terms of goals this study!) parameters and functional connections of an object and create a model that is often not even similar (in the literal sense of the word) to the object itself.

In connection with the above, it is curious that the most interesting object of research in many sciences is Human- both inaccessible and multiparametric, and the humanities are in no hurry to acquire human models.

It is not necessary to build a model from the same material as the object - the main thing is that it reflects what is essential that corresponds to the objectives of the study. The so-called mathematical models are generally built “on paper”, in the head of a researcher or in a computer. By the way, there are good reasons to believe that a person solves all problems and tasks by modeling real objects and situations in his psyche. Even G. Helmholtz in his theory of symbols asserted that our sensations are not “mirror” images of the surrounding reality, but are symbols (that is, some models) of the external world. His concept of symbols is by no means a rejection of materialistic views, as stated in philosophical literature, but a dialectical approach of the highest standard - he was one of the first to understand that a person's reflection of the external world (and, therefore, interaction with the world) wears what we call today , informational character.

There are many examples of models in the natural sciences. One of the brightest is the planetary atomic model proposed by E. Rutherford in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. This, in general, a simple model, we owe all the breathtaking achievements of physics, chemistry, electronics and other sciences of the twentieth century.

However, no matter how much we investigate, no matter how we model, at the same time, this or that object, it is necessary to be aware of the fact that by itself, isolated, closed object cannot exist (function) for a number of reasons. Not to mention the obvious - the need to receive matter and energy, to give up waste (metabolism, entropy), there are also other, for example, evolutionary reasons. Sooner or later, in the developing world, an object faces a problem, which it is not able to cope with on its own - it is necessary to look for a “comrade-in-arms”, “employee”; at the same time, it is necessary to unite with such a partner, whose goals at least do not contradict their own. This is how the need for interaction arises. In the real world, everything is interconnected and interacts. So here:

Models of interaction of objects, which themselves, at the same time, models, are called systems.

Of course, from a practical point of view, we can say that a system is formed when a goal is set for some object (subject), which he cannot achieve alone and is forced to interact with other objects (subjects) whose goals do not contradict his goals. However, it should be remembered that in real life, in the world around us, there are no models or systems, which are also models! .. There is just life, complex and simple objects, complex and simple processes and interactions, often incomprehensible, sometimes unconscious and not noticed by us ... By the way, a person, groups of people (especially non-random) from the systemic point of view are also objects. Models are built by the researcher specifically for solving certain problems, achieving the set goals. The researcher selects some objects together with connections (systems) when he needs to study a phenomenon or some part of the real world at the level of interactions. Therefore, the sometimes used term "real systems" is nothing more than a reflection of the fact that we are talking about modeling some part of the real world that is interesting to the researcher.

It should be noted that the above conceptual introduction of the concept systems as models of interaction of object models, of course, not the only possible one - in the literature, the concept of a system is both introduced and interpreted in different ways. So, one of the founders of systems theory L. von Bertalanffy in 1937 he defined as follows: “A system is a complex of interacting elements” ... The following definition is also known (B. S. Urmantsev): “System S is the I-th set of compositions Mi, built in relation to Ri, according to the composition law Zi from the prime elements of the set Mi0, selected at the base Ai0 from the set M ".

2.3. Systems

Having thus introduced the concept of a system, we can offer the following definition:

A system is a set of elements - models of objects interacting on the basis of direct and feedback, simulating the achievement of a given goal.

Minimum population - two elements modeling some objects, the goal of the system is always set from the outside (this will be shown below), which means that the reaction of the system (the result of the activity) is directed outward; therefore, the simplest (elementary) system of elements-models A and B can be depicted as follows (Fig. 1):

Rice. 1. Elementary system

In real systems, there are, of course, much more elements, but for most research purposes, it is almost always possible to combine some groups of elements together with their connections and reduce the system to the interaction of two elements or subsystems.

The elements of the system are interdependent and only in interaction, all together (by the system!) Can achieve goals set in front of the system (for example, a certain state, that is, a set of essential properties at a certain moment in time).

It is probably not difficult to imagine and the trajectory of the system towards the target is a certain line in some imaginary (virtual) space, which is formed if we imagine a certain coordinate system in which each parameter characterizing the current state of the system has its own coordinate. The trajectory can be optimal in terms of the cost of some system resources. Parameter space systems are usually characterized by a number of parameters. A normal person in the decision-making process more or less easily manages to operate five-seven(maximum - nine!) simultaneously changing parameters (usually this is associated with the volume, the so-called short-term random access memory - 7 ± 2 parameters - the so-called Miller's number). Therefore, it is practically impossible for a normal person to imagine (comprehend) the functioning of real systems, the simplest of which are characterized by hundreds of simultaneously changing parameters. Therefore, they often talk about multidimensionality of systems(more precisely, spaces of system parameters). The attitude of specialists to the spaces of system parameters is well characterized by the expression “curse of multidimensionality”. There are special techniques for overcoming the difficulties of manipulating parameters in multidimensional spaces (methods of hierarchical modeling, etc.).

This system can be part of another system, for example, the environment; then environment- it supersystem. Any system is necessarily included in some supersystem - another thing is that we do not always see it. An element of a given system can itself be a system - then it is called subsystem this system (Fig. 2). From this point of view, even in an elementary (two-element) system, one element, in the sense of interaction, can be considered as a supersystem in relation to another element. The supersystem sets goals for its systems, provides them with everything necessary, adjusts behavior in accordance with the goal, etc.

Rice. 2. Subsystem, system, supersystem.

Connections in systems are straight and reverse... If we consider element A (Fig. 1), then for it the arrow from A to B is a direct connection, and the arrow from B to A is a feedback; for element B, the opposite is true. Likewise, the connection of this system with a subsystem and a supersystem (Fig. 2). Sometimes links are considered as a separate element of the system and such an element is called communicant.

Concept management, widespread in everyday life, is also associated with systemic interactions. Indeed, the effect of element A on element B can be regarded as control of the behavior (functioning) of element B, which is carried out by A in the interests of the system, and the feedback from B to A as a reaction to control (results of functioning, coordinates of movement, etc.) ... Generally speaking, all of the above is also true for the effect of B on A; it should only be noted that all systemic interactions are asymmetric (see below - asymmetry principle), therefore, usually in systems, one of the elements is called the leading (dominant) and control is considered from the point of view of this element. It must be said that control theory is much older than systems theory, but, as happens in science, it "follows" as a particular from systemology, although not all specialists recognize this.

The concept of the composition (structure) of inter-element bonds in systems has undergone considerable evolution in recent years. So, quite recently, in the systemic and near-systemic (especially, philosophical) literature, the components of inter-element connections were called substance and energy(strictly speaking, energy is a common measure different forms the movement of matter, the two main forms of which are matter and field). In biology, the interaction of an organism with the environment is still considered at the level of matter and energy and is called metabolism... And relatively recently, the authors became bolder and started talking about the third component of inter-element exchange - information... Recently, works by biophysicists have appeared, in which it is already boldly asserted that the "vital activity" of biological systems "... involves the exchange of matter, energy and information with the environment." It would seem a natural thought - any interaction should be accompanied by information exchange... In one of his works, the author even proposed a definition information as a metric of interaction... However, even today, the literature often mentions material and energy exchange in systems and is silent about information even when it comes to the philosophical definition of a system, which is characterized by “... the performance of a common function, ... the unification of thoughts, scientific positions, abstract objects, etc. " ... The simplest example, illustrating the exchange of substance and information: the transfer of goods from one point to another is always accompanied by the so-called. cargo documentation. Why, oddly enough, the information component in systemic interactions was kept silent for a long time, especially in our country, the author guesses and will try to express his assumption a little lower. True, not everyone was silent. So, back in 1940, the Polish psychologist A. Kempinski expressed an idea that surprised many at that time and was not very accepted until now - the interaction of the psyche with the environment, the construction and filling of the psyche is of an informational nature. This idea got the name the principle of information metabolism and was successfully used by a Lithuanian researcher A. Augustinavichiute while creating new science about the structure and mechanisms of the functioning of the human psyche - the theory of information metabolism of the psyche(Socionics, 1968), where this principle is the basis for constructing models of types of informational metabolism of the psyche.

Simplifying somewhat the interactions and structure of systems, one can represent inter-element (inter-system) exchange in systems(fig. 3):

• material support for the functioning of the system comes from the supersystem to the system ( matter and energy), information messages (target designation - a goal or program to achieve the goal, instructions for adjusting the functioning, that is, the trajectory of movement to the goal), as well as rhythmic signals required to synchronize the functioning of the supersystem, system and subsystems;
• material and energy results of functioning are sent from the system to the supersystem, i.e. useful products and waste (matter and energy), information messages (about the state of the system, route to the goal, useful information products), as well as rhythmic signals necessary to ensure the exchange (in the narrow sense - synchronization).

Rice. 3. Inter-element exchange in systems

Of course, such a division into components of inter-element (intersystem) connections is of a purely analytical nature and is necessary for a correct analysis of interactions. It must be said that the structure of system connections causes significant difficulties in the analysis of systems, even for specialists. So, not all analysts separate information from matter and energy in intersystem exchange. Of course, in real life, information is always presented on some carrier(in such cases it is said that information modulates the medium); usually for this, media are used that are convenient for communication systems and for perception - energy and matter (for example, electricity, light, paper, etc.). However, when analyzing the functioning of systems, it is important that matter, energy and information are independent structural components of communication processes. One of the currently fashionable fields of activity, claiming to be scientific, "bioenergy" is actually engaged in information interactions, which for some reason are called energy-informational, although the energy levels of signals are so small that even the well-known electrical and magnetic components are very difficult to measure.

Highlight rhythmic signals as a separate component of systemic connections, the author proposed it back in 1968 and used it in a number of other works. It seems that this aspect of interaction is still underestimated in the systems literature. At the same time, rhythmic signals carrying "service" information play an important, often decisive role in the processes of systemic interactions. Indeed, the disappearance of rhythmic signals (in a narrow sense - synchronization signals) plunges into chaos the "supply" of matter and energy from object to object, from the supersystem to the system and back (it is enough to imagine what happens in life when, for example, suppliers send some cargo not according to the agreed schedule, but as you want); the disappearance of rhythmic signals in relation to information (violation of the periodicity, disappearance of the beginning and end of the message, the intervals between words and messages, etc.) makes it incomprehensible, how incomprehensible is the "picture" on the TV screen in the absence of synchronization signals or a scattered manuscript in which the pages are not numbered ...

Some biologists study the rhythm of living organisms, though not so much in the systemic as in the functional plan. For example, the experiments of Doctor of Medical Sciences S. Stepanova at the Moscow Institute of Biomedical Problems showed that the human day, in contrast to the earthly one, increases by one hour and lasts 25 hours - this rhythm was called circodian (circadian). According to psychophysiologists, this explains why people tolerate late going to sleep more calmly than early awakening. Biorhythmologists believe, writes the magazine "Marie Claire", that the human brain is a factory, which, like any production, works on schedule. Depending on the time of day, the body produces secretions chemical substances, contributing to an increase in mood, vigor, increased libido or drowsiness. To always be in shape, you can set your daily routine taking into account your biorhythms, that is, find the source of cheerfulness in yourself. Perhaps this is why one in three women in the UK take sick leave from time to time to have sex (results of a survey by She magazine).

Until recently, only a few researchers - dissidents in science - discussed the informational and rhythmic influence of the Cosmos on earthly life. So, there are known problems arising in connection with the introduction of the so-called. "Summer" and "winter" time - physicians conducted research and found a clearly negative effect of "double" time on human health, apparently due to a failure in the rhythm of mental processes. In some countries, the clock is changed, in others it is not, considering that it is economically ineffective, and in relation to human health, it is harmful. So, for example, in Japan, where the clock is not translated, the highest life expectancy. Discussions on these topics continue to this day.

Systems cannot arise and function on their own. Even Democritus argued: "Nothing arises without cause, but everything arises on some basis or by force of necessity." And philosophical, sociological, psychological literature, many publications on other sciences are full of beautiful terms "self-improvement", "self-harmonization", "self-actualization", "self-realization", etc. Well, let poets and writers - they can, but philosophers ?! At the end of 1993 in Kiev state university defended a doctoral dissertation in philosophy, the basis of which is "... the logical and methodological substantiation of the self-development of the initial" cell "to the scale of a person's personality" ... Or a lack of understanding of elementary systemic categories, or sloppiness of terminology unacceptable for science.

It can be argued that all systems are alive in the sense that they function, develop (evolve) and achieve a given goal; a system that is incapable of functioning in such a way that the results satisfy the supersystem, which does not develop, is at rest or is “closed” (does not interact with anyone), is not needed by the supersystem and dies. The term "vitality" is also understood in the same sense.

In relation to the objects they model, systems are sometimes called abstract(these are systems in which all elements are concepts; ex. languages), and specific(such systems in which at least two elements - objects e.g. family, factory, humanity, galaxy, etc.). An abstract system is always a concrete subsystem, but not vice versa.

Systems can simulate almost everything in the real world, where some realities interact (function and develop). Therefore, the commonly used meaning of the word "system" implicitly presupposes the allocation of some set of interacting realities with connections necessary and sufficient for analysis. So, they say that the systems are the family, the work collective, the state, the nation, the ethnos. The systems are forest, lake, sea, even desert; it is not difficult to see subsystems in them. In inanimate, "inert" matter (according to V. I. Vernadsky) there are no systems in the strict sense of this word; therefore, bricks, even beautifully laid bricks, are not a system, and the mountains themselves can be called a system only conditionally. Technical systems, even such as a car, an airplane, a machine tool, a plant, a nuclear power plant, a computer, etc., by themselves, without people, are not, strictly speaking, systems. Here the term "system" is used either in the sense that human participation in their functioning is obligatory (even if the plane is able to fly on autopilot, the machine is automatic, and the computer "itself" calculates, designs, simulates), or with an orientation towards automatic processes , which in a sense can be seen as a manifestation of primitive intelligence. In fact, a person is implicitly involved in the operation of any automaton. However, computers are not systems yet ... One of the creators of computers called them "conscientious idiots." It is possible that the development of the problem artificial intelligence will lead to the creation of the same "subsystem of machines" in the system "humanity", which is the "subsystem of humanity" in systems of a higher order. However, this is a probable future ...

Human participation in the functioning of technical systems can be different. So, intellectual they call systems where the creative, heuristic abilities of a person are used for functioning; v ergatic systems, a person is used as a very good automaton, and his intellect (in a broad sense) is not really needed (for example, a car and a driver).

It has become fashionable to say "big system" or "complex system"; but it turns out, saying so, we often unnecessarily sign some of our limitations, because these are "... such systems that exceed the capabilities of the observer in some aspect important for his goal" (W. R. Ashby).

As an example of a multilevel, hierarchical system, let us try to present a model of interaction between man, humanity, the nature of the Earth and the planet Earth in the Universe (Fig. 4). From this simple, but quite strict model, it will become clear why, until recently, systemology was not officially encouraged, and systemologists in their works did not dare to mention the informational component of intersystem connections.

Man is a social being ... So let's imagine the system "man - mankind": one element of the system is man, the second is mankind. Is such a model of interaction possible? Quite! .. But humanity together with man can be represented as an element (subsystem) of a higher order system, where the second element is the living nature of the Earth (in broad sense of this word). Earthly life (humanity and nature) naturally interact with the planet Earth - a system of the planetary level of interaction ... Finally, the planet Earth, together with all living things, certainly interacts with the Sun; solar system enters the Galaxy system, etc. - we generalize the Earth's interactions and represent the Universe as the second element ... Such a hierarchical system quite adequately reflects our interest in the position of man in the Universe and his interactions. And here's what is interesting - in the structure of system connections, in addition to quite understandable matter and energy, there is naturally information, including on higher levels interaction! ..

Rice. 4. An example of a multilevel, hierarchical system

This is where ordinary common sense ends and a question arises that Marxist philosophers did not dare to ask out loud: “If the information component is an obligatory element of systemic interactions (and it seems that this is so), then with whom does the information interaction of the Planet Earth take place? ?! .. "and, just in case, did not encourage, did not notice (and did not publish!) The work of systemologists. The deputy editor-in-chief (later - the editor-in-chief) of the Ukrainian philosophical-sociological journal, claiming to be solid, once told the author that he had not heard anything about the science of systemology. In the 60s – 70s, they no longer imprisoned us for cybernetics, but we didn’t hear the persistent statements of the outstanding cyberneticist VM Glushkov about the need to develop research and applications of systemology. Unfortunately, both the official academic science and many applied sciences such as psychology, sociology, political science, etc., are still hard to hear about systemology ... Although the word system and words about systems research are in vogue as always. Back in the 70s, one of the prominent systemologists warned: "... The mere use of system words and concepts does not yet give a systemic study, even if the object can really be considered as a system."

Any theory or concept is based on premises, the validity of which does not cause objections from the scientific community.

L. N. Gumilev

3. Systemic principles

What is consistency? What do they mean when they say "the systemic nature of the world", "the systematicity of thinking", "the systematic approach"? The search for answers to these questions leads to the formulation of provisions, which are usually called systemic principles... Any principles are based on experience and consensus (social agreement). The experience of studying a variety of objects and phenomena, public assessment and understanding of the results allow us to formulate some statements of a general nature, the application of which to the creation, research and use of systems as models of certain realities determine the methodology of the systems approach. Some principles receive theoretical justification, some are justified empirically, and some have the character of hypotheses, the application of which to the creation of systems (modeling of realities) allows one to obtain new results, which, by the way, serve as empirical proof of the hypotheses themselves.

In science it is known quite big number principles, they are formulated in different ways, but in any presentation they are abstractions, that is, they have a high degree of generality and are suitable for any application. The ancient scholastics asserted - "If something is true at the level of abstractions, it cannot be wrong at the level of reality." Below are the most important from the point of view of the author system principles and the necessary comments on their wording. The examples do not pretend to be strict and are intended only to clearly show the meaning of the principles.

The principle of goal setting- the goal that determines the behavior of the system is always set by the supersystem.

The most important principle, however, is not always accepted at the level of ordinary "common sense". The generally accepted belief is that someone is someone, and a person with his free will sets a goal for himself; some collectives and states are considered independent in the sense of their goals. Actually, goal setting - difficult process, consisting, in general, of two components: tasks (setting) goals system (for example, in the form of a set of essential properties or parameters that must be achieved at a certain point in time) and development (tasks) goal achievement programs(programs for the functioning of the system in the process of achieving the goal, ie, "movement along the trajectory to the goal"). To set a goal for the system means to determine why a certain state of the system is needed, which parameters characterize this state and at what point in time the state should take place - and these are all questions external to the system that the supersystem must solve (indeed, a "normal" system in general, there is no need to change your state and it is "most pleasant" to be in a state of rest - but why does a supersystem need such a system?).

The two components of the goal-setting process determine two possible ways of setting a goal.

• First way: having set a goal, the supersystem can limit itself to this, allowing the system itself to develop a program for achieving the goal - this is what creates the illusion of an independent goal setting by the system. So, life circumstances, people around, fashion, prestige, etc. form a certain target setting in a person. The formation of an attitude often goes unnoticed for the person himself, and awareness comes when the goal is formed in the form of a verbal or non-verbal image in the brain (desire). Then the person achieves the goal, often solving complex problems. Under these conditions, there is nothing surprising in the fact that the formula “I achieved my goal myself” is replaced by the formula “I set a goal for myself”. The same takes place in collectives that consider themselves independent, and even more so in the heads of statesmen, so-called independent states ("so-called" because collectives - formally, and states - politically, of course, can be independent; however, from a systemic point of view, dependence on the environment, that is, other collectives and states, is obvious here).
• Second way: the goal of systems (especially primitive ones) is set immediately in the form of a program (algorithm) for achieving the goal.

Examples of these two methods of goal setting:

• to the driver of a car ("man-machine" system), the dispatcher can set a task (goal) in this form - "deliver the cargo to point A" - in this case, the driver (system element) decides for himself how to go (develops a program to achieve the goal);
• another way - for a driver who is unfamiliar with the territory and the road, the task of delivering the cargo to point A is given along with a map on which the route is indicated (the program for achieving the goal).

The applied meaning of the principle: inability or unwillingness to “get out of the system” in the process of setting or realizing a goal, self-confidence, often lead functionaries (individuals, leaders, statesmen, etc.) to mistakes and delusions.

Feedback principle- the response of the system to the impact should minimize the deviation of the system from the trajectory to the target.

This is a fundamental and universal systemic principle. It can be argued that there are no systems without feedback. Or, to put it another way: a system that lacks feedback degrades and perishes. The meaning of the concept of feedback is that the result of the functioning of the system (element of the system) affects the influences arriving at it. Feedback happens positive(enhances the action of direct communication) and negative(weakens the action of direct communication); in both cases, the task of the feedback is to return the system to the optimal trajectory to the target (trajectory correction).

An example of a system without feedback is the command-administrative system, which still exists in our country. Many other examples can be cited - everyday and scientific, simple and complex. And all the more surprising is the ability of a normal person not to see (not want to see!) The consequences of their activities, that is, feedbacks in the “person - environment” system ... There is so much talk about ecology, but it’s impossible to get used to new and new facts of people poisoning themselves - what are the workers of a chemical plant thinking about, poisoning their own children? social group called "children" and then receiving a disfigured generation of young people? ..

The applied meaning of the principle is that ignoring feedback inevitably leads the system to a loss of controllability, deviation from the trajectory and death (the fate of totalitarian regimes, environmental disasters, many family tragedies, etc.).

The principle of purposefulness- the system strives to achieve a given goal even when environmental conditions change.

The flexibility of the system, the ability to change its behavior, and sometimes its structure, within certain limits, is important property ensuring the functioning of the system in a real environment. Methodologically, the principle of tolerance adjoins the principle of purposefulness ( lat... - patience).

The principle of tolerance- the system should not be "strict" - deviations within certain limits of the parameters of elements, subsystems, the environment or the behavior of other systems should not lead the system to a catastrophe.

If we imagine the “newlyweds” system in the “big family” supersystem with parents, grandparents, then it is easy to assess the importance of the principle of tolerance, at least for the integrity (not to mention tranquility) of such a system. A good example of the observance of the principle of tolerance is also the so-called. pluralism, which is still being fought for.

Optimal Diversity Principle- extremely organized and extremely disorganized systems are dead.

In other words, “all extremes are bad” ... The extreme disorganization or, what is the same, the diversity brought to the extreme can be likened (not very strictly for open systems) to the maximum entropy of the system, upon reaching which the system can no longer change in any way (function, develop ); in thermodynamics, this ending is called "heat death". An extremely organized (overorganized) system loses its flexibility, and hence the ability to adapt to changes in the environment, becomes "strict" (see the principle of tolerance) and, as a rule, does not survive. N. Alekseev even introduced the 4th law of energy entropics - the law of limiting development material systems... The meaning of the law boils down to the fact that for a system, entropy equal to zero is as bad as the maximum entropy.

The principle of emergence- the system has properties that cannot be inferred from the known (observable) properties of its elements and the methods of their connection.

Another name for this principle is “the postulate of integrity”. The meaning of this principle is that the system as a whole possesses properties that subsystems (elements) do not have. These systemic properties are formed during the interaction of subsystems (elements) by strengthening and manifesting some properties of elements simultaneously with weakening and hiding others. Thus, a system is not a set of subsystems (elements), but a kind of integrity. Therefore, the sum of the properties of the system is not equal to the sum of the properties of its constituent elements. The principle is important not only in technical, but also in socio-economic systems, since it is associated with such phenomena as social prestige, group psychology, intertype relationships in the theory of informational metabolism of the psyche (socionics), etc.

The principle of consent- the goals of the elements and subsystems should not contradict the goals of the system.

Indeed, a subsystem with a goal that does not coincide with the goal of the system disorganizes the functioning of the system (increases "entropy"). Such a subsystem must either "fall out" from the system, or perish; otherwise - the degradation and death of the entire system.

Causality principle- any change in the state of the system is associated with a certain set of conditions (cause) that give rise to this change.

This, at first glance, is a self-evident statement, in fact, a very important principle for a number of sciences. So, in the theory of relativity, the principle of causality excludes the influence of a given event on all the past. In the theory of knowledge, he shows that the disclosure of the causes of phenomena makes it possible to predict and reproduce them. It is on this that an important set of methodological approaches to the conditioning of some social phenomena by others is based, united by the so-called. causal analysis ... With its help, for example, processes social mobility, social status, as well as factors influencing value orientations and personality behavior. Causal analysis is used in systems theory for both quantitative and qualitative analysis of the relationship of phenomena, events, system states, etc. The effectiveness of causal analysis methods is especially high in the study of multidimensional systems - and these are practically all really interesting systems.

The principle of determinism- the reason for a change in the state of the system always lies outside the system.

An important principle for any systems, with which people often cannot agree ... "There is a reason for everything ... Only sometimes it is difficult to see it ..." ( Henry Winston). Indeed, even such giants of science as Laplace, Descartes and some others professed the "monism of Spinoza's substance", which is "the cause of itself." And in our time we have to hear explanations of the reasons for the change in the state of certain systems by "needs", "desires" (as if they are primary), "aspirations" ("... the universal desire to be realized" - K. Vonegut), even by the "creative nature of matter" (and this is generally something incomprehensible and philosophical); often everything is explained by "mere chance".

In fact, the principle of determinism asserts that a change in the state of a system is always a consequence of the influence of a supersystem on it. The lack of impact on the system is a special case and can be considered either as an episode when the system moves along a trajectory towards the goal ("zero impact"), or as a transitional episode to death (in the systemic sense). Methodologically, the principle of determinism in research complex systems, especially social, allows you to understand the peculiarities of the interaction of subsystems without falling into subjective and idealistic mistakes.

The black box principle- the response of the system is a function not only of external influences, but also of the internal structure, characteristics and states of its constituent elements.

This principle is important in research practice when studying complex objects or systems, the internal structure of which is unknown and inaccessible ("black box").

The “black box” principle is extremely widely used in natural sciences, various applied research, even in everyday life. So, physicists, assuming the known structure of the atom, investigate various physical phenomena and states of matter, seismologists, assuming the known state of the Earth's core, try to predict earthquakes and the movement of continental plates. Assuming a certain structure and state of society, sociologists use polls to find out how people react to certain events or influences. In the confidence that they know the state and the likely reaction of the people, our politicians carry out certain reforms.

A typical "black box" for researchers is a person. Investigating, for example, the human psyche, it is necessary to take into account not only experimental external influences, but also the structure of the psyche, and the state of its constituent elements (mental functions, blocks, superblocks, etc.). Hence it follows that with known (controlled) external influences and under the assumption of known states of the elements of the psyche, it is possible to create an idea of ​​the structure of the psyche, that is, the type of informational metabolism (TIM) of the psyche of a given person. This approach is used in the procedures for identifying the TIM of the psyche and verifying its model in the study of the characteristics of the personality and individuality of a person in the theory of informational metabolism of the psyche (socionics). With a known structure of the psyche and controlled external influences and reactions to them, one can judge the states of mental functions, which are elements of the structure. Finally, knowing the structure and state of a person's mental functions, one can predict his reaction to certain external influences. Of course, the conclusions that the researcher draws on the basis of experiments with the "black box" are probabilistic in nature (due to the probabilistic nature of the above assumptions) and this must be taken into account. And, nevertheless, the “black box” principle is an interesting, versatile and powerful enough tool in the hands of a competent researcher.

Diversity principle- the more diverse the system, the more stable it is.

Indeed, the diversity of the structure, properties and characteristics of the system provides ample opportunities for adaptation to changing influences, faults of subsystems, environmental conditions, etc. However ... everything is good in moderation (see. optimal diversity principle).

Entropy principle- an isolated (closed) system dies.

A gloomy wording - well, what can you do: the most fundamental law of nature has approximately the same meaning - the so-called. the second law of thermodynamics, as well as the second law of energy entropics formulated by G. N. Alekseev. If the system suddenly turned out to be isolated, “closed”, that is, it does not exchange matter, energy, information, or rhythmic signals with the environment, then the processes in the system develop in the direction of increasing the entropy of the system, from a more ordered state to a less ordered one, that is, towards equilibrium, and equilibrium is an analogue of death ... "Closure" in any of the four components of intersystem interaction leads the system to degradation and death. The same applies to the so-called closed, "ring", cyclical processes and structures - they are only at first glance "closed": often we simply do not see the channel through which the system is open, we ignore or underestimate it and ... fall into error. All real, functioning systems are open.

It is also important to take into account the following - by its very functioning the system inevitably increases the "entropy" of the environment (quotation marks here denote a loose use of the term). In this regard, GN Alekseev proposed the third law of energy entropics - the entropy of open systems in the process of their progressive development always decreases due to the consumption of energy from external sources; at the same time, the "entropy" of systems serving as energy sources increases. Thus, any ordering activity is carried out due to the expenditure of energy and the growth of the "entropy" of external systems (supersystem), and without this it cannot occur at all.

An example of an isolated technical system - the lunar rover (as long as there is energy and consumables on board, it can be controlled by the command radio link and it works; the sources are depleted - "died", stopped to control, that is, the interaction on the information component is interrupted - it will die even if there is energy on board) ...

An example of isolated biological system - a mouse trapped in a glass jar. And here, the people who were shipwrecked, on desert island- the system, apparently not completely isolated ... Of course, without food and heat, they will die, but if they are available, they will survive: apparently, a certain information component in their interaction with the outside world takes place.

These are exotic examples ... In real life, everything is both simpler and more complicated. Thus, famine in African countries, loss of life in polar regions due to lack of energy sources, degradation of a country that has surrounded itself with an “iron curtain”, lagging behind the country and bankruptcy of an enterprise market economy they do not care about interaction with other enterprises, even an individual person or a closed group, which degrade when they “withdraw into themselves,” cut off ties with society - these are all examples of more or less closed systems.

An extremely interesting and important for humanity phenomenon of the cyclical development of ethnic systems (ethnoses) was discovered by the famous researcher L.N. Gumilev. However, it seems that the talented ethnologist made a mistake, believing that "... ethnic systems ... develop according to the laws of irreversible entropy and lose the initial impulse that gave rise to them, just as any movement fades away from environmental resistance ...". It is unlikely that ethnic groups are closed systems - there are too many facts against this: it is enough to recall the famous traveler Thor Heyerdahl, who experimentally investigated the interrelationships of peoples in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean, the research of linguists on the interpenetration of languages, the so-called great migrations of peoples, etc. In addition, humanity is in this case, it would be a mechanical sum of individual ethnic groups, very similar to billiards - balls roll and collide exactly insofar as they are given a certain energy. It is unlikely that such a model correctly reflects the phenomenon of humanity. Apparently, the real processes in ethnic systems are much more complicated.

In recent years, an attempt has been made to apply for the study of systems similar to ethnic groups, the methods of a new field - nonequilibrium thermodynamics, on the basis of which it seemed possible to introduce thermodynamic criteria for the evolution of open physical systems. However, it turned out that these methods are still powerless - the physical criteria of evolution do not explain the development of real living systems ... It seems that processes in social systems can be understood only on the basis of a systematic approach to ethnic groups as open systems, which are subsystems of the "humanity" system. Apparently, it would be more promising to study the information component of intersystem interaction in ethnic systems - it seems that it is on this path (taking into account the integral intelligence of living systems) that it is possible to solve not only the phenomenon of the cyclic development of ethnic groups, but also the fundamental properties of the human psyche.

The principle of entropy, unfortunately, is often ignored by researchers. At the same time, two errors are typical: either they artificially isolate the system and investigate it, not realizing that the functioning of the system changes dramatically; or they "literally" apply the laws of classical thermodynamics (in particular, the concept of entropy) to open systems where they cannot be observed. The latter mistake is especially common in biological and sociological research.

Development principle- only the developing system is tenacious.

The meaning of the principle is both obvious and not perceived at the level of “common sense of things”. Indeed, how one does not want to believe that the complaints of the Black Queen from “Alice Through the Looking Glass” by Lewis Carroll make sense: “… you have to run as fast just to stay in place! If you want to get to another place, then you need to run at least twice as fast! .. "We all so want stability, peace, and the ancient wisdom grieves:" Peace is death "... An outstanding personality N. M. Amosov advises: "To live, constantly make yourself difficult ..." and he himself makes eight thousand movements while charging.

What does “the system does not develop” mean? This means it is in a state of equilibrium with the environment. Even if the environment (supersystem) were stable, the system would have to carry out work to maintain the required level of vital activity in connection with the inevitable losses of matter, energy, information failures (using the terminology of mechanics - friction losses). If we take into account that the environment is always unstable, changes (it does not matter - for the better or for the worse), then even in order to tolerably solve the same problem, the system needs to improve over time.

The principle of no excess- an extra element of the system dies.

Superfluous element means unused, unnecessary in the system. The medieval philosopher William of Ockham advised: "Do not multiply the number of entities in excess of the necessary"; this sound advice is called Occam's Razor. The superfluous element of the system is not only wasted consumption of resources. In fact, this is an artificial increase in the complexity of the system, which can be likened to an increase in entropy, and hence a decrease in the quality, quality factor of the system. One of the real systems is defined as follows: “Organization - not having extra elements an intelligent system of consciously coordinated activities. " "What is difficult is false" - asserted the Ukrainian thinker G. Skovoroda.

The principle of agony - nothing dies without a fight.

The principle of conservation of the amount of matter- the amount of matter (matter and energy) entering the system is equal to the amount of matter formed as a result of the activity (functioning) of the system.

In essence, this is a materialistic proposition about the indestructibility of matter. Indeed, it is easy to see that all matter entering a certain real system is spent on:

• maintaining the functioning and development of the system itself (metabolism);
• production by the system of the product necessary for the supersystem (otherwise why does the system need the supersystem);
• "Technological waste" of this system (which, by the way, in the super-system can be, if not a useful product, then in any case, raw material for some other system; however, it may not be - ecological crisis on the Earth arose precisely because the system "humanity", including the subsystem "industry", throws harmful waste into the supersystem "biosphere" - a typical example of violation of the system principle of consent: it seems that the goals of the system "humanity" do not always coincide with the goals of the supersystem "Earth").

One can also see some analogy between this principle and the first law of energy entropics - the law of conservation of energy. The principle of conservation of the amount of matter is important in the context of the systems approach, because until now, in various studies, mistakes are made associated with underestimating the balance of matter in various systemic interactions. There are many examples in the development of industry - these are environmental problems, and in biological research, in particular, related to the study of the so-called. biofields, and in sociology, where energy and material interactions are clearly underestimated. Unfortunately, the question of whether it is possible to speak about the preservation of the amount of information is still poorly worked out in systemology.

Non-linearity principle- real systems are always nonlinear.

The understanding by normal people of nonlinearity is somewhat reminiscent of the human representation of the globe. Indeed, we walk on a flat earth, we see (especially in the steppe) an almost ideal plane, but in rather serious calculations (for example, the trajectories of spaceships) we have to take into account not only the spheroidism, but also the so-called. geoid nature of the Earth. From geography and astronomy, we learn that the plane we see is a special case, a fragment of a large sphere. Something similar takes place with nonlinearity. “Where something diminishes, it will increase in another place” - approximately so MV Lomonosov once said, and “common sense” believes that as much will decrease and will increase. It turns out that such linearity is a special case! In reality, in nature and technical devices, the rule is rather nonlinearity: it is not necessary that it decreases as much as it increases - maybe more, or maybe less ... it all depends on the form and degree of nonlinearity of the characteristic.

In systems, nonlinearity means that the response of a system or element to an action is not necessarily proportional to the action. Real systems can be more or less linear only on small area its characteristics. However, most often one has to consider the characteristics of real systems to be highly nonlinear. Accounting for nonlinearity is especially important in systems analysis when building models of real systems. Social systems are highly nonlinear, mainly due to the nonlinearity of such an element as a person.

Optimal efficiency principle- the maximum efficiency of functioning is achieved on the verge of the stability of the system, but this is fraught with the breakdown of the system into an unstable state.

This principle is important not only for technical, but even more so for social systems. Due to the strong nonlinearity of such an element as a person, these systems are generally unstable and therefore one should never "squeeze" maximum efficiency out of them.

The law of the theory of automatic regulation says: “The lower the stability of the system, the easier it is to control it. And vice versa". There are many examples in the history of mankind: almost any revolution, many catastrophes in technical systems, conflicts on ethnic grounds, etc. As for the optimal efficiency, the issue of this is resolved in the supersystem, which should take care not only of the efficiency of subsystems, but also of their stability.

The principle of completeness of connections- communications in the system must ensure a sufficiently complete interaction of the subsystems.

It can be argued that connections, in fact, create a system. The very definition of the concept of a system gives grounds to assert that there is no system without connections. Systemic communication is an element (communicant) viewed as material medium interaction of subsystems. Interaction in the system consists in the exchange of elements with each other and with the outside world substance(material interactions), energy(energy or field interactions), information(information interactions) and rhythmic signals(this interaction is sometimes referred to as synchronization). It is quite obvious that insufficient or excessive exchange of any of the components disrupts the functioning of subsystems and the system as a whole. In this regard, it is important that throughput and the qualitative characteristics of the connections ensured the exchange in the system with sufficient completeness and admissible distortions (losses). The completeness and loss rates are established based on the integrity and survivability characteristics of the system (see 4.3. loose coupling principle).

The principle of quality- the quality and efficiency of the system can be assessed only from the point of view of the supersystem.

The categories of quality and efficiency are of great theoretical and practical importance. Based on the assessment of quality and efficiency, the creation, comparison, verification and assessment of systems is carried out, the degree of conformity to the purpose, the purposefulness and prospects of the system, etc. politics in socio-economic issues, etc. In the theory of informational metabolism of the psyche (socionics), on the basis of this principle, it can be argued that a person can form individual norms only on the basis of an assessment of his activities by society; in other words, a person is not able to evaluate himself. It should be noted that the concepts of quality and efficiency, especially in the context of systemic principles, are not always correctly understood, interpreted and applied.

Quality indicators are a set of basic positive (from the point of view of a supersystem or a researcher) properties of a system; they are system invariants.

• System quality - generalized positive characteristic expressing the degree of usefulness of the system for the supersystem.
• The effect - it is the result, the consequence of any action; effective means giving effect; hence - efficiency, effectiveness.
• Efficiency - The result of actions or activities of the system, normalized to the cost of resources, at a certain time interval is a value that takes into account the quality of the system, the consumption of resources and the time of action.

Thus, efficiency is measured by the degree of positive influence of the system on the functioning of the supersystem. Consequently, the concept of efficiency is external to the system, i.e., no description of the system can be sufficient to introduce an efficiency measure. By the way, this also implies that the fashionable concepts "self-improvement", "self-harmonization", etc., which are widely used even in solid literature, simply do not make sense.

Logout principle- in order to understand the behavior of the system, it is necessary to leave the system in the supersystem.

An extremely important principle! An old physics textbook once explained the features of uniform and rectilinear motion: “... Being in a closed cabin sailing ship moving uniformly and rectilinearly on calm water, it is impossible by any physical methods to establish the fact of movement ... The only way is to go on deck and look at the shore ... " look at the shore - access to the "ship - shore" supersystem.

Unfortunately, both in science and in everyday life, we find it difficult to think about the need to exit the system. So, in search of the reasons for the instability of the family, bad relations in the family, our valiant sociologists accuse anyone and anything except ... the state. But the state is a supersystem for the family (remember: “the family is the cell of the state”?). It would be necessary to enter this supersystem and assess the influence on the family of a perverted ideology, economy and command-administrative structure of management without feedback, etc. schools ”... And I don’t hear the question - what is the“ school ”system in the“ state ”supersystem and what requirements does the supersystem put forward to education? .. Methodologically, the principle of exiting the system is perhaps the most important in the systemic approach.

The loose coupling principle- the connections between the elements of the system must be strong enough to preserve the integrity of the system, but weak enough to ensure its survivability.

The need for strong (must be strong!) Connections to ensure the integrity of the system is clear without much explanation. However, the imperial elites and the bureaucracy usually lack the understanding that too strong anchorage of national entities to the empire-forming metropolis is fraught with internal conflicts, sooner or later destroying the empire. Hence, separatism, which for some reason is considered a negative phenomenon.

The strength of the connections should also have a lower limit - the connections between the elements of the system should be to a certain extent weak so that some troubles with one element of the system (for example, the death of an element) do not entail the death of the whole system.

They say that in the competition for The best way to keep her husband, announced by an English newspaper, the first prize went to a woman who offered the following: "Keep on a long leash ...". An excellent illustration of the principle of weak connection! .. Indeed, the sages and humorists argue - although a woman marries in order to tie a man to herself, a man marries so that a woman can get rid of him ...

Another example is the Chernobyl nuclear power plant ... In an incorrectly designed system, the operators turned out to be too tightly and rigidly connected with other elements, their mistakes quickly brought the system into an unstable state, and then a catastrophe ...

Hence, the extreme methodological value of the loose coupling principle is clear, especially at the stage of creating a system.

Glushkov principle- any multidimensional quality criterion of any system can be reduced to a one-dimensional output to higher order systems (supersystems).

This is a great way to overcome the so-called. “Curses of multidimensionality”. It was already noted above that a person was unlucky with the ability to process multi-parameter information - seven plus or minus two simultaneously changing parameters ... For some reason, nature needs it so, but it's hard for us! The principle proposed by the outstanding cyberneticist V.M.Glushkov makes it possible to create hierarchical systems of parameters (hierarchical models) and to solve multidimensional problems.

In systems analysis, various methods of studying multidimensional systems have been developed, including strictly mathematical ones. One of the common mathematical procedures for multivariate analysis is the so-called. cluster analysis, which allows, on the basis of a set of indicators characterizing a number of elements (for example, the studied subsystems, functions, etc.), to group them into classes (clusters) in such a way that the elements included in one class are more or less homogeneous, similar in comparison with elements belonging to other classes. By the way, on the basis of cluster analysis, it is not difficult to substantiate an eight-element model of the type of information metabolism in socionics, it is necessary and fairly true to reflect the structure and mechanism of the functioning of the psyche. Thus, examining a system or making a decision in a situation with a large number of measurements (parameters), one can greatly facilitate one's task by reducing the number of parameters by a sequential transition to supersystems.

The principle of relative randomness- randomness in a given system may turn out to be a strictly deterministic dependence in a supersystem.

A person is so arranged that uncertainty is unbearable to him, and randomness simply annoys him. But what is surprising is that in everyday life and in science, without finding an explanation for something, we would rather recognize this “something” as three times random, but we will never think of going beyond the system in which it happens! Without listing the already debunked errors, let us note some persistence that have taken place so far. Our solid science still doubts the connection between terrestrial processes and heliocosmic ones and with persistence worthy of better application, piles up where and where not needed probabilistic explanations, stochastic models, etc. To the great meteorologist A.V. Dyakov, who recently lived nearby with us, it turned out to be easy to explain and predict with almost 100% accuracy the weather on the entire Earth, in individual countries and even collective farms, when he went beyond the planet, to the Sun, into space ("The weather of the Earth is done on the Sun" - A. V. Dyakov). And all domestic meteorology cannot dare to recognize the Earth's supersystem in any way and every day mocks us with vague forecasts. The same is in seismology, medicine, etc., etc. This escape from reality discredits truly random processes, which, of course, take place in the real world. But how many mistakes could have been avoided if, in search of causes and patterns, it was more bold to use a systematic approach!

Optimum principle- the system should move along the optimal trajectory to the target.

This is understandable, since a non-optimal trajectory means low efficiency of the system's functioning, increased resource consumption, which sooner or later will cause "displeasure" and the corrective effect of the supersystem. A more tragic outcome for such a system is also possible. So, G. N. Alekseev introduced the 5th law of energy entropics - the law of preferential development or competition, which says: "In each class of material systems, those that achieve maximum efficiency under a given set of internal and external conditions are predominantly developed." It is clear that the predominant development of efficiently functioning systems occurs as a result of "encouraging" stimulating influences of the supersystem. As for the rest, inferior in efficiency or, which is the same thing, "moving" in their functioning along a trajectory that differs from the optimal one, then they are threatened with degradation and, ultimately, death or expulsion from the supersystem.

Asymmetry principle- all interactions are asymmetric.

There is no symmetry in nature, although our everyday consciousness cannot agree with this. We are convinced that everything beautiful should be symmetrical, partners, people, nations should be equal (also something like symmetry), interactions should be fair, which means they should also be symmetrical (“You - me, I - you” definitely implies symmetry) ... In fact, symmetry is the exception rather than the rule, and the exception is often undesirable. So, in philosophy there is an interesting image - "Buridan's donkey" (in scientific terminology - the paradox of absolute determinism in the doctrine of will). According to philosophers, a donkey, placed at an equal distance from two equal in size and quality (symmetrical!) Bunches of hay, will die of hunger - it will not decide which bunch to start chewing (philosophers say - his will will not receive an impulse prompting a bunch of hay). Conclusion: the bunches of hay should be somewhat asymmetrical ...

For a long time people were convinced that crystals - the standard of beauty and harmony - are symmetrical; in the 19th century, accurate measurements showed that there are no symmetrical crystals. More recently, using powerful computers, aesthetes in the United States tried to synthesize an image of absolutely beautiful face... However, measurements of the parameters were carried out only on one half of the beauties' faces, being convinced that the other half was symmetrical. Imagine their disappointment when the computer gave out the most ordinary, rather even ugly face, even somewhat unpleasant. The very first artist, who was shown a synthesized portrait, said that such faces do not exist in nature, since this face is clearly symmetrical. Crystals, faces and in general all objects in the world are the result of the interaction of something with something. Consequently, the interactions of objects with each other and with the surrounding world are always asymmetric and one of the interacting objects always dominates. So, for example, a lot of troubles could be avoided for spouses if the asymmetry of interaction between partners and with the environment were correctly taken into account in family life! ..

Until now, among neurophysiologists and neuropsychologists, there is a debate about the interhemispheric asymmetry of the brain. No one doubts that it, asymmetry, takes place - it is not clear only on what it depends (innate? Educated?) And whether the dominance of the hemispheres changes during the functioning of the psyche. In real interactions, of course, everything is dynamic - it may be that first one object dominates, then, for some reason, another. In this case, the interaction can pass through symmetry as through a temporary state; how long this state will last, this is a matter of system time (not to be confused with current time!). One of the modern philosophers recalls his formation: “... The dialectical decomposition of the world into opposites already seemed to me too conventional (“ dialectal ”). I had a presentiment besides such a private view, I began to understand that in reality there are no “pure” opposites. Between all the “poles” there is necessarily an individual “asymmetry”, which ultimately determines the essence of their being ”. In the study of systems and, especially, in the application of simulation results to realities, taking into account the asymmetry of interaction is often of fundamental importance.

The usefulness of the system for thinking is not only that people begin to think about things in an orderly manner, according to a certain plan, but that people begin to think about them in general.

G. Lichtenberg

4. Systematic approach - what is it?

Once a distinguished biologist and geneticist N.V. Timofeev-Ressovsky I spent a long time explaining to my old friend, also an outstanding scientist, what a system and a systems approach are. Having listened, he said: "... Yeah - I understood ... The systematic approach is, before doing something, you need to think ... But we were taught this in the gymnasium!" still forget, on the one hand, about the limited "thinking" abilities of a person with a family, plus or minus two simultaneously changing parameters, and on the other hand, about the immeasurably higher complexity of real systems, life situations and human relations. And if you do not forget about it, then sooner or later the feeling will come consistency the world, human society and man as a set of elements and connections between them ... The ancients said: "Everything depends on everything ..." - and this makes sense. The meaning of consistency, expressed in system principles - this is the foundation of thinking that is able to save at least from gross mistakes in difficult situations. And from a sense of the systemic nature of the world and an understanding of systemic principles, there is a direct path to an awareness of the need for some methods to help overcome the complexity of problems.

Of all the methodological concepts systemological closest to "natural" human thinking - flexible, informal, versatile. Systems approach combines a natural-scientific method based on experiment, formal inference and quantitative assessment, with a speculative method based on a figurative perception of the surrounding world and qualitative synthesis.

Literature

1. Glushkov V.M. Cybernetics. Questions of theory and practice. - M., "Science", 1986.
2. Fleishman B.S. Fundamentals of systemology. - M., "Radio and Communication", 1982.
3. Anokhin P.K. Fundamental questions of the general theory functional systems// Principles of the systemic organization of functions. - M., 1973.
4. Wartofsky M. Models. Representation and scientific understanding. Per. from English / Common ed. and after. I. B. Novik and V. N. Sadovsky. - M., "Progress", 1988 - 57 p.
5. Ya.G. Neuimin Models in Science and Technology. History, theory, practice. Ed. NS Solomenko, Leningrad, "Science", 1984. - 189 p.
6. System modeling technology / E. F. Avramchuk, A. A. Vavilov and others; Under total. ed. S. V. Emelyanova et al. - M., "Mechanical Engineering", Berlin, "Technician", 1988.
7. Ermak V.D. Information models in the processes of interaction between the operator and the means of displaying information of large control systems. General systems theory and knowledge integration: Materials of the seminar / MDNTP im. F.E.Dzerzhinsky, M., 1968.
8. Blauberg I.V., Yudin E.G. Formation and essence of the systematic approach. - M., "Science", 1973.
9. Averyanov A.N. Systemic cognition of the world: Methodological problems. -M., "Politizdat", 1985.
10. Mathematical theory of systems / N. A. Bobylev, V. G. Boltyansky et al. - M., "Science", 1986.
11. Clear J. Systemology. Automation of solving system problems. Per. from English - M., "Radio and Communication", 1992.
12. Ljung L. System identification. Theory for the user. Per. from English / Ed. Ya.Z. Tsypkina. - M., "Science", Ch. ed. phys.-mat. lit., 1991.
13. Nikolaev V.I., Brook V.M. Systems engineering: methods and applications. - Leningrad, "Mechanical Engineering", Leningrad. detached., 1985.
14. Kolesnikov L. A... Foundations of the theory of the systems approach. - Kiev, "Naukova Dumka", 1988.
15. Larichev O.I., Moshkovich E.M., Rebrik S.B. On human capabilities in the problems of classification of multicriteria objects. // System research. Methodological problems. Yearbook. - 1988 .-- M., Science.
16. Druzhinin V.V., Kontorov D.S. Systems engineering. - M., "Radio and Communication", 1985.
17. Biological rhythms / Ed. Yu. Ashoff. - M., "Mir", 1984. - T. 1.
18. Chizhevsky A. L. Earthly echo of solar storms. - M., "Thought", 1976.
19. V.P. Kaznacheev Essays on the theory and practice of human ecology. - M., "Science", 1983.
20. Ackoff R., Emery F. About purposeful systems. Per. from English, Ed. I.A.Ushakova. - M., "Sov. radio ", 1974.
21. Philosophical Dictionary/ Ed. V.I.Shinkaruk. - K., Acad. Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, Ch. ed. Ukr. encyclopedias, 1973.
22. The future of artificial intelligence. - M .: "Science", 1991.
23. Rybin I.A. Biophysics lectures: Tutorial... - Sverdlovsk: Ural University Publishing House, 1992.
24. Alekseev G.N. Energoentropics. - M., "Knowledge", 1983.
25. Concise vocabulary in sociology / Under total. ed. D. M. Gvishiani, M. Lapina. - "Politizdat", 1988.
26. Gumilev L.N. Biography of scientific theory or auto-necrologist // Banner, 1988, book 4.
27. Gumilev L.N. Ethnosphere: History of People and History of Nature. - M: "Ecopros", 1993.
28. A. I. Zotin Thermodynamic basis of organisms' reactions to external and internal factors. - M .: "Science", 1988.
29. Pechurkin I.O. Energy and life. - Novosibirsk: "Science", Sib. branch, 1988.
30. Gorskiy Yu.M. System information analysis of management processes. - Novosibirsk: "Science", Sib. Det., 1988.
31. Antipov G.A., Kochergin A.N. Problems of methodology for studying society as an integral system. - Novosibirsk: "Science", Sib. otd., 1988.
32. Gubanov V.A., Zakharov V.V., Kovalenko A.N. Introduction to Systems Analysis: Textbook / Ed. L.A. Petrosyan. - L .: Ed. Leningrad University, 1988.
33. Zhambu M. Hierarchical cluster analysis and correspondence: Per. with fr. - M .: "Finance and Statistics", 1982.
34. Ermak V.D. On the problem of analyzing system interactions. // Questions of special radio electronics, MRP of the USSR. - 1978, Ser. 1, T. 3, No. 10.
35. Ermak V.D. The structure and functioning of the human psyche from a systemic point of view. // Socionics, mentology and personality psychology, MIS, 1996, no. 3.
36. Peters T., Waterman R. Looking for effective management(experience of the best companies). - M., "Progress", 1986.
37. Buslenko N.P. Modeling complex systems. - M .: "Science", 1978.
38. Pollyak Yu. G. Fundamentals of the theory of modeling complex control systems // Proceedings of the Radio Engineering Institute. - 1977, no. 29.