Do you know what bullshit is? As usual nobody gets the point. Tell me what soft systems methodology says about what constitutes a “good society”. I will literally wait for your answer here.
Frankly that’s a pretty rude and disingenuous reply. You wouldn’t treat me like that in person, and I see no reason why you should online.
If you’re genuinely interested in an answer, soft systems methodology is a framework for decision making. By its nature it is not intended to make value judgements or dictate how you should build a good society, beyond the implicit assumption that any solution should come from clear consultation with everyone involved in the problem situation. What it is intended to do is provide a way for engineers and policy makers understand the problem situation they are stepping into, explicitly consult all the stakeholders involved, and develop clear definitions of the system they’re working with so that solutions can deal with the root cause of problems, rather than surface level measures.
To take an example tool, let’s consider applying
system archetypes, and specifically success to the successful. The obvious application is the current economic system, where wealth begets wealth (landlords, investment banking, etc.). If we as policy makers wish to counteract this feedback loop, then we know that wealth redistribution will only go so far, since the reinforcing feedback loop will force more wealth to those who already possess it. Instead, if we want equity, we need to decouple that feedback loop, by e.g. restricting the number of properties a landlord can own.
As I initially said, it is just a tool, and I’ve only covered a small part of it, but it is one that explicitly forces policy makers to consult stakeholders and allows us to effectively model complex social systems to bring about real societal change.
Nah, she just wants to reply some snarky comments that don’t really inform people other than letting them know she thinks they are wrong, and that’s she thinks she’s some kind of authority on the matter.
Do you know what soft systems methodology is?
Do you know what bullshit is? As usual nobody gets the point. Tell me what soft systems methodology says about what constitutes a “good society”. I will literally wait for your answer here.
Frankly that’s a pretty rude and disingenuous reply. You wouldn’t treat me like that in person, and I see no reason why you should online.
If you’re genuinely interested in an answer, soft systems methodology is a framework for decision making. By its nature it is not intended to make value judgements or dictate how you should build a good society, beyond the implicit assumption that any solution should come from clear consultation with everyone involved in the problem situation. What it is intended to do is provide a way for engineers and policy makers understand the problem situation they are stepping into, explicitly consult all the stakeholders involved, and develop clear definitions of the system they’re working with so that solutions can deal with the root cause of problems, rather than surface level measures.
To take an example tool, let’s consider applying system archetypes, and specifically success to the successful. The obvious application is the current economic system, where wealth begets wealth (landlords, investment banking, etc.). If we as policy makers wish to counteract this feedback loop, then we know that wealth redistribution will only go so far, since the reinforcing feedback loop will force more wealth to those who already possess it. Instead, if we want equity, we need to decouple that feedback loop, by e.g. restricting the number of properties a landlord can own.
As I initially said, it is just a tool, and I’ve only covered a small part of it, but it is one that explicitly forces policy makers to consult stakeholders and allows us to effectively model complex social systems to bring about real societal change.
Ok, you don’t want to solve issues, you want a fairy tale. Sorry, but that’s not achievable.
Nah, she just wants to reply some snarky comments that don’t really inform people other than letting them know she thinks they are wrong, and that’s she thinks she’s some kind of authority on the matter.
Ha ha ha!