Generalization and systemic epistemology: Why should it make sense?

Abstract

Abstract This paper argues that true ‘systemic’ epistemology should reveal multiple perspectives, conflicting realities and various other contexts due to its inherent pluralistic nature. Therefore, generalization in systems research occurs not across one linear conceptual framework but across the variety of nonlinear, conflicting, dialectal ‘realities’. It is therefore a misunderstanding of systems research to search for linear, singular and non‐conflicting versions of events as though there is one overarching ‘mega concept’ that will explain world events. The paper presents the hallmarks of a systemic epistemology. Using an example the nature of a systems epistemology is demonstrated and explained. The paper concludes that a ‘systemic’ epistemology is one that should reflect a ‘systemic’ reality. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 31 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.