The term gestalt, when used in the context of general systems theory, assumes the value of “systemic touchstone”, namely a figure of reference useful to categorize the properties or qualities of a set of systems. Typical gestalts used, e.g., in biology, are those based on anatomical or physiological characteristics, which correspond respectively to architectural and organizational design choices in natural and artificial systems. In this presentation we discuss three gestalts of general systems theory: behavior, organization, and substance, which refer respectively to the works of Wiener, Boulding, and Leibniz. Our major focus here is the system introduced by the latter. Through a discussion of some of the elements of the Leibnitian System, and by means of several novel interpretations of those elements in terms of today’s computer science, we highlight the debt that contemporary research still has with this Giant among the giant scholars of the past. The paper accompanying this presentation is available at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/67040428/Articles/DF14c_Wiener21stB_cr.pdf

1. Behavior
Organization
Substance
Three Gestalts of
General Systems
Theory
Vincenzo De Florio
MOSAIC research group
University of Antwerp & iMinds

2. Driving Technology’s Future…
• …by standing on the shoulders of Giants!
• Those Giants are the foundation we stand on
• But they also “direct research towards the
gaps which they reveal”
• Here: reflections on how much we still owe to
three such Giants

3. General systems theory
• The study of the concept and principles of
systems in general – without referring to a
specific discipline
• Systems (natural or otherwise) are classified
according to general criteria
• Anatomical (structural, architectural);
physiological (organizational); behavioral traits
= Gestalts

4. Theories and Gestalts
• The quality of a theory depends on the quality
of its “axioms”!
• This presentation: three theories based on
three gestalts
–Behavioral classification: Aristotle, Wiener
–Organizational classification: Leibniz,
Wiener, Boulding
–“Substance”: Aristotle, Leibniz

5. 1) Behavior
• Wiener et al.: “behavioristic study of
natural events”
• Classification based on “the change produced
in the surroundings by an object”
• Structural / architectural / organizational traits
are not part of the model
– “…omit the specific structure and the intrinsic
organization…”

6. 1) Behavior (cont.’ed)
• Classes: Passive, Random, Purposeful;
Teleologic (reactive), Predictive (proactive) 
cybernetics
 In nuce, autonomic systems! MAPE loops!
• What next? Auto-predictive behaviors!
Auto-resilience!
–Individual and social behaviors
–System-env fit; strategy-env fit
–More info: Session V.2 tomorrow at 2pm

7. 2) Organization
• K. Boulding, Skeleton of Science
• Organizational characteristics of
natural and artificial systems
– An “arrangement of levels oftheoretical discourse”
based on organization, openness…
 Social “*”: organizations, systems, behaviors…
• What next? Bio-inspired social organizations!

8. 3) Leibniz’s Substance
• Leibnitian system: very complex and
fragmented corpus of ideas
• Starting points:
–Aristotelian substance: “subject that
underwent change”
–Aristotelian entelechies: substances that
“bring about their own changes from one
state to another”
 BEHAVIOR!
 ACTIVE BEHAVIOR!

9. Substance is a network
• Substance: fully interconne-
cted network of all-open
entelechies
–“Harmony”
• A social organization
[ Boulding!] with a controlling substance
(mind) representing “the whole”
 Social constructivism; ANT

10. Substance is a KW unit
• Every possible
substance network
becomes a new
UNIT of KNOWLEDGE
Table of instructions!
Subroutines! Boxes in flowcharts!
Components in CbSE!

11. Substance is a KW module
• A new “Knowledge Digit”,
or pictogram,
• A template that can
be reused into a
Greater Module
 Fractal organization!

12. A hierarchy of WHOLEs
emerges
– each GREATER
than the SUM
of its PARTS

13. • Characteristica
Universalis:
language to repre-
sent KW modules
• Calculus
Ratiocinator:
tool to reason
automatically about
KW modules
Substance is … code!

14. • Substance is a code!
• Instance of a substance: phenotypical code
produced by a genotypical code
• Life is execution of codes!
 There is no such thing as a physical life!
• Concepts are “real”, matter is fake
• What is the world then?
Everything is code!

15. World is a substance
• World: the network of all networks
• A finite resource! The world has limited
“receptivity”, limited “capacity”
• Purpose: maximize quantity and quality
• “Like in certain games where all spaces on the board
are to be filled according to certain rules […] as
fittingly as possible […] In short it is just like tiles that
are arranged so that as many as possible occupy a
given area”
Cellular automata!
Artificial Life! Virtual Reality!
Multi-agent Systems!

16. Three selection criteria
• A purposeful-behaviored system controls
the world! (A demiurge? A Middle-Ware?)
• Purpose: select the best substance
ecosystem for the current world.
• Best = f (I, C, E)
–Intrinsic quality
–Compossibility
–Extrinsic quality
 Session V.2
tomorrow at 2pm

17. Intrinsic quality
• Certain recombinations make more sense
 A greater purpose emerges from the parts
• The greater the emergence, the stronger the
“demand for existence” (I)
• A classification emerges: a GST!
–Purposeful, openness, awareness, …
→ Elements of Wiener’s and Boulding’s!

18. Compossibility
• Aim: ecosystems of substances in equilibrium!
• Not all combinations are possible. Some
lead to contradictions or clash with other
substances
 selection criterion C
• For instance: Ultimate Predator clashes with
other substances and leads to an empty world
–Lotka-Volterra
–Man ??

19. Extrinsic quality
• Properties that are not “systemic” or intrinsic
• Call for a match with external conditions
– Criterion E: System-environment fit!
( Session V.2 tomorrow at 2pm)
• Leibniz: “unpacking” ( unknowns  facts(t) )

20. Unmoved Mover is Substance
• A Characteristica
Universalis script
could describe “God”
• Ultimate ordinateur,
ultimate craftsman,
able to achieve
the best with the
minimal swarf.

21. Philosophy or science?
FRACTAL SOCIAL
ORGANIZATION
001122222222
A hierarchy of WHOLEs
emerges
– each GREATER
than the SUM
of its PARTS
Phenotype
Genotype

22. Philosophy and science!
• FSO: networks of “concepts” embedding other
concepts
• Each FSO is a KW unit represented by an
unique symbol, a pictogram
• Every FSO is a KW module: a KW “template”
representing, e.g., a social response
• FSO is genotypic code that produces
self-similar phenotypic “products”
(3D pics, audio, social behavior, ...)

23. 23
012222222001122222222
Conservation of modularity!

24. 24
Conservation of modularity!

25. Conclusions
• Whose shoulders are we standing on??
• Have we reached the shoulders yet??
• “A far greater secret lies hidden in our
understanding, of which these are but the
shadows”
• Conjecture: conservation of modularity!
The Reason why evolution “evolves”, and why
nature “naturally” develops ever more complex
substances.

26. FSO videoclips
Antifragility
Autoresilience
Fractal Social
Organizations
Resilience
Quality