Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

Understanding Concepts of

environment
The environment is the context in which the system we are interested
in is found. Strictly speaking, it is whatever is not included in our
definition of the system. In developing a systems perspective we
describe a system in relationship to its environment, and how changes
in the environment affect the system.
When describing a system in the context of its environment we speak
about the "response" and the "behavior" of the system. The response
of a system is how it changes when the environment changes in a
particular way. The more general description of a system in the
context of diverse conditions is its "behavior".
The concepts of adaptation and evolution are intimately related to the
way a system, or a collection of similar systems, respond and change
in the context of their environment. Specifically, the concepts of
adaptation and evolution refer to changes in a system that affect how
it responds to repeated instances of similar or related conditions.
These concepts have a biological or social flavor. However, the
response of a physical system can also change as a result of
environmental forces.
Most of the properties that are of interest in the study of complex
systems arise from the flows of energy, matter or information through
a system. (This statement can be made more exact by considering
that systems that do not have flows through them tend to equilibrium
according to the second law of thermodynamics). These flows involve
the system, but are also properties of the environment.
The role of the environment is also important when considering the
basic idea of observation. Observing a system typically involves the
response of a system to its environment. Even when we describe a
system's shape or color, we make use of how the system responds to
light.
Since the systems we usually consider are a small part of the
universe, the environment refers to most of the universe. Completely
describing the state of the environment is, in principle, a much more
difficult task than describing the state of the system. However, it is
generally possible to restrict the aspects of the environment that are
described to those forces which are most directly relevant to the
system. Part of the process of describing (or modeling) a system's
behavior involves identifying the aspects of the environment which are
sufficiently important to consider.
In general, when we think about a model of a system, the properties of
the environment are treated in a simpler way than the system itself.
The environment may even be treated as featureless or unchanging.
Alternatively, it may be treated as random, which means its properties
have no relationship to the properties of the system itself. Such
simplifications are part of the traditional reductionist approach which
ignores the relationships or interdependencies of the system with the
environment. Realizing that these simplifications are not always
applicable doesn't mean they are not useful, it just means that we
have to study when they can and cannot be applied, and know how to
improve upon them when they cannot.
One useful example is how we apply responsibility or blame for a
person's behavior. This is relevant whether we are talking about
attitudes toward a successful individual or to a criminal. Some people
idolize a successful individual while others look to family or social
context for the reasons of success. Some people would assign
criminal responsibility to an individual person, and advocate
punishment or therapy, while others would assign the responsibility to
the environment, and advocate changing societal context or
conditions. The more difficult problem of recognizing the interplay of
system and environment is part of a systems approach.
Ecology and their
interconnectedness
When a genetically modified crop is grown on a large scale in the open,
should we be concerned? What possible adverse effects could such crops
pose to the wider ecology? Can we know the totality of the effects that
will occur? What can be done if something goes wrong?
Let us start by taking a few moments to appreciate the diverse life forms
and natural elements that make up a typical farming environment – the
insects, birds, small animals, and plants; the soil, its nutrients,
earthworms, micro-organisms, and other soil inhabitants; the wind, the
sunlight and the rain; larger animals; the varying temperatures, pressures
and humidity.
Nature is truly incredible, and no human being can compute the total
interactions that occur within a natural system. No human being has
control over the forces that both affect and are a part of nature. Yet, in
acknowledging our limited ability and understanding, our hearts may
open up, awakening humility, and moving us to wondering the
possibility of something much more intelligent and capable than we are,
and upon which we depend.
The totality of interactions in natural systems is immense and beyond
intellectual comprehension. When we apply science, we can measure a
limited number of outcomes resulting from the genetic modification of a
crop. For example, we can look at some changes in the degree of
biodiversity; is there a reduction in the number of ladybirds or other
insects? What happens to the number of birds? We can also look for any
differences in yield over a given area.
However, any experiment is done for a limited time-frame. How long
should that time-frame be? Would the results be valid for the same crop
grown in successive years, or in different conditions – in a slightly more
humid or warmer climate, for example? Crucially, a point should we say
that we know enough to make an important decision?
It is clear that scientific evaluations exist in a framework that gives a
partial picture, and not a full one. The whole, after all, is not the sum of
its parts, and even more so when we speak only of the parts we know.
However, at WIN we do believe that scientific knowledge has value.
Scientific experiments can indeed give us certain bits of information.
Our ability to appreciate the implications from those bits is dependent on
the extent that we use our awareness and capacity to reflect, both
individually and collectively. Within that capacity will exist an
appreciation that there are possibilities we perhaps have little or no
knowledge about.
Our own awareness and capacity to reflect is the place where science
ends, and deeper qualities can emerge. Wisdom, wholeness and love, for
example – rather than profit, egoism, and greed – are what is needed and
that have the potential to embrace science within a framework of a
deeper truth – that is what makes science worthwhile, and through which
it can be guided to be of real service.

S-ar putea să vă placă și