| ||
|
Semantic Analysis of Systems
One of the unique principles of any analysis is dividing the whole into parts, which inevitably leads to interaction between the former parts of the whole. Any division implicates the concept of "link" (whatever has been divided, it is always part of the whole, not independent and requiring relations to the whole, i.e. interaction). As soon as the boundary (alienation) appears, there springs up a new form of integration to be defined as interaction. It marks the ties between the rationally divided parts of the integral unit.
The notion of a system implicates conditions for its formation (definition), that is assigning of the boundary between the inner part (a closed system) with the outer part (an open system). The condition for system formation is motivational tension defined by the requirement for singling something out of the world with the purpose of its realization. Motivational tension is actualized as a finite concept, being specified in the context of certain subjectness. Definition, in this sense, appears as a conceptual form of expressing this condition through meanings. A "closed system" is something defined through the meaning.
The system's sense is understood as a correlation with the separation/single-out requirement that "belongs" to the subject of requirement and is realized in the subject space (an open system). The term "open system" is essentially not a notion, but a finite category (contribution to the infinite whole).
A boundary would be described as conditions for dividing the whole unit and correlation with that unit. Conditions for a system's boundary (its limits) are defined by requirement as a source of this system's tension, and they are expressed by "attraction" and "rejection" forces. In the language it is formulated through the force tension of the system striving toward equilibrium. Any theory basically studies either a static state or the system transition to equilibrium. That is why any closed system is homeostatic, and it either strives toward equilibrium or is stationary, having already reached that equilibrium. There is no discretely balanced system. It is always balanced to something external (conditions of its definition). That is why, in terms of its conceptual definition (in terms of meanings) a system of any level is closed. It is open for a sense definition, because it is potentially linked to its external "open" source, representing the alienation thereof. It looks improbable to discover the sense of this source while every source of the system's tension is always brought outside its boundaries, when defining the system. The rational "closure" of this infinite method always brings one to the idea of God, the "original stimulus", "self-propelled movement" etc. All finite paradoxes cropping up in the theory can not be resolved on the conceptual level. While every concept (that has meaning) is already a closed system as it is. Any concept thus has to express a finite meaning and is not applicable for description of an open system. It is impossible to describe the source of external tension through concepts in a finite "statement", because this source recedes into spatial or temporal infinity.
Thus, Semantic Analysis discloses the evolutionary process step by step, coordinating each stage within the requirement - the source of tension, and treating the system's behavior as movement toward homeostasis. Qualities, selected by the subject in the process of constructing a mental map, determine the type of system that can be physical, biological, social, cultural, physiological etc. in fact, Semantic Analysis constitutes a methodological instrument for description and research of any science systems, and it defines principles of scientific analysis.
| ||
