🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:00 *📚 Systems thinking is about understanding and influencing systems.* 00:39 *🌐 Two primary types of systems thinking: extroverted (outward focus) and introverted (inward focus).* 02:15 *🧑🤝🧑 People are the first pillar of systems thinking as systems are built for and by humans.* 02:44 *🗣️ Communication is the second pillar, essential for understanding and influencing people and systems.* 03:39 *📏 Measurement is the third pillar; you can't change what you don't measure.* 03:54 *📊 Outcomes are the fourth pillar, focusing on empirical results and feedback loops.* 04:07 *🔗 Networks are the fifth pillar; all systems are networks with nodes, relationships, and boundaries.* 04:48 *🧠 Introverted systems thinking involves structured, clear, and purposeful thinking.* 05:32 *🔄 Extroverted systems thinking focuses on behaviors and tools to influence external systems.* 07:13 *💬 Humans are emotional beings; emotions are central to understanding and influencing people.* 08:09 *🧠 The prefrontal cortex helps manage emotions but can be overridden by primal instincts.* 09:06 *🏅 Social status is a primary driver of human behavior and interactions.* 10:13 *📝 Communication involves verbal, written, non-verbal, digital forms, and listening.* 11:38 *📊 Measurement includes key performance indicators, quantitative and qualitative data, and complex multivariate analyses.* 12:20 *⚙️ Measurements help understand and influence system behavior, essential for complex systems.* 13:14 *🧪 Outcomes focus on empirical results, hypotheses, and feedback loops for continuous improvement.* 14:24 *🔄 Networks and systems are defined by nodes, relationships, and boundaries, and can be hierarchical and intersectional.* 18:20 *🧩 Thinking with structure involves cognitive control, thought stopping, task sets, and schemas.* 21:10 *🔍 Thinking with clarity focuses on distillation, reducing noise, and enhancing signal in cognitive processes.* 22:05 *💡 Cognitive dissonance, often pathologized, is a brain's superpower for recognizing contradictions.* 22:32 *🧠 Cognitive dissonance signals a need for deeper understanding and reconciliation of conflicting ideas.* 23:01 *🗣️ People often prioritize social identity over truth, leading to rhetorical defenses instead of genuine curiosity.* 23:44 *🦸♂️ Honoring cognitive dissonance can enhance systems thinking by encouraging reconciliation of internal incongruities.* 24:11 *🕵️♂️ Discernment is key to quickly identifying relevant information and improving cognitive clarity.* 24:52 *🎯 Thinking with purpose involves setting ambitious goals and focusing on reshaping the world.* 25:20 *🌍 Systems thinkers should aim to reshape the world with their practice, guided by a North Star purpose.* 26:15 *📈 Exponential thinking and identifying key leverage points are crucial for achieving significant results.* 26:57 *🧩 Mission and passion drive focus and energy, helping to align learning with a larger purpose.* 27:52 *🔥 Passion is the emotional force that motivates learning and engagement in systems thinking.* 28:06 *📝 Homework: Develop a taxonomy of the course content, using various methods to structure and communicate your understanding.* Made with HARPA AI
22:43 this is indeed a tricky situation. Uncertainty, not knowing what's going on, not having answers is uncomfortable and incompatible with human hubris. This is the one big reason we invented religions, we just made up stories that explain the universe. If not activly taught how to deal with cognitive dissonance correctly for whatever reason, people fall back to the path of minimal resistance. Tragically this path leads into information silos most of the time, where the narrative might be less fractured but also less factual. We as a species are simply more comfortable to believe an obvious lie than to admit that we don't know.
Its people all the way down. Good starting point to frame any solutions to system problems.for me the take away is the structure of people and their interactions you have described will be important to keep in mind as we move into a world with entities who function with silicon or other substrates . Will we build them with emotions or will this emerge ??
Hey David, I was thinking about the dangers of AGI, like when it turns into ASI. Why create AGI at all? Why not just create many distinct narrow AI agents who are hypercompetant in one area, like biology, physics, medicine, robotics etc? Why combine all knowledge or data into one AI system? This seems like it would be easier to predict and control. With the infinite inputs of all human knowledge and just goven free reign to think about and act on it all, who knows what the outputs would be. Kind of like adding all the ingredients in the kitchen together and hoping it will make a good dish, when it will inevitably taste like shit, as opposed to making seperate dishes. Idk if this makes sense. Essentially, why is AGI necessary and ehy cant we just have incredibly well developed narrow AI systems?
Okay now provide reasoning, so that we can actually ponder the possibility of being incorrect. Also provide the books you recommend for the correct perspective.
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 Hey, I'm just happy someone is interested in learning more! There are plenty of natural systems out there that exist independently of us, like ecosystems, weather patterns, and even cellular processes in living organisms. For some good reads on this, check out "Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos" by M. Mitchell Waldrop and "The Web of Life" by Fritjof Capra. They dive into how these natural systems work on their own." Thinking in Systems" by Donella Meadows is another great one. It explains how systems thinking applies to everything, not just human-made stuff. John H. Holland's "Hidden Order" talks about how complexity shows up naturally without human intervention. I think that focusing too much on human-made systems can lead to an anthropocentric bias, which can limit our understanding and make us overlook the complexity and beauty of the natural world, not to mention it very likely skews our understanding of the systems we're exploring. Hope this helps clear things up, dude!
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 I provided many books and an abstract of my thesis, but I guess it was removed somehow. Sorry about that. I wish we could converse more about it, but I'm not sure how we could go about doing that without providing external links and being flagged as spam. I replied a bit on his next Systems Thinking Course video, however. Maybe that might help elucidate my reasoning a bit. Again, sorry about that, dude.
@@Systems.Thinking I appreciate you engaging with me on this, man. I totally get your point about ecosystems being reflections of human perception and the idea that "the map is not the terrain." It’s a solid point. But here's my take. The term "system" is just a label we use to describe complex interactions that already exist in nature. These interactions are real and happen regardless of whether we observe or label them. By focusing only on how these interactions relate to humans, we risk missing the bigger picture and important details. Historically, this human-centric approach has had some pretty negative consequences. For example, the Green Revolution increased food production but led to biodiversity loss and soil degradation. Urban development has often prioritized human needs at the expense of habitats, resulting in significant biodiversity loss. Climate change mitigation strategies, like geoengineering, can have unintended ecological impacts, ignoring the vital role of natural carbon sinks. Large dams for human use disrupt river ecosystems, and the overuse of antibiotics has led to the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, a major global health threat. What I’m trying to say is that it’s important to recognize our human-centric limitations but also to adopt a broader perspective that considers all elements of the systems we study. That’s how we get a true understanding of the intricate world around us. All the best, bro!
🎯 Key points for quick navigation:
00:00 *📚 Systems thinking is about understanding and influencing systems.*
00:39 *🌐 Two primary types of systems thinking: extroverted (outward focus) and introverted (inward focus).*
02:15 *🧑🤝🧑 People are the first pillar of systems thinking as systems are built for and by humans.*
02:44 *🗣️ Communication is the second pillar, essential for understanding and influencing people and systems.*
03:39 *📏 Measurement is the third pillar; you can't change what you don't measure.*
03:54 *📊 Outcomes are the fourth pillar, focusing on empirical results and feedback loops.*
04:07 *🔗 Networks are the fifth pillar; all systems are networks with nodes, relationships, and boundaries.*
04:48 *🧠 Introverted systems thinking involves structured, clear, and purposeful thinking.*
05:32 *🔄 Extroverted systems thinking focuses on behaviors and tools to influence external systems.*
07:13 *💬 Humans are emotional beings; emotions are central to understanding and influencing people.*
08:09 *🧠 The prefrontal cortex helps manage emotions but can be overridden by primal instincts.*
09:06 *🏅 Social status is a primary driver of human behavior and interactions.*
10:13 *📝 Communication involves verbal, written, non-verbal, digital forms, and listening.*
11:38 *📊 Measurement includes key performance indicators, quantitative and qualitative data, and complex multivariate analyses.*
12:20 *⚙️ Measurements help understand and influence system behavior, essential for complex systems.*
13:14 *🧪 Outcomes focus on empirical results, hypotheses, and feedback loops for continuous improvement.*
14:24 *🔄 Networks and systems are defined by nodes, relationships, and boundaries, and can be hierarchical and intersectional.*
18:20 *🧩 Thinking with structure involves cognitive control, thought stopping, task sets, and schemas.*
21:10 *🔍 Thinking with clarity focuses on distillation, reducing noise, and enhancing signal in cognitive processes.*
22:05 *💡 Cognitive dissonance, often pathologized, is a brain's superpower for recognizing contradictions.*
22:32 *🧠 Cognitive dissonance signals a need for deeper understanding and reconciliation of conflicting ideas.*
23:01 *🗣️ People often prioritize social identity over truth, leading to rhetorical defenses instead of genuine curiosity.*
23:44 *🦸♂️ Honoring cognitive dissonance can enhance systems thinking by encouraging reconciliation of internal incongruities.*
24:11 *🕵️♂️ Discernment is key to quickly identifying relevant information and improving cognitive clarity.*
24:52 *🎯 Thinking with purpose involves setting ambitious goals and focusing on reshaping the world.*
25:20 *🌍 Systems thinkers should aim to reshape the world with their practice, guided by a North Star purpose.*
26:15 *📈 Exponential thinking and identifying key leverage points are crucial for achieving significant results.*
26:57 *🧩 Mission and passion drive focus and energy, helping to align learning with a larger purpose.*
27:52 *🔥 Passion is the emotional force that motivates learning and engagement in systems thinking.*
28:06 *📝 Homework: Develop a taxonomy of the course content, using various methods to structure and communicate your understanding.*
Made with HARPA AI
The more time passes the more I'm convinced that lucidity/mental clarity is the top 1 skill, especially after AGI
Systems Thinking = Herding Cats (🐱 I am so ready for this course)
22:43 this is indeed a tricky situation. Uncertainty, not knowing what's going on, not having answers is uncomfortable and incompatible with human hubris. This is the one big reason we invented religions, we just made up stories that explain the universe.
If not activly taught how to deal with cognitive dissonance correctly for whatever reason, people fall back to the path of minimal resistance. Tragically this path leads into information silos most of the time, where the narrative might be less fractured but also less factual. We as a species are simply more comfortable to believe an obvious lie than to admit that we don't know.
Awesome. Thank you.
Thank you!
Its people all the way down. Good starting point to frame any solutions to system problems.for me the take away is the structure of people and their interactions you have described will be important to keep in mind as we move into a world with entities who function with silicon or other substrates . Will we build them with emotions or will this emerge ??
Hey David, I was thinking about the dangers of AGI, like when it turns into ASI. Why create AGI at all? Why not just create many distinct narrow AI agents who are hypercompetant in one area, like biology, physics, medicine, robotics etc? Why combine all knowledge or data into one AI system? This seems like it would be easier to predict and control.
With the infinite inputs of all human knowledge and just goven free reign to think about and act on it all, who knows what the outputs would be. Kind of like adding all the ingredients in the kitchen together and hoping it will make a good dish, when it will inevitably taste like shit, as opposed to making seperate dishes. Idk if this makes sense. Essentially, why is AGI necessary and ehy cant we just have incredibly well developed narrow AI systems?
AGI is already such a huge buzzword that no one's gonna stop at a bunch of narrow ASI's
u da 🐐🐐
I think it is more of concrete system thinking vs abstract system thinking
Good one. Could have come with this myself.
All systems are designed for and by humans, eh? Incorrect.
Okay now provide reasoning, so that we can actually ponder the possibility of being incorrect.
Also provide the books you recommend for the correct perspective.
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 Hey, I'm just happy someone is interested in learning more!
There are plenty of natural systems out there that exist independently of us, like ecosystems, weather patterns, and even cellular processes in living organisms.
For some good reads on this, check out "Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos" by M. Mitchell Waldrop and "The Web of Life" by Fritjof Capra. They dive into how these natural systems work on their own." Thinking in Systems" by Donella Meadows is another great one. It explains how systems thinking applies to everything, not just human-made stuff. John H. Holland's "Hidden Order" talks about how complexity shows up naturally without human intervention.
I think that focusing too much on human-made systems can lead to an anthropocentric bias, which can limit our understanding and make us overlook the complexity and beauty of the natural world, not to mention it very likely skews our understanding of the systems we're exploring.
Hope this helps clear things up, dude!
Ecosystems are just human reflections. The map is not the terrain. Climate science is a human system that studies nature. Nature is not the system.
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 I provided many books and an abstract of my thesis, but I guess it was removed somehow. Sorry about that. I wish we could converse more about it, but I'm not sure how we could go about doing that without providing external links and being flagged as spam. I replied a bit on his next Systems Thinking Course video, however. Maybe that might help elucidate my reasoning a bit. Again, sorry about that, dude.
@@Systems.Thinking I appreciate you engaging with me on this, man. I totally get your point about ecosystems being reflections of human perception and the idea that "the map is not the terrain." It’s a solid point. But here's my take.
The term "system" is just a label we use to describe complex interactions that already exist in nature. These interactions are real and happen regardless of whether we observe or label them. By focusing only on how these interactions relate to humans, we risk missing the bigger picture and important details.
Historically, this human-centric approach has had some pretty negative consequences. For example, the Green Revolution increased food production but led to biodiversity loss and soil degradation. Urban development has often prioritized human needs at the expense of habitats, resulting in significant biodiversity loss. Climate change mitigation strategies, like geoengineering, can have unintended ecological impacts, ignoring the vital role of natural carbon sinks. Large dams for human use disrupt river ecosystems, and the overuse of antibiotics has led to the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, a major global health threat.
What I’m trying to say is that it’s important to recognize our human-centric limitations but also to adopt a broader perspective that considers all elements of the systems we study. That’s how we get a true understanding of the intricate world around us.
All the best, bro!