Pluralism and the legitimation of systems science

It is argued that methodological pluralism is essential for the continued legitimation of systems science and that if the authors' inquiries are going to have any legitimacy in tackling some of the major issues of today, they must indeed embrace methodological plurality.

Abstract

The central message of this paper is that methodological pluralism is essential for the continued legitimation of systems science. This statement is supported by a critique of our notion of complexity. Our traditional view of complexity focuses upon the "natural world" of object relations and thereby excludes complexities of moral decision making and subjectivity. However, we are now beginning to realize that these realms of complexity are not independent of one another. Indeed, our ability to cope adequately with many of the problems we are currently facing, especially global problems, depends on being able to understand the systemic relationships between all three. Interestingly, we find that different methods have evolved to handle the different forms of complexity. Therefore, if our inquiries are going to have any legitimacy in tackling some of the major issues of today, we must indeed embrace methodological pluralism.