What do you think?
Rate this book
System: The Shaping of Modern Knowledge
The role that "system" has played in the shaping and reshaping of modern knowledge, from Galileo and Newton to our own "computational universe." A system can describe what we see (the solar system), operate a computer (Windows 10), or be made on a page (the fourteen engineered lines of a sonnet). In this book, Clifford Siskin shows that system is best understood as a genre--a form that works physically in the world to mediate our efforts to understand it. Indeed, many Enlightenment authors published works they called "system" to compete with the essay and the treatise. Drawing on the history of system from Galileo's "message from the stars" and Newton's "system of the world" to today's "computational universe," Siskin illuminates the role that the genre of system has played in the shaping and reshaping of modern knowledge.
Previous engagements with systems have involved making them, using them, or imagining better ones. Siskin offers an innovative perspective by investigating system itself. He considers the past and present, moving from the "system of the world" to "a world full of systems." He traces the turn to system in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and describes this primary form of Enlightenment as a mediator of political, cultural, and social modernity--pointing to the moment when people began to "blame the system" for working both too well ("you can't beat the system") and not well enough (it always seems to "break down"). Throughout, his touchstones are: what system is and how it has changed; how it has mediated knowledge; and how it has worked in the world.
Previous engagements with systems have involved making them, using them, or imagining better ones. Siskin offers an innovative perspective by investigating system itself. He considers the past and present, moving from the "system of the world" to "a world full of systems." He traces the turn to system in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and describes this primary form of Enlightenment as a mediator of political, cultural, and social modernity--pointing to the moment when people began to "blame the system" for working both too well ("you can't beat the system") and not well enough (it always seems to "break down"). Throughout, his touchstones are: what system is and how it has changed; how it has mediated knowledge; and how it has worked in the world.
318 pages, Hardcover
Published January 1, 2016
7 people are currently reading
108 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
March 22, 2017
I really like what Siskin tried to do in this book. Suskin's subject matter, identifying systems, gets 5 full stars from me. A lot of the history gets 5 stars as well. But, and it's really through no fault of his own, Suskin fails to connect those past systems fully to the systems he is trying to identify. Research in chaos, systems, networks, emergence, fractals, and the like are still in their infancy. Considering how little we actually know about systems (we know so much, but that knowledge has only enabled us to realize how much we don't know), I was impressed that Suskin tried to make the connections he did.
Suskin tried to demonstrate how understanding systems gave us our fist real understanding of our world and larger universe (e.g. Newton explained the universe as a system). He further tried to explain that the emergence of knowledge in general was a system, and he tried to outline that system. While I think this is exactly how knowledge will be explained in the future, Suskin falls short of connecting the dots. That said, it seems likely to me this book will be viewed, in the future, as an early and worthwhile attempt to explain human knowledge as a system.
Suskin tried to demonstrate how understanding systems gave us our fist real understanding of our world and larger universe (e.g. Newton explained the universe as a system). He further tried to explain that the emergence of knowledge in general was a system, and he tried to outline that system. While I think this is exactly how knowledge will be explained in the future, Suskin falls short of connecting the dots. That said, it seems likely to me this book will be viewed, in the future, as an early and worthwhile attempt to explain human knowledge as a system.
Read
March 5, 2018Hepsini okumadım ama çoğunu okudum :)
January 31, 2025
this has roughly 50 pages of references and i feel like i needed to read every single one to understand what the hell was going on. maybe it is just 1am and i have lost my ability to think coherently. i will never know
March 13, 2017
Siskin's guiding thesis is that the construct of 'system' is best understood as a genre that is fluent and adaptable. This view of system and the way systems are organized is intended to touch on how the narrow, yet deep, individual academic disciplines developed in the early 19th century and how these disciplines can be rethought and reshaped again moving forward. Siskin's historical and ever-evolving notion of system also addresses how epistemology can and does change over time.
In spite of an interesting thesis, the book is quite difficult to read in spots.
In spite of an interesting thesis, the book is quite difficult to read in spots.
January 6, 2019
The book should have been much longer for it's stated aim which is to demonstrate an understanding of how the concept of 'system' shaped British thought, from the enlightenment, to f modern times. The text spans everything from just before Newton and the writing of the Principia, to very briefly, the age of the digital computing system, and Wolfram's approach to understanding computation. Contrary to one's perception of the above topics, the book is not exclusive to the formal mathematical system, which is barely 1/3 of the material here.
Most of the text is an overview of the attempt to organize knowledge mostly from the historical, philosophical, and literary perspectives. The text takes a decidedly 'reductionist' approach of analysis, studying the broadest topic of "knowledge" (genre), then defining components of genres, books, and then going through the typology of books, with a particular eye to the novel, and biography. All of this effort serves to understand the notion of genre deeply, and how that notion factors into the human conception of reality. The middle parts of the book focus heavily on the social scientific view of human systems, as something to fight or resist in popular narratives of injustice and grievance.
It really feels like there should have been the 'last third' of this book is missing, as the overall narrative should have been the founding of formal systems of mechanical phenomena by Newton in his "System of the World" , then the extension of Newton's mechanistic system perspective into other fields, like political philosophy and biology. The most recent understanding of systems, coming mostly out of the formal social sciences is not covered at all, which is a shame, as there's a lot of material on this notion in the field of economics and physics.
While the book doesn't cover this particular dialogue within economics, it focuses on the discussion of whether "system" is actually some intrinsic property of the world, and whether one discovers it, or, if "system" is just a frame to which one views the world, a container for blocks say, is one of the central themes of the overarching narrative. Newton clearly believed in the former, where's as the historians and political philosophers of the 18th-century viewers it as the later. This is very similar to the 'create' or 'discover' mathematics meta-argument mathematicians have among themselves.
No mention of Turing, Shannon, the cybernetics movement (except a very brief at the beginning of the book), again a glaring hole in the coverage. The book feels incomplete, and the forays into system in literature, history, and philosophy feel not as connected as it should/could be, with the earlier works of Galileo and Newton. Overall, however a decent book, and a good start on this subject.
Most of the text is an overview of the attempt to organize knowledge mostly from the historical, philosophical, and literary perspectives. The text takes a decidedly 'reductionist' approach of analysis, studying the broadest topic of "knowledge" (genre), then defining components of genres, books, and then going through the typology of books, with a particular eye to the novel, and biography. All of this effort serves to understand the notion of genre deeply, and how that notion factors into the human conception of reality. The middle parts of the book focus heavily on the social scientific view of human systems, as something to fight or resist in popular narratives of injustice and grievance.
It really feels like there should have been the 'last third' of this book is missing, as the overall narrative should have been the founding of formal systems of mechanical phenomena by Newton in his "System of the World" , then the extension of Newton's mechanistic system perspective into other fields, like political philosophy and biology. The most recent understanding of systems, coming mostly out of the formal social sciences is not covered at all, which is a shame, as there's a lot of material on this notion in the field of economics and physics.
While the book doesn't cover this particular dialogue within economics, it focuses on the discussion of whether "system" is actually some intrinsic property of the world, and whether one discovers it, or, if "system" is just a frame to which one views the world, a container for blocks say, is one of the central themes of the overarching narrative. Newton clearly believed in the former, where's as the historians and political philosophers of the 18th-century viewers it as the later. This is very similar to the 'create' or 'discover' mathematics meta-argument mathematicians have among themselves.
No mention of Turing, Shannon, the cybernetics movement (except a very brief at the beginning of the book), again a glaring hole in the coverage. The book feels incomplete, and the forays into system in literature, history, and philosophy feel not as connected as it should/could be, with the earlier works of Galileo and Newton. Overall, however a decent book, and a good start on this subject.
April 8, 2020
Very cool book. I especially enjoyed the bits about Malthus. I wish that spatial systems like Feng Shui, Taylorism and Toyota was discussed, but I understand the book didn't really cross that kind of system.
May 2, 2019
Good overview of the thinking in systems history and present and the role it played in evolution of epistemology. It is not written well as a book to read though.
February 6, 2022
This was a very pleasant audiobook; the narrator does a great job of delivering dense material.
That aside, I listened to this whole book not sure what point the author was trying to make. I do think the discussion of how the concept of a system has evolved and how that has affected the way humans learn and judge the world is interesting, but because the book will return to its thesis: system is a genre, so frequently, I just wonder "okay, so what?"
I actually believe there is a connection, a point, to be made. It's just not made well. I think for people hoping to develop their own system ie. interpretation of how (a facet of) the world works, this is a book with foundational knowledge and points to consider for a well-designed system.
That aside, I listened to this whole book not sure what point the author was trying to make. I do think the discussion of how the concept of a system has evolved and how that has affected the way humans learn and judge the world is interesting, but because the book will return to its thesis: system is a genre, so frequently, I just wonder "okay, so what?"
I actually believe there is a connection, a point, to be made. It's just not made well. I think for people hoping to develop their own system ie. interpretation of how (a facet of) the world works, this is a book with foundational knowledge and points to consider for a well-designed system.
May 24, 2017
Extremely academic--not just that it was dry and overly verbose, but also that it spent time arguing with other academic approaches that differed from it, enough so that it detracted from making its own points. Oh well.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews