Contenu du sommaire : Analyse de systèmes en sciences sociales (I)

Anatol Rapoport : Modern systems theory ? An outlook for coping with change. Systemic theories are differentiated in accordance with their degree of « hardness », the « hardest » ones being those in which a system is defined in terms of mathematically specifiable relations among variables, and the « softest » ones being those that rely on an intuitive appreciation of analogies. The applicability of systemic theories of various types to physical, biological, and social sciences is discussed. In particular, it is argued that theories relevant to gross aspects of human behavior and to social organization cannot be meaningfully separated from ethical overtones, and that therefore there are limitations of the extent to which such theories can be « hardened ». The analogue of a sensitive instrument in the physical sciences is an investigator sensitized to particular types of social phenomena. This sensitization occurs via specific subjective orientations.

Charles Roig : General systems theory and its prospective development in social science. This article is a stage in the analysis of the concept of system as used in social science. Its main aim is to warn against the usual simplified analogies made with biological, mechanical or cybernetical systems in the name of general systems theory, which is actually much more of a project than a coherent scientific design. Such analogical translations too often give birth to tautologies or in the better instances to abstract patterns far from all empirical reality. However, systems analysis has two assets this article means to overview. First, it incites a questioning of the epistemology of social science in new ways, beyond the too restrictive functionalist postulates (i.e. they deal only with a certain type of system). Secondly it allows a clarification of concepts which are increasingly used in social science (from « structure » to « feedback ») without worrying about the appropriateness of their use or even of their definition. This study leaves aside among other things, the main problem of language as verbal support ? never neutral ? of social science ; this characteristic distinguishes social science theory from physics theory. Doesn't every systemic interpretation of social reality constitute, in the first place, a terminological (or logological) system with all its implications ? This basic point remains to be clarified.

Hayward R. Alker : Directive Behavior : A Desirable Orientation for Mathematical Social Science. The article suggests four topic areas needing more formal analysis. Each derives from the concern of early mathematical systems theorists like Norbert Weiner, D. T. Campbell and Gerd Sommerhoff with directive behavior, defined roughly as « actual or apparent, conscious or unconscious, goal-directed activity ». The first area is the logical clarification of the variety of action modalities ; alternate formal characterizations of quasi-teleological U.N. peace-making activities provide an illustrative exemple of Sommerhoff's formal definition of the directive correlation of action and environment variables. Problems concerning action sequences and goal hierarchies include delimiting the pervasiveness of TOTE (feedback loop) hierarchies in biosocial sensing and knowing processes and the interdependence of supply and demand mechanisms in social stratification processes. The optimal and pathological properties of certain algorithmic decision-making procedures of relevance to both socialistic and capitalistic economies provides an illustration of a third kind of recommended research activity. Just as Sommerhoff was preoccupied with the quasi-teleological nature of evolution, so a computer simulation by Ronald Brunner of potentially revolutionary political development and decay exemplifies a way of formally studying emergent properties of social systems, including their possible self-transformation.

Eric Trist : System and organization : a recapitulation with special reference to the work of A. Angyal. Comment on Andreas Angyal's theories reviewed in Foundations for a science of personality, dealing with general problems concerning adaptation and organization. The analysis of epistemological foundations of systems theory, of the function and definition of the concept of system and of its environmental relationship enables us to explicit some important concepts, relationships and oppositions : i.e. structure - process relationship, analytic and integrative approaches, positional value, distinct open and closed systems, concepts such as biosphere, field determination, projective or introjective perspective, boundary regulation.