The only truth in systems thinking is that a successful system is successful for the time it was built. Sooner or later, it will be eclipsed by a new perspective that sheds light on variables that didn't seem like variables in the first place.

Using an example from the above book, we did not consider that the chemicals accumulated in the water or soil would be absorbed by the insects and animals that fed off that water and soil, resulting in a "bioaccumulation" of human-made chemicals that ended up killing off many apex predators at the top of the food chain, like falcons and eagles.

DDT, an insecticide sprayed over industrial farmlands, were absorbed by insects, those of which were consumed by eagles, leading to thinning eggshells that harmed the reproductive cycles of the predator birds. At the time the United States and other countries applied DDT, people thought in simpler cause-effect patterns: Chemical kills pests that kill our produce. Pests gone, more produce. The variables were simple because it takes months, years, decades to discover more complex causes and effects of our actions.

A more modern example are the forever plastics that end up in the ocean, get absorbed by salmon and tuna, and finally end up in humans. Without understanding bioaccumulation in the first place, we wouldn't be able to consider that certain plastics could enter our bodies through naturally-grown food sources.

Practically, the only thing we can do to learn from our actions is to allow and encourage those interested in the effects of our actions to observe, record, and publish conclusions on these actions. We can then build on this knowledge to change behaviors that appear so simple and beneficial, but so complexly damaging to ourselves and everything around us.

Systems must always be accountable to new information, or else they will be useless. The use of useless systems is the hallmark of a declining culture that prioritizes tradition over practicality.

----

In human behavior, we are sold on the fiction that "If I do this, I get that." The easy cause and effect. This works in the immediate physics of the world ("If I push the cup off the table, it will fall on the ground.") but in social relations, it's hardly the case. If I thought up the pattern, "If I ask this person for a cup of sugar, they'll give me a cup of sugar," then you'll already know that this pattern relies on a bunch of dependencies before it could be easily implemented. You'll likely need to know if that person is a friend or family member, what their mood is, if they even have sugar in the first place.

And these are the easiest variables to consider! This ignores whether asking for that cup of sugar out of nowhere might be considered a bit rude or forward, whether it would have been better if the recipient provided their own cup in the first place, and then it would be a viable request, or whether in that culture sugar has the value of gold.

In the context of social relations, an "If This Then That" pattern requires a lot more "If" statements before the pattern can be an easy success. Luckily, most of us internalize a lot of the dependencies so that we can quickly intuit what needs to be true before we initiate the action or request.

However, I only provided a very low-stakes example for simplicity, even though it undermines the implications of internalized pattern-making. Now that you understand that there is a lot to unpack from the simplest of actions, we can move up to the larger decisions that we make in life based on patterns that also have a lot to unpack.

"If I get a well-paid, respected job, then I will be financially secure and comfortable."

"If I follow my passions, then I will never have to work a day in my life."

"If I go on vacation, I can finally relax and re-center myself."

These kinds of cause-effect statements are the core of how we make most decisions throughout our life. And in each statement, there are hundreds, if not thousands of years of reasoning that attempt to back up their apparent truths.

But what if these kinds of statements aren't the solutions to our larger problems in life, but the causes? What if they are the sources of the friction and exhaustion and wasted energy that we deal with each day?

This is the end of Part 1. It might be a bit before I get to Part 2, but I'll update with a link here when I get to it.

Best,
Dom