Site Logo

STPrism

Geoffrey Vickers

6 min read

Based on the provided texts, the relationship between hierarchy, non-ergodicity, speciation, causality, and constraint can be untangled by viewing them as interconnected components of Sir Geoffrey Vickers’ model of human systems.

In this framework, systems are not static objects but dynamic processes of relationship maintenance that evolve over time. The five concepts you identified function together as follows:

1. Hierarchy and Constraint: The Vertical Structure

Vickers views organizations and societies as open systems arranged in a hierarchy. This hierarchy is defined by the flow of constraints and enablements.

• The Logic of Hierarchy: A system (e.g., a corporation, a society) is composed of subsystems (departments, individuals). The higher levels depend on the lower levels for their existence (a society depends on biological humans), but the higher levels impose constraints on the lower ones to maintain the coherence of the whole[1].

• Enablements vs. Constraints: This relationship is dialectical. Systems enable their members to do things they could not do alone (e.g., build a cathedral), but the price of this enablement is constraint[4][5]. As the “enablements” of technology and power increase, the required “constraints” (regulation and law) must also increase to prevent chaos[4][5].

• Levels of Control: Vickers distinguishes five levels of control in this hierarchy, ranging from simple “control by releaser” (biological reflexes) to “control by self-determination” (human ethical debate)[6][7]. Higher levels of control do not dissolve the lower ones but restrict and guide them[8].

2. Causality: From Linear to Circular

Vickers rejects simple linear causality (A causes B) in favor of circular causality or mutual interaction, particularly regarding the relationship between “events” and “ideas.”

• The Two-Stranded Rope: History is described as a “two-stranded rope” where the history of events and the history of ideas develop in intimate relation. Events change our ideas (our appreciation of the world), and these changed ideas then cause us to act differently, creating new events[9][10].

• Feedback Loops: In this circular process, the “effect” feeds back to become a “cause.” A policy decision (cause) creates a new situation (effect), which changes the policymaker’s view of the world (feedback), leading to new policies. Thus, the system is self-regulating and self-transforming[11][12].

3. Non-Ergodicity: The Historical Nature of Systems

Because causality is circular and systems learn, they are non-ergodic (or in Vickers’ terms, “historical”). This means the system never returns to the exact same state; its future cannot be statistically predicted from its past because the “rules” of the system change over time.

• Path Dependence: Unlike a mechanical system (like a clock) where the rules are fixed, human systems rewrite their own rules (norms and values) as they go. A river catchment area, for example, is not a fixed datum but a product of history; the river cuts its own bed, changing the conditions for its future flow[13][14].

• Irreversible Change: Linear trends (like economic growth or technological expansion) cannot continue indefinitely. They inevitably breed their own reversals or limitations[15][16]. Because the “appreciative settings” (the filter through which we value reality) change based on experience, the way a society responds to a stimulus today will differ from how it responds tomorrow[17]. Therefore, past data is not a reliable predictor of future behavior[18].

4. Speciation: The Response to Incoherence

Speciation (or fission) is the structural result of the tension between hierarchy and non-ergodic change. As systems grow and their history complicates their values, maintaining internal coherence becomes difficult.

• Fission of Cultures: When a system’s internal “appreciative system” (its shared values and understanding) becomes too complex or inconsistent to be contained, the system splits. “Inconsistent subcultures multiply by fission” to create smaller, more coherent groups[19][20].

• Intrasystemic to Intersystemic: Vickers argues that splitting a political entity converts “intrasystemic strains” (internal civil conflict) into “intersystemic conflicts” (conflict between two separate neighbors). While this doesn’t solve the conflict, it may make it more manageable by simplifying the “appreciative setting” required for each group to cohere[21][22].

• Diversity over Universality: This drives a move away from a single universal culture toward a “mosaic” of compatible cultures. Speciation is the system’s way of preserving the constraint and coherence necessary for survival when the hierarchy becomes too vast or unstable[23][24].

Summary of the Relationship

1. Hierarchy imposes Constraints to create order.

2. Causality within this order is circular (events change ideas, ideas change events).

3. This circularity makes the system Non-Ergodic (it evolves historically and irreversibly; the “rules” change).

4. As the system evolves non-ergodically, internal tensions rise until the hierarchy can no longer maintain coherence.

5. Speciation occurs as the system splits into smaller units to restore manageable Constraints and coherence.

This cycle stands in contrast to “goal-seeking” models (like a rat in a maze), proposing instead that human life is about maintaining relationships through this turbulent historical process[25].

Graph View