Many real-world situations can be experienced differently as either a difficulty or a mess, depending on the viewpoint of
the observer. However, I could not call it a system unless I had tried to make sense of it using systems thinking and found
or formulated a system of interest within it. This means I would need a purpose for engaging with the real-world situation.
When I do not have such a purpose in mind, I'm using the word "system" in its everyday sense rather than its technical systems
practice sense.
The act of making a distinction is quite basic to what it is to be human. When we make a distinction, we split the world into
two parts-- this and that. We separate the thing from its context or a system from its environment. This is the same as drawing
a circle on a sheet of paper. When the circle is closed, three different elements are brought forth at the same time-- an
inside, an outside, and a boundary.
The fundamental choice that faces systems practitioners is choosing to see systems either as something that exists, that can
be discovered, measured, and possibly modelled, manipulated, or maintained, as does the first system practitioner in this
cartoon, who jumps to the conclusion that this is clearly a manufacturing system; or as something we construct, design, or
experience because of the distinctions or theories we embody, as does the second systems practitioner, who is open to the
complexity of the situation-- the factory, river, dairying-- and sees systems as mental constructs formulated as part of a
systemic inquiry. You will now learn how to define and identify systems of interest for yourself.