What exactly is the SYSTEM?

Posted by ChampDog | Saturday, July 17, 2010

In my previous post, I talked about system defines the milestones but what exactly is the system? Is that an universe? Is that a country?  Is that a family? Is that myself? Yes, all these can be the system.

You maybe confused with what the system is but in reality the system which defines the milestones can be anything. The answer of that question is:

The System is Everything

A system can be anything, therefore everything is the system. Because system consists of list of milestones, therefore everything has their milestones too. So, who define the system that eventually defines the milestones? In reality the system is a extremely complex. Let's look at the following diagram for a simplify version of the system:

  1. System 1 consists of milestones. These milestones are defined by System 1. 
  2. System 1 itself is a milestone that defined by System 2. Therefore system 2 defines the milestones in system 1 too. 
  3. System 2 defines it's own milestones and it also defines the shared milestones with System 3. 
  4. System 4 defines system 1, 2, & 3. 

Assuming if you're in System 2, you have the control over the milestones in System 1 but you have no control over the milestone in System 2 because you're still within the system 2. However, you still can defines some of the milestones in System 3. What if you're in System 4? Does that mean you're God? Then, who defines the milestones in System 4?

Remember, everything is in progress and there is no ending and no beginning? Do you really think there is an ultimate source out there? Yes, depends on which system you're in.

  1. Mt. August 18, 2010  

    in short, scope is an important factor to be determined before proceed to further discussion, or a common ground has to be agree upon before an argument takes place.

    if system 2 came into existence by itself, why couldn't it determine its own milestone ?

  2. ChampDog August 19, 2010  

    Yes, you have a point. Scope or common ground to define before an argument takes places. But how about the scope that beyond our imagination? Then it still ends up to have the same problems...

    That is the placed called "Nirvana" in both Buddhism & Hinduism where this is really "Nothing" at the beginning and it starts exist by its own.

    If system 2 can come into existence by itself, yes I think it can determine its own milestone.

    However, I don't think this can happen is mainly due to the fact that I strongly believe "everything is in progress" as I talked about that in my previous post.

    It can only happen within our "view" or "perspective" because we can't see though the system 2 that there is system 3 & 4 out there....

  3. Mt. August 19, 2010  

    if you define a limitation within your own infinite concept, then at the end the whole philosophy will fail to stand on itself.

    but i am still interest to read more ...

  4. ChampDog August 19, 2010  

    Yes,"infinite concept". At this point in time, I will still think that is true. :)

    Thanks and I appreciate all your comments. It triggers me to think more in fact! :)

  5. Mt. August 19, 2010  

    "A system can be anything, therefore everything is the system"

    this is a paradox statement. i can do anything doesn't mean everything is done by me.

  6. ChampDog August 21, 2010  

    I think you have a point. Maybe I should correct that statement. Perhaps I want to change to:

    "System can be anything AND everything is the system".

  7. Mt. August 22, 2010  

    ha ha, good one, you have just used 'definition' to answer all questions that were raised upon your philosophy. how is that different than simply just call it 'god'.

  8. ChampDog August 23, 2010  

    Haha.. not really I previously meant for that to. The system is everything and it could be anything too. Perhaps the wording might not be correct when I wanted to bring it out.

    God is within the system and itself is the system. So, there is a little difference in terms of definition. I understand your point about definition which can be used to answer a lot questions.

    I think the very important basic fundamental concept here (shouldn't call it as definition) is that "Everything is in Progress" and I show the reasons why I think so -because all static objects that we have seen & experienced are actually moving in reality.

  9. Mt. October 02, 2010  

    if everything is in progress then there must be one thing that is NOT, else the notion of everything is in progress does not work. As if that one thing is the reference for everything else is in progress.

    if there is ONE thing that is not "in progress", then NOT everything is in progress.

  10. Mt. October 02, 2010  

    even by your strict definition that system 1 does not have control over system 3, but it doesn't mean that system 1 cannot write a book about system 3 and get it all right !

  11. ChampDog October 03, 2010  

    I understand your point here. You need to have a reference point for anything that is in progress because everything is relativity? That's why where the God comes in as an ultimate source of static object in the entire universe?

    Hahaha... that's good one. Are you referring me? I think that is still possible. Assuming an organization is a system, it is just like you understand how exactly the organization works but you still do not have control over it. Btw, we can get it all wrong too! :)

    Back to the first discussion, perhaps I should say: The System is Everything and everything is relative?