Mike,
I think we always DO start from the whole. It's what confronts us; it's
what we are a part of and wish to see as a whole in order to derive some
modicum of comfort, isn't it? We WANT wholeness.
Businesses strive for complete systems that serve their goals. And every
business suffers from breakdowns of whatever "whole" cycles they have
created. That's one reason there are strategy sessions not only to plan
beautiful futures, but also to plan reactions to unforeseen stresses on
the whole system.
Your phrase about "starting from the whole being/entity" concludes with
the words "with their own properties". See? You can't avoid talking
about understanding parts whose sum is graeter than the whole. You have
simply given parts another name: properties.
Hey, I'm just having fun splitting hairs, Mike. Let's lead this in
another direction, or further down the same path. Senge gives one small
chapter over to the idea of "seeing the first AND the trees". I sense
he's right. In business, there's no other way but to look at the pars
which make up the whole. Forward thinking managers will try to see how
manipulation of variables will affect a whole which is greater than the
sum. I think it's clear from the layers of mud laid down on this subject
that it's a chess match at best.
But that doesn't mean you cannot "practice" foresight which leads to
sustainable success. You're right--machine and organism each have their
place. Those metaphors are exploitable within one model. How?
-- Barry bmallis@markem.com