ISSS Wiki - User contributions [en]

General System Theory by Bertalanffy

2026-05-14T09:31:37Z

Laouris: created and populated page

=Bertalanffy’s General System Theory=

[[Ludwig von Bertalanffy]]’s [[General System Theory]] (GST) is one of the foundational intellectual sources of the modern systems movement. Developed from his work in theoretical biology and most fully presented in General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, GST proposed that many phenomena across biology, psychology, the social sciences, and technology could not be adequately understood by reducing them to isolated parts. Instead, they had to be studied as organized wholes: systems whose properties arise from the dynamic relations among their components. Bertalanffy’s contribution was not simply to add another theory within biology, but to articulate a general scientific orientation for studying organization, wholeness, interaction, and emergence across domains.

==Historical context and purpose==
Bertalanffy developed GST in response to what he saw as a crisis of scientific fragmentation and reductionism. By the mid-twentieth century, the sciences had become increasingly specialized, while many of their most important problems concerned organized complexity: living organisms, minds, social groups, institutions, and ecological relations. The attached source emphasizes that Bertalanffy was reacting against the assumption that understanding parts automatically explains wholes, especially when mechanistic models drawn from classical physics were applied uncritically to living and social systems.
GST therefore aimed to identify principles, models, and laws that apply to systems in general, independently of the particular material out of which those systems are composed. Bertalanffy argued that “systems” of different kinds may exhibit structurally similar patterns, or isomorphisms, making it possible to transfer conceptual insights across fields without collapsing one field into another. This was also one of the original purposes of the systems movement institutionalized through the Society for General Systems Research, the predecessor of the International Society for the Systems Sciences. The ISSS history records that the Society was conceived in 1954 by Bertalanffy, Kenneth Boulding, Ralph Gerard, and Anatol Rapoport, and that one of its principal aims was to investigate the isomorphy of concepts, laws, and models across fields.

==Core idea: systems are organized wholes==
For Bertalanffy, a system is not merely an aggregate of elements. A system is a set of interacting components whose relations and organization are essential to its behavior. The behavior of the whole cannot be fully derived by studying the parts in isolation. This anti-reductionist position did not reject analysis; rather, it rejected the assumption that analysis alone is sufficient. Parts must be understood within the organized configuration in which they operate.

Bertalanffy described GST as a “general science of wholeness.” Its task was to formulate concepts such as organization, wholeness, directiveness, differentiation, and teleology in ways that could become scientifically legitimate rather than vague or metaphysical. This made GST an intellectual bridge between the natural sciences, the biological sciences, and the human sciences.

==Open systems and steady state==
Bertalanffy’s most important technical contribution was his theory of open systems. Classical physics had largely focused on closed systems: systems considered in isolation from their environments. Living systems, however, are not closed. They maintain themselves through continuous exchange of matter, energy, and information with their environment. An organism survives not by reaching thermodynamic equilibrium, but by sustaining a dynamic steady state through ongoing inflow, transformation, and outflow.

This idea helped resolve an apparent contradiction between thermodynamics and life. Closed systems tend toward increasing entropy, but living systems maintain and even increase local order by importing energy and exporting entropy. In this way, GST provided a scientific vocabulary for understanding growth, regulation, metabolism, differentiation, and self-maintenance without appealing to vitalism.
Equifinality, regulation, and organization

A further key concept is equifinality. In closed mechanical systems, the final state is strongly determined by initial conditions. In open systems, by contrast, similar end states may be reached from different starting points and by different pathways. This is central to understanding biological development, adaptation, robustness, and recovery. A living organism, for example, can often compensate for disturbances and still preserve its overall form or function.

Bertalanffy also gave scientific importance to organization over substance. Systems may be composed of cells, organs, persons, institutions, or technological components; what makes them comparable is not their material composition, but their organization. This was the basis for his search for isomorphisms: recurring formal patterns across otherwise different domains. Feedback in physiology, regulation in organizations, growth in populations, differentiation in embryos, and specialization in social systems may be studied as structurally comparable phenomena, provided the comparison is disciplined and not merely metaphorical.

==Relationship to cybernetics and later systems science==
GST developed in close historical proximity to cybernetics, but the two traditions were not identical. Cybernetics emphasized communication, control, feedback, and regulation, especially in machines and organisms. Bertalanffy’s GST emphasized open systems, organismic biology, wholeness, hierarchy, differentiation, and the general theory of organization. Later systems science drew heavily from both traditions. Historical studies of Bertalanffy’s work show that GST and cybernetics had both convergences and differences, and that understanding their relationship is important for reconstructing the genealogy of systems science.

==Humanistic and ethical significance==
Bertalanffy’s systems thinking also had a humanistic dimension. He was concerned that mechanistic and reductionist models, when applied to human beings and societies, could encourage technocracy, manipulation, and dehumanization. GST, therefore, carried an implicit ethical warning: science should not treat living beings, persons, and societies merely as machines. A systems worldview should help restore attention to wholeness, context, meaning, and responsibility.

==Limitations and continuing relevance==
Bertalanffy did not provide a complete methodology for systems intervention, nor did he fully develop observer-dependence, power, conflict, participatory design, or the complexities of social systems. These questions were later taken up by second-order cybernetics, critical systems thinking, soft systems methodology, organizational cybernetics, complexity theory, and dialogic systems approaches. Nevertheless, GST remains foundational because it established the ontological and epistemological shift from parts to organized wholes, from closed to open systems, from linear causality to dynamic interaction, and from disciplinary isolation to transdisciplinary inquiry.
For the International Society for the Systems Sciences, Bertalanffy’s GST is not merely a historical precursor. It is part of the Society’s founding intellectual identity. Its continuing value lies in its invitation to search for rigorous, transferable principles of organization while respecting the specificity of different domains. GST opened the door to systems science as a transdisciplinary project; subsequent generations have continued the work of deepening, critiquing, formalizing, and applying that project to the complex challenges of life, society, technology, and planetary futures.

==Selected references==
* Bertalanffy, L. von. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. George Braziller.
Drack, M., & Pouvreau, D. (2015). On the history of Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s “General Systemology,” and on its relationship to cybernetics. International Journal of General Systems.
* International Society for the Systems Sciences. (n.d.). History. https://www.isss.org/history/

[[Category: Systems Theories by ISSS Members]]

Category:Systems Theories by ISSS Members

2026-05-14T09:27:41Z

Laouris: Created page with "Category for Systems Theories by ISSS Members"

Category for Systems Theories by ISSS Members

Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

2026-05-14T09:27:27Z

Laouris:

[[James N (Jamie) Rose]]’s '''Integrity Paradigm''' is an ambitious attempt to formulate a unifying framework for reality, systems, life, mind, and consciousness. Rose presents it not as a narrow theory within a single scientific domain, but as a candidate [[General Theory of Systems]], and, in some places, as a broad [[Theory of Everything]]. The paradigm appears to have roots in work he says began in 1973 and was further developed through the 1990s, and later in papers, conference presentations, and online writings.

At its core, the Integrity Paradigm argues that the universe should be understood primarily through relations, continuity, communication, and organization rather than through rigid separations such as matter versus life, physics versus biology, or the inanimate versus the animate. Rose repeatedly frames the universe as fundamentally communicative and relational, and he argues that life is not an alien break from non-life but a natural extension of pre-existing organizational potentials already present in the cosmos. In this view, what we call living, cognitive, and social systems emerge from deeper shared patterns of interaction and distributed organization.

A second major theme is Rose’s effort to reinterpret entropy, complexity, and self-organization. He appears to reject the idea that order and complexity require an entirely separate principle opposed to entropy. Instead, he proposes that distribution, dissemination, and interaction across nested levels of organization can generate new loci of engagement and, under the right conditions, increase complexity. In this sense, complex order is treated as a natural outcome of universal processes rather than an exception to them. The Integrity Paradigm, therefore, seeks to bridge thermodynamics, information, emergence, and organization within a single conceptual framework.

A third defining feature is its strong transdisciplinary aspiration. Rose explicitly links mathematics, language, philosophy, systems science, biology, information theory, and consciousness studies. He argues that a true general systems theory must be expressible both mathematically and in clear human language, so that it can function not only as abstract science but also as a shared conceptual framework for inquiry across disciplines. This ambition is reflected in his ISSS involvement, including the [[SIG: General Systems Mathematics and Languaging]], and in conference abstracts that position the Integrity Paradigm as an umbrella model for systems unification.

In scholarly terms, the Integrity Paradigm is best described as an original, highly synthetic systems-philosophical framework advanced primarily by Rose himself, rather than as an established paradigm with broad uptake in mainstream science.

The web evidence points mainly to Rose’s own website, [[Ceptual Institute]] materials, Academia postings, ISSS profiles, and conference listings. This does not invalidate the project, but it does mean that any publishable characterization should clearly distinguish between Rose’s proposal and the scientific consensus. It is a personal grand-systems framework seeking to unify physics, biology, complexity, information, and consciousness around the idea that existence is fundamentally relational, communicative, and organizationally continuous across scales.

==External Links==
* Understanding the Integral Universe by J. Rose - Abstracts: https://www.uazone.org/naph/integrity/jnrose/uiuintro-a.htm
* The Integrity Paradigm by James N. Rose: https://www.uazone.org/naph/integrity/integrity-ci.html
* Information concept and the Initial formulation for a unified ...: https://www.uazone.org/naph/integrity/ipci-1973cmts.html
* Integrity Paradigm - General comments: https://www.uazone.org/naph/extegrity.html
* SIG: General Systems Mathematics and Languaging: https://wiki.isss.org/index.php/SIG%3AGeneral_Systems_Mathematics_and_Languaging
* James N (Jamie) Rose: https://wiki.isss.org/index.php/James_N_%28Jamie%29_Rose
* Integrity Paradigm - General Theory of Systems [1997]: https://www.academia.edu/45082070/Integrity_Paradigm_General_Theory_of_Systems_1997_
* James N Rose - Independent Researcher: https://independent.academia.edu/JamesRose
* New Age (Integral) Philosophy - Philosophy of Information Society: https://uazone.org/naph/
* ESTABLISHING AN UMBRELLA PHILOSOPHY - REQUIRED TO UNDERPIN GENERAL SYSTEMS UNIFICATION IN A SINGLE ENCOMPASSING PARADIGM: https://www.academia.edu/128891740/ESTABLISHING_AN_UMBRELLA_PHILOSOPHY_REQUIRED_TO_UNDERPIN_GENERAL_SYSTEMS_UNIFICATION_IN_A_SINGLE_ENCOMPASSING_PARADIGM
* Our GSTS Founders' Goal: a single grand encompassing theory embracing all systems. The First Proposal on the Table: James N Rose 'Integrity Paradigm': https://journals.isss.org/index.php/proceedings63rd/article/view/3551

[[Category: Systems Theories by ISSS Members]]
[[Category: Systems Theories by James N Rose]]

Systems Theories by ISSS Members

2026-05-14T09:26:40Z

Laouris: added listing

==List of Systems Theories developed by notable systems theorists and ISSS Members==
Number: {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Systems Theories by ISSS Members}}
{{#categorytree:Systems Theories by ISSS Members|mode="all" |hideroot=on|mode=pages|style=bold}}

Mini Symposia

2026-05-14T09:25:17Z

Laouris:

The [[International Society for the Systems Sciences'' (ISSS) organizes Weekly mini-symposia and open mic sessions during their operational season to explore systems science, holistic thinking, and global challenges. These sessions typically feature expert presentations followed by, or in combination with, open discussions, and are held online via Zoom to accommodate a global membership across different time zones.

==Types and Themes of ISSS Mini-Symposia==
The mini-symposia cover a wide range of topics that bridge theory with practical, real-world, and "wicked" challenges. Themes often include:
* Systems Theory & Modeling: Exploring foundational concepts like "systemness" (as opposed to just "systems"), general systems theory, and methodologies for analyzing complex problems.
* Cybernetics & AI: Discussions on the role of cybernetics in addressing 21st-century issues (e.g., "Cybernetics Escapes the Laboratory," "Re-Braiding Cybernetics & AI").
* Global & Environmental Challenges: Topics such as Peaceful Futures (understanding peace as a systemic capability), climate change, and sustainability.
* Social & Organizational Systems: Applying systems thinking to topics like migration, resilient communities, organizational change, and social justice.
* Health & Biological Systems: Systems biology 3.0, translational systems biology, and guidelines for reporting systems approaches in health.
* Education & Practice: Discussions on systems engineering education, "Towards a Common Core for System Science Education," and applying systems thinking in the built environment

==Procedure for moderating a Mini Symposium==
The process of planning and moderating a Mini Symposium is described as [[Technical Procedure: Schedule and Moderate a Mini Symposium]].

==List of all Mini Symposia Pages==
Number: {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Mini Symposia}}
{{#categorytree:Mini Symposia|mode="all" |hideroot=on|mode=pages|style=bold}}

Mini Symposia

2026-05-13T10:23:53Z

Laouris: Added: Technical Procedure: Schedule and Moderate a Mini Symposium

The International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) organizes Weekly mini-symposia and open mic sessions during their operational season to explore systems science, holistic thinking, and global challenges. These sessions typically feature expert presentations followed by, or in combination with, open discussions, and are held online via Zoom to accommodate a global membership across different time zones.

==Types and Themes of ISSS Mini-Symposia==
The mini-symposia cover a wide range of topics that bridge theory with practical, real-world, and "wicked" challenges. Themes often include:
* Systems Theory & Modeling: Exploring foundational concepts like "systemness" (as opposed to just "systems"), general systems theory, and methodologies for analyzing complex problems.
* Cybernetics & AI: Discussions on the role of cybernetics in addressing 21st-century issues (e.g., "Cybernetics Escapes the Laboratory," "Re-Braiding Cybernetics & AI").
* Global & Environmental Challenges: Topics such as Peaceful Futures (understanding peace as a systemic capability), climate change, and sustainability.
* Social & Organizational Systems: Applying systems thinking to topics like migration, resilient communities, organizational change, and social justice.
* Health & Biological Systems: Systems biology 3.0, translational systems biology, and guidelines for reporting systems approaches in health.
* Education & Practice: Discussions on systems engineering education, "Towards a Common Core for System Science Education," and applying systems thinking in the built environment

==Procedure for moderating a Mini Symposium==
The process of planning and moderating a Mini Symposium is described as [[Technical Procedure: Schedule and Moderate a Mini Symposium]].

==List of all Mini Symposia Pages==
Number: {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Mini Symposia}}
{{#categorytree:Mini Symposia|mode="all" |hideroot=on|mode=pages|style=bold}}

Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

2026-05-13T07:30:20Z

Laouris: added links

Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

2026-05-13T07:26:48Z

Laouris:

Integrity Paradigm by James N Rose

2026-05-13T07:26:31Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page Integrity Paradigm by James N Rose to Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

#REDIRECT [[Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose]]

Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

2026-05-13T07:26:31Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page Integrity Paradigm by James N Rose to Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

[[James N. Rose]]’s '''Integrity Paradigm''' is an ambitious attempt to formulate a unifying framework for reality, systems, life, mind, and consciousness. Rose presents it not as a narrow theory within a single scientific domain, but as a candidate [[General Theory of Systems]], and, in some places, as a broad [[Theory of Everything]]. The paradigm appears to have roots in work he says began in 1973 and was further developed through the 1990s, and later in papers, conference presentations, and online writings.

At its core, the Integrity Paradigm argues that the universe should be understood primarily through relations, continuity, communication, and organization rather than through rigid separations such as matter versus life, physics versus biology, or the inanimate versus the animate. Rose repeatedly frames the universe as fundamentally communicative and relational, and he argues that life is not an alien break from non-life but a natural extension of pre-existing organizational potentials already present in the cosmos. In this view, what we call living, cognitive, and social systems emerge from deeper shared patterns of interaction and distributed organization.

A second major theme is Rose’s effort to reinterpret entropy, complexity, and self-organization. He appears to reject the idea that order and complexity require an entirely separate principle opposed to entropy. Instead, he proposes that distribution, dissemination, and interaction across nested levels of organization can generate new loci of engagement and, under the right conditions, increase complexity. In this sense, complex order is treated as a natural outcome of universal processes rather than an exception to them. The Integrity Paradigm, therefore, seeks to bridge thermodynamics, information, emergence, and organization within a single conceptual framework.

A third defining feature is its strong transdisciplinary aspiration. Rose explicitly links mathematics, language, philosophy, systems science, biology, information theory, and consciousness studies. He argues that a true general systems theory must be expressible both mathematically and in clear human language, so that it can function not only as abstract science but also as a shared conceptual framework for inquiry across disciplines. This ambition is reflected in his ISSS involvement, including the [[SIG: General Systems Mathematics and Languaging]], and in conference abstracts that position the Integrity Paradigm as an umbrella model for systems unification.

In scholarly terms, the Integrity Paradigm is best described as an original, highly synthetic systems-philosophical framework advanced primarily by Rose himself, rather than as an established paradigm with broad uptake in mainstream science.

The web evidence points mainly to Rose’s own website, [[Ceptual Institute]] materials, Academia postings, ISSS profiles, and conference listings. This does not invalidate the project, but it does mean that any publishable characterization should clearly distinguish between Rose’s proposal and the scientific consensus. It is a personal grand-systems framework seeking to unify physics, biology, complexity, information, and consciousness around the idea that existence is fundamentally relational, communicative, and organizationally continuous across scales.

[[Category: Systems Theories]]
[[Category: Systems Theories by James N Rose]]

Integrity Paradigm by James N (Jamie) Rose

2026-05-13T07:26:01Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

SIG: Systemic Dialogue

2026-05-08T08:18:08Z

Laouris:

{{ISSS_SIG
|title= Systemic Dialogue
|image=SIG_Logo.png
|start_year=2025
|end_year=
|chair=[[Yiannis Laouris]]
|secretary=[[Kevin Dye]]<br>[[Marcus Hallside]]
|key_domains=Key Domains
|notable_achievements=Notable Achievements
|links=External Links
}}

The '''Systemic Dialogue''' [[Special Integration Group]] was launched in the beginning of 2025

==Focus of the Action Research SIG==
The Systemic Dialogue SIG is dedicated to advancing participatory methodologies and enhancing the role of structured deliberation in democratic decision-making. Its creation responds to the growing need for a forum where systems science methodologies can be explored, refined, and applied to complex societal challenges.
At its core, this SIG promotes structured, systemic dialogue—a methodical approach that fosters equitable participation, deepens collective insights, and strengthens democratic engagement at both local and global levels. The term "systemic" reflects the need for methodologies and modeling techniques that structure and guide dialogue toward meaningful, actionable and impactful outcomes.

By integrating and cross-referencing diverse systems methodologies, the SIG aims to develop synergistic approaches for managing complex societal challenges. The group will investigate how different systems thinking methodologies can inform, supplement, and enhance each other in decision-making and conflict resolution processes.

==Key Activities==

* 2026: [[SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)]]

==Links to other Organizations==
The Systemic Dialogue SIG collaborates closely with the [[Institute for 21st Century Agoras]].

==Chairs, Members and Reading Materials==
The founder of the '''Systemic Dialogue''' [[Special Integration Group]] is [[Yiannis Laouris]].

===Members===
* [[Gerald Midgley]]
* [[Gary Metcalf]]
* [[Norma Romm]]
* [[Peter Tuddenham]]
* [[Peter Hayward Jones]]
* [[Allenna Leonard]]
* [[Kevin Dye]]
* [[Tom Flanagan]]
* [[Michele Friend]]
* [[Marcus Hallside]]
* [[Marios Michaelides]]
* [[Demitrios Varsos]]
* [[Marilia Charonitaki]]
* [[Kirk Weigand]]
* [[Nikitas Assimakopoulos]]

===Reading Materials===

===Links to videos===
Below are links to videos from discussion sessions attended by ISSS members.

[[Category:SIGs]]

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:57:56Z

Laouris: added text

Reimagining Our World Systemically
From Problématique to Purposeful Action
A Structured Democratic Dialogue for Leaders, Thinkers, and Changemakers

==Overview==
More than half a century after the Club of Rome introduced the Global Problématique, humanity faces an even more tightly interwoven web of ecological, geopolitical, technological, economic, and social pressures. What the Club of Rome described in the 1970s has since accelerated into what many now call a polycrisis: a condition where multiple crises interact and amplify one another, making both diagnosis and intervention increasingly difficult. In this context, the need to update our understanding of the Problématique and to revisit the systemic approaches required to address it has become urgent. The “Reimagining Our World Systemically: From Problématique to Purposeful Action” aspires to address this challenge and advocate that there must be no limits to hope. Central to this effort is SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): strengthening the means of implementation by enabling intensive collaboration across disciplines, sectors, and regions, and by working explicitly with the interdependencies among the SDGs.
Organizers
* [[International Society for the Systems Sciences]] ([[SIG: Systemic Dialogue]]; [[SIG: Balancing Individualism and Collectivism]]; [[SIG: Students]])
* [[Institute for 21st Century Agoras]] (Global Agoras)
* [[International Federation for Systems Research]]
* [[Future Worlds Center]]
* Endorsed by the [[Club of Rome]]
* Under the auspices of the Cyprus Office of the Commissioner for the Citizen
* Under the auspices of the Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the European Union (Jan–Jun 2026)

==Project Overview==
Phase 1: Virtual Sessions (Mar–Apr 2026)
Five to six (2-hour) online sessions, utilizing the structured dialogic design process (widely known as Structured Democratic Dialogue: SDD), devoted to revisiting and updating the global Problématique, with explicit attention to SDG interdependencies and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Up to 30 participants will work collectively to:
i. Surface the continuous critical problems humanity faces today by responding to the Triggering Question:
What are the most critical obstacles that humanity needs to address in the next few years to ensure a sustainable and just future?
ii. Clarify their meanings and cluster them into themes, thus developing a shared language and mental model
iii. Explore the influence relations among the challenges culminating in the construction of a visual map that highlights which obstacles addressed will most likely have the greatest influence on transforming the system.

This preparatory work ensures that all contributors construct a common framing and a deeper appreciation of the complexity involved, thereby being better prepared to propose essential systemic actions, which is the focus of phase 2.
Phase 2: Face-to-face (Jun 29 – 30, 2026; after the 70th ISSS Conference)
The initiative culminates in a two-day summit in Cyprus, which will engage about 24 participants, mostly representatives from Phase 1, as well as a few other leading systems scientists and some senior policymakers from across Europe and beyond. The June dialogue seeks to answer a guiding, action-oriented question regarding the influence map of obstacles generated in Phase 1. The Triggering Question for this phase is:
What essential actions can humanity take in the next decade to build a resilient, fair, peace-capable, and future-fit world system?
Participants will again use the SDD methodology to generate and explore actions, cluster and explore their interdependencies, and finally co-design a shared structural map of priorities; a blueprint for guiding action that can inform policy, research agendas, institutional reforms, partnership strategies, and broader societal mobilization. The aim is not incremental improvement but a coherent systemic architecture for thriving planetary futures. The Cyprus convening is designed as a catalytic starting point rather than a concluding milestone, initiating a longer-term global process of follow-on dialogues, regional replications, and sustained SDG-17-aligned partnerships. Its results will be stewarded through an expanding international network committed to translating systemic insight into coordinated implementation.

==Method==
The process follows the rigorous methodology of SDD; a globally applied, transdisciplinary method used for peacebuilding, governance reform, conflict transformation, and large-scale futures design. SDD is grounded in:
# Systems science and complexity theory
# Dialogic design principles
# Equitable participation, cognitive diversity, and partnership building (SDG 17)
# Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) to map interdependencies
# Collective intelligence processes that reveal “deep drivers” of systemic change

The method creates a safe, intellectually rich environment where every participant contributes to the shared model, regardless of status, discipline, or political position. It is designed to prevent domination, groupthink, rhetorical persuasion, or power asymmetry.

==Expected Results, Outputs, Outcomes, and Legacy==
# A co-created Influence Map showing systemic relationships among key challenges (Phase 1) and key actions (Phase 2); a structural map as a partnership/implementation blueprint (who needs to coordinate with whom, across what dependencies).
# Strategic recommendations tailored to political, institutional, and civil-society audiences.
# Input into the ISSS 2026 post-conference activities on planetary governance and systemic action.
# The results are intended to serve as a reference architecture for governments, international organizations, and civil-society networks to strengthen SDG implementation partnerships (SDG 17).
# Catalyze SDG 17-aligned alliances, research programs, and policy initiatives; a long-term platform for systemic governance innovation.
# A narrative summary, appropriate for audiences worldwide, in the form of a final report/white paper.

==Why This Matters==
Most global initiatives fail not because of a lack of knowledge, but because: institutions are siloed; disciplines do not dialogue; political incentives are short-term; complexity overwhelms decision-makers; and public trust in governance continues to erode. This initiative directly addresses these gaps by enabling: a shared understanding of system interdependencies (including SDG linkages); SDG 17-ready cross-sector partnerships grounded in science and practicality; actionable priorities that withstand political realities; and a unifying narrative for a future-fit planetary civilization. The dialogue brings together those who think about whole systems and those who shape them — a rare but necessary collaboration.
This work is part of the broader mission of the International Society for the Systems Sciences to elevate systems thinking into real-world action at a decisive moment for humanity.

== Part 1: Problématique==

Below are liks to all Problématique sessions.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181664092 |350|left|Introductions}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1176119010 |350|center|Idea Generation}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181642844 |350|left|Categorization Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190385406 |350|center|Categorization Part 2}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384289 |350|left|Mapping Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384285 |350|center|Mapping Part 2}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384287 |350|right|Mapping Part 3}}

<br />

== Part 1: Purposeful Action==
Below are links to all Action sessions.

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World (2026)

2026-05-08T07:54:03Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World (2026) to SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

#REDIRECT [[SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)]]

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:54:03Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World (2026) to SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

Reimagining Our World Systemically
From Problématique to Purposeful Action
A Structured Democratic Dialogue for Leaders, Thinkers, and Changemakers
Overview
More than half a century after the Club of Rome introduced the Global Problématique, humanity faces an even more tightly interwoven web of ecological, geopolitical, technological, economic, and social pressures. What the Club of Rome described in the 1970s has since accelerated into what many now call a polycrisis: a condition where multiple crises interact and amplify one another, making both diagnosis and intervention increasingly difficult. In this context, the need to update our understanding of the Problématique and to revisit the systemic approaches required to address it has become urgent. The “Reimagining Our World Systemically: From Problématique to Purposeful Action” aspires to address this challenge and advocate that there must be no limits to hope. Central to this effort is SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): strengthening the means of implementation by enabling intensive collaboration across disciplines, sectors, and regions, and by working explicitly with the interdependencies among the SDGs.
Organizers
• International Society for the Systems Sciences (SIG: Systemic Dialogue; SIG: Balancing Individualism and Collectivism; SIG: Students)
• Institute for 21st Century Agoras (Global Agoras)
• International Federation for Systems Research
• Future Worlds Center
• Endorsed by the Club of Rome
• Under the auspices of the Cyprus Office of the Commissioner for the Citizen
• Under the auspices of the Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the European Union (Jan–Jun 2026)
Project Overview
Phase 1: Virtual Sessions (Mar–Apr 2026)
Five to six (2-hour) online sessions, utilizing the structured dialogic design process (widely known as Structured Democratic Dialogue: SDD), devoted to revisiting and updating the global Problématique, with explicit attention to SDG interdependencies and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Up to 30 participants will work collectively to:
i. Surface the continuous critical problems humanity faces today by responding to the Triggering Question:
What are the most critical obstacles that humanity needs to address in the next few years to ensure a sustainable and just future?
ii. Clarify their meanings and cluster them into themes, thus developing a shared language and mental model
iii. Explore the influence relations among the challenges culminating in the construction of a visual map that highlights which obstacles addressed will most likely have the greatest influence on transforming the system.

This preparatory work ensures that all contributors construct a common framing and a deeper appreciation of the complexity involved, thereby being better prepared to propose essential systemic actions, which is the focus of phase 2.
Phase 2: Face-to-face (Jun 29 – 30, 2026; after the 70th ISSS Conference)
The initiative culminates in a two-day summit in Cyprus, which will engage about 24 participants, mostly representatives from Phase 1, as well as a few other leading systems scientists and some senior policymakers from across Europe and beyond. The June dialogue seeks to answer a guiding, action-oriented question regarding the influence map of obstacles generated in Phase 1. The Triggering Question for this phase is:
What essential actions can humanity take in the next decade to build a resilient, fair, peace-capable, and future-fit world system?
Participants will again use the SDD methodology to generate and explore actions, cluster and explore their interdependencies, and finally co-design a shared structural map of priorities; a blueprint for guiding action that can inform policy, research agendas, institutional reforms, partnership strategies, and broader societal mobilization. The aim is not incremental improvement but a coherent systemic architecture for thriving planetary futures. The Cyprus convening is designed as a catalytic starting point rather than a concluding milestone, initiating a longer-term global process of follow-on dialogues, regional replications, and sustained SDG-17-aligned partnerships. Its results will be stewarded through an expanding international network committed to translating systemic insight into coordinated implementation.
Method
The process follows the rigorous methodology of SDD; a globally applied, transdisciplinary method used for peacebuilding, governance reform, conflict transformation, and large-scale futures design. SDD is grounded in:
1. Systems science and complexity theory
2. Dialogic design principles
3. Equitable participation, cognitive diversity, and partnership building (SDG 17)
4. Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) to map interdependencies
5. Collective intelligence processes that reveal “deep drivers” of systemic change
The method creates a safe, intellectually rich environment where every participant contributes to the shared model, regardless of status, discipline, or political position. It is designed to prevent domination, groupthink, rhetorical persuasion, or power asymmetry.
Expected Results, Outputs, Outcomes, and Legacy
1. A co-created Influence Map showing systemic relationships among key challenges (Phase 1) and key actions (Phase 2); a structural map as a partnership/implementation blueprint (who needs to coordinate with whom, across what dependencies).
2. Strategic recommendations tailored to political, institutional, and civil-society audiences.
3. Input into the ISSS 2026 post-conference activities on planetary governance and systemic action.
4. The results are intended to serve as a reference architecture for governments, international organizations, and civil-society networks to strengthen SDG implementation partnerships (SDG 17).
5. Catalyze SDG 17-aligned alliances, research programs, and policy initiatives; a long-term platform for systemic governance innovation.
6. A narrative summary, appropriate for audiences worldwide, in the form of a final report/white paper.
Why This Matters
Most global initiatives fail not because of a lack of knowledge, but because: institutions are siloed; disciplines do not dialogue; political incentives are short-term; complexity overwhelms decision-makers; and public trust in governance continues to erode. This initiative directly addresses these gaps by enabling: a shared understanding of system interdependencies (including SDG linkages); SDG 17-ready cross-sector partnerships grounded in science and practicality; actionable priorities that withstand political realities; and a unifying narrative for a future-fit planetary civilization. The dialogue brings together those who think about whole systems and those who shape them — a rare but necessary collaboration.
This work is part of the broader mission of the International Society for the Systems Sciences to elevate systems thinking into real-world action at a decisive moment for humanity.

Below are liks to all sessions.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181664092 |350|left|Introductions}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1176119010 |350|center|Idea Generation}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181642844 |350|left|Categorization Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190385406 |350|center|Categorization Part 2}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384289 |350|left|Mapping Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384285 |350|center|Mapping Part 2}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384287 |350|right|Mapping Part 3}}

<br />

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:53:39Z

Laouris:

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:52:12Z

Laouris: Added links to Zoom sessions

Below are liks to all sessions.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181664092 |350|left|Introductions}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1176119010 |350|center|Idea Generation}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181642844 |350|left|Categorization Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190385406 |350|center|Categorization Part 2}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384289 |350|left|Mapping Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384285 |350|center|Mapping Part 2}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384287 |350|right|Mapping Part 3}}

<br />

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:47:22Z

Laouris:

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181664092 |350|left|Introductions}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1176119010 |350|center|Idea Generation}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181642844 |350|left|Categorization Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190385406 |350|center|Categorization Part 2}}
<br />

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384289 |350|left|Mapping Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384285 |350|center|Mapping Part 2}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384287 |350|right|Mapping Part 3}}

<br />

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:45:54Z

Laouris:

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181664092 |350|left|Introductions}}

{{#ev:vimeo| 1176119010 |350|center|Idea Generation}}

{{#ev:vimeo| 1181642844 |350|right|Categorization Part 1}}

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190385406 |350|left|Categorization Part 2}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384289 |350|center|Mapping Part 1}}
{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384285 |350|right|Mapping Part 2}}

{{#ev:vimeo| 1190384287 |350|left|Mapping Part 3}}

SIG Systemic Dialogue - Reimagining our World Systemically (2026)

2026-05-08T07:35:52Z

Laouris: Page created

https://vimeo.com/1181664092 Introductions

https://vimeo.com/1176119010 Idea Generation

https://vimeo.com/1181642844 Categorization Part 1

https://vimeo.com/1190385406 Categorization Part 2

https://vimeo.com/1190384289 Mapping Part 1

https://vimeo.com/1190384285 Mapping Part 2

https://vimeo.com/1190384287 Mapping Part 3

Mini Symposium 2026 04 29 Harry Anastasiou

2026-05-05T09:59:54Z

Laouris: added vimeo link

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Harry_Anastasiou.jpg
| name=[[Harry Anastasiou]]
| title=Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World
| date=Apr 29, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1187852549
}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World</span>

==Abstract==
The trajectory from modernity to postmodernity, spanning from the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century to the contemporary digital era, has been characterized by techno-scientific advances which structurally intertwined the local, the national, the international and the global into tightly interlinked socio-technical systems. These developments created powerful novel phenomena and historical dynamics that can no longer be contained or managed unilaterally by individuals, communities or nation-states. Across domains, the major structures and processes shaping our world increasingly disclose systemic interconnections, interdependencies, and feedback loops, where linear causality breaks down, effects fold back into causes, and space and time appear to implode. Developments in science, technology, industry, finance, energy, communications, politics, ideology, culture, and security unfold within complex, co-evolving global systems, producing patterns that are emergent, non-linear, and often unintended. At the same time, these expanding interconnectivities also collide with traditional nationalism and ethnocentrism precisely as nationalist paradigms reassert themselves at the forefront of history and geopolitics. This creates a growing mismatch between the scale at which problems emerge and the scale at which governance and decision-making remain organized. Within this globalizing techno-systemic landscape human beings find themselves in a precarious situation, as emerging concentrations of economic, technological, and informational power eclipse both citizen agency and the capacity of traditional institutions of democratic representation. This condition raises a set of pressing systemic questions: How can human agency be re-constituted at a scale commensurate with global interconnections and interdependencies? What does this imply for democratic governance, peace, and justice in complex societies? And how can the interdisciplinary tools of systems science—drawing on concepts such as emergence, feedback, adaptation, and participatory design, among others—be mobilized to render our complex and conflicted world more intelligible and to support strategic forms of collective action capable of reinforcing human agency?

{{#ev:vimeo| 1187852549 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Harry Anastasiou is professor of International Peace and Conflict Studies and former Director of the Conflict Resolution Program at Portland State University, USA. He has taught, published and lectured widely on nationalism, ethnic conflict, tech-nationalism, multi-dimensional peacebuilding, and international peace and conflict issues. In his lectures and publications he has addressed the worldwide relapse of ethnocentric and bellicose nationalism and its effects on democracy, human rights, the rule of law and international relations, with particular attention on the implications for peace and security. Building on his experience as a peace and conflict studies scholar and practitioner, Anastasiou has served and contributed to numerous civil society organizations engaged in peacebuilding initiatives, facilitation and mediation. Professor Anastasiou has been an invited lecturer for the “Great Decisions” series of the World Affairs Council, as well as for The International Visitor Leadership Program of the U.S. Department of State, among others. He has also served as an invited consultant to the U.S. Department of State on issues pertinent to the Eastern Mediterranean.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Harry Anastasiou]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 29 Harry Anastasiou

2026-04-27T07:43:14Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Harry_Anastasiou.jpg
| name=[[Harry Anastasiou]]
| title=Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World
| date=Apr 29, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/XXXXX}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World</span>

==Abstract==
The trajectory from modernity to postmodernity, spanning from the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century to the contemporary digital era, has been characterized by techno-scientific advances which structurally intertwined the local, the national, the international and the global into tightly interlinked socio-technical systems. These developments created powerful novel phenomena and historical dynamics that can no longer be contained or managed unilaterally by individuals, communities or nation-states. Across domains, the major structures and processes shaping our world increasingly disclose systemic interconnections, interdependencies, and feedback loops, where linear causality breaks down, effects fold back into causes, and space and time appear to implode. Developments in science, technology, industry, finance, energy, communications, politics, ideology, culture, and security unfold within complex, co-evolving global systems, producing patterns that are emergent, non-linear, and often unintended. At the same time, these expanding interconnectivities also collide with traditional nationalism and ethnocentrism precisely as nationalist paradigms reassert themselves at the forefront of history and geopolitics. This creates a growing mismatch between the scale at which problems emerge and the scale at which governance and decision-making remain organized. Within this globalizing techno-systemic landscape human beings find themselves in a precarious situation, as emerging concentrations of economic, technological, and informational power eclipse both citizen agency and the capacity of traditional institutions of democratic representation. This condition raises a set of pressing systemic questions: How can human agency be re-constituted at a scale commensurate with global interconnections and interdependencies? What does this imply for democratic governance, peace, and justice in complex societies? And how can the interdisciplinary tools of systems science—drawing on concepts such as emergence, feedback, adaptation, and participatory design, among others—be mobilized to render our complex and conflicted world more intelligible and to support strategic forms of collective action capable of reinforcing human agency?

{{#ev:vimeo|XXXX |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Harry Anastasiou is professor of International Peace and Conflict Studies and former Director of the Conflict Resolution Program at Portland State University, USA. He has taught, published and lectured widely on nationalism, ethnic conflict, tech-nationalism, multi-dimensional peacebuilding, and international peace and conflict issues. In his lectures and publications he has addressed the worldwide relapse of ethnocentric and bellicose nationalism and its effects on democracy, human rights, the rule of law and international relations, with particular attention on the implications for peace and security. Building on his experience as a peace and conflict studies scholar and practitioner, Anastasiou has served and contributed to numerous civil society organizations engaged in peacebuilding initiatives, facilitation and mediation. Professor Anastasiou has been an invited lecturer for the “Great Decisions” series of the World Affairs Council, as well as for The International Visitor Leadership Program of the U.S. Department of State, among others. He has also served as an invited consultant to the U.S. Department of State on issues pertinent to the Eastern Mediterranean.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Harry Anastasiou]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:Harry Anastasiou.jpg

2026-04-27T07:42:48Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 04 29 Harry Anastasiou

2026-04-27T07:41:17Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= AndreasNicolaides.jpg
| name=[[Harry Anastasiou]]
| title=Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World
| date=Apr 8, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/XXXXX}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Reflections on Our Systemically Interconnected and Interdependent World</span>

==Abstract==
The trajectory from modernity to postmodernity, spanning from the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century to the contemporary digital era, has been characterized by techno-scientific advances which structurally intertwined the local, the national, the international and the global into tightly interlinked socio-technical systems. These developments created powerful novel phenomena and historical dynamics that can no longer be contained or managed unilaterally by individuals, communities or nation-states. Across domains, the major structures and processes shaping our world increasingly disclose systemic interconnections, interdependencies, and feedback loops, where linear causality breaks down, effects fold back into causes, and space and time appear to implode. Developments in science, technology, industry, finance, energy, communications, politics, ideology, culture, and security unfold within complex, co-evolving global systems, producing patterns that are emergent, non-linear, and often unintended. At the same time, these expanding interconnectivities also collide with traditional nationalism and ethnocentrism precisely as nationalist paradigms reassert themselves at the forefront of history and geopolitics. This creates a growing mismatch between the scale at which problems emerge and the scale at which governance and decision-making remain organized. Within this globalizing techno-systemic landscape human beings find themselves in a precarious situation, as emerging concentrations of economic, technological, and informational power eclipse both citizen agency and the capacity of traditional institutions of democratic representation. This condition raises a set of pressing systemic questions: How can human agency be re-constituted at a scale commensurate with global interconnections and interdependencies? What does this imply for democratic governance, peace, and justice in complex societies? And how can the interdisciplinary tools of systems science—drawing on concepts such as emergence, feedback, adaptation, and participatory design, among others—be mobilized to render our complex and conflicted world more intelligible and to support strategic forms of collective action capable of reinforcing human agency?

{{#ev:vimeo|XXXX |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Harry Anastasiou is professor of International Peace and Conflict Studies and former Director of the Conflict Resolution Program at Portland State University, USA. He has taught, published and lectured widely on nationalism, ethnic conflict, tech-nationalism, multi-dimensional peacebuilding, and international peace and conflict issues. In his lectures and publications he has addressed the worldwide relapse of ethnocentric and bellicose nationalism and its effects on democracy, human rights, the rule of law and international relations, with particular attention on the implications for peace and security. Building on his experience as a peace and conflict studies scholar and practitioner, Anastasiou has served and contributed to numerous civil society organizations engaged in peacebuilding initiatives, facilitation and mediation. Professor Anastasiou has been an invited lecturer for the “Great Decisions” series of the World Affairs Council, as well as for The International Visitor Leadership Program of the U.S. Department of State, among others. He has also served as an invited consultant to the U.S. Department of State on issues pertinent to the Eastern Mediterranean.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Harry Anastasiou]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:Barbara Widhalm Profile.jpg

2026-04-27T07:39:02Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 05 27 Barbara Widhalm,

2026-04-27T07:38:46Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Barbara_Widhalm_Profile.jpg
| name=[[Barbara Widhalm]]
| title=The Art of Holding Space: Exploring the Co-Creative Potential of the In-Between
| date=May 27, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/XXXX}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> The Art of Holding Space: Exploring the Co-Creative Potential of the In-Between</span>

==Abstract==
Our relationship lives in the space between us. It doesn’t live in me or in you or even in the dialogue between the two of us. It lives in the space we live together and that space is sacred space.
—Martin Buber

More than ever, the world needs spaces where people cultivate trust to connect across differences, to listen for what’s at the “heart of the matter” in the group, and to attune to a mutual, caring field.

In this mini symposium, I will invite dialog on holding space in academic and non-academic settings. Together, we will consider:

· What does holding space mean in our communities of practice?
· How can holding space support bridge-building, self-organizing, and co-creative capacities?
· What’s your special sauce in holding space?

My interest in holding space is grounded in my transdisciplinary framework for designing collaborative learning experiences as living systems, as well as in my praxis of nurturing affective intelligence in groups.

The importance of tending to space has been theorized in the transformative learning and adult learning literature, in the healing and therapeutic arts, in ritual design, as well as in systemic group facilitation practices (such as approaches developed by the International Bateson Institute, Center for Systems Awareness, the Art of Hosting, and Universidade Biocêntrica).

In our discussion, I will introduce several space-holding qualities I have identified. I will then offer examples from my teaching practice, including a module in an asynchronous community college course, called the We-Ro’s Journey (elevating the hero’s journey to a collective We).

As part of our shared exploration, I will invite some co-creative experiential group processes, as well.

{{#ev:vimeo|xxxx |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Barbara Widhalm is an adult educator committed to teaching students with multiple barriers to learning and to facilitating cohort-based adult education graduate programs.

Located in the San Francisco Bay Area, she serves as faculty at Peralta Community College District in Oakland, CA (Humanities, Critical Thinking, Learning Resources) and at St. Mary’s College of California (Bachelors Completion Program in Leadership Studies, Master of Leadership Studies).

Her teaching philosophy blends transformative learning theory, ecological design, living systems awareness, and affective intelligence. Her research focuses on designing collaborative learning communities that foster collective wisdom in hybrid, face-to-face, and online formats. In her dissertation research, she developed a framework for designing learning experiences as self-organizing living systems, inspired by the principles of living systems as articulated by Fritjof Capra. Her Journal of Sustainability Education article “Educators as Architects of Living Systems” has been cited widely, including in the Encyclopedia of Sustainability in Higher Education.

Barbara current research interest focuses on the art of holding space and fostering affective intelligence in learning communities (see ISSS Proceedings 2025).

She holds a doctorate in Transformative Learning, a Masters in Community and Regional Planning and pursued undergraduate studies in languages, ecology, and environmental economics in Austria and Russia. Barbara has benefited from multiple systemic facilitation styles, including the practice of Freirean culture circles and the affective intelligence approach as articulated by the Universidade Biocêntrica in Fortaleza, Brazil.

Originally from Vienna, Austria, she also operates a small Austrian community bakery and enjoys hosting collaborative dialog cafés.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Barbara Widhalm]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 8 Andreas Nicolaides

2026-04-27T07:35:41Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 8 Andreas Nicolaides to Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides: Alphabetic ordering

#REDIRECT [[Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides

2026-04-27T07:35:41Z

Laouris: Laouris moved page Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 8 Andreas Nicolaides to Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides: Alphabetic ordering

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= AndreasNicolaides.jpg
| name=[[Andreas Nicolaides]]
| title=Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis
| date=Apr 8, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1181357175}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis</span>

==Abstract==
Darwin’s On the Origin of Species left unresolved the problem named in its title: how new species arise. The Modern Synthesis, though uniting Mendelian genetics with natural selection, has produced no coherent theory of speciation. Instead, evolutionary biology has accumulated a patchwork of mechanisms, often treating anomalies—such as long periods of evolutionary stasis, apparently sudden transformations, reticulated phylogenies (branching complicated by cross-lineage gene flow), and recurrent hybridisation (interbreeding between distinct lineages)—as exceptions rather than signals of a deeper order.

This presentation introduces the Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis: the claim that speciation is not the incidental by-product of auxiliary processes linked to natural selection, but is structured by higher-order regulatory systems, encoded in the germline, that govern the mode and tempo of evolution. These are not fixed typological essences but dynamic, multi-scale architectures intrinsic to life’s organisation. Framed within the broader perspective of Genomic Essentialism, the hypothesis advances the view that biological organisation is driven by genomic programmes that are constitutive of life itself, rather than by emergent properties alone.

Four systemic functions illustrate this architecture:

#Initiators: timers and triggers that delimit and precipitate transformation, including tandem-repeat turnover, germline resets, hybridisation, duplication, and viral invasion.
# Generators: mechanisms that expand and rewire genomic material, such as bursts of transposons, endogenous retroviruses, segmental duplications, retrocopying, and 3-D architectural change.
# Coordinators: processes that synchronise transformations across populations, including viral and symbiotic dynamics and germline programmes that align thresholds.
# Stabilisers: systems that preserve lineage coherence, such as centromeric divergence with drive suppression, piRNA surveillance, inversions, supergenes, imprinting, and incompatibility complexes.

These functions do not direct development itself but transform the regulatory logic that structures it. In this sense, the system constitutes a meta-programme: a higher-order genomic architecture that converts existing developmental programmes into novel ones, linking organisms across space and time. Crucially, they also resolve the anomalies: stasis reflects stability maintained by stabilisers, sudden transformations occur when initiators cross thresholds, reticulated histories arise from coordinating processes across lineages, and hybrid dysfunction stems from divergence in stabilising systems.

On this basis, the hypothesis yields distinctive predictions: genomic turnover should track clade-specific tempos of speciation; bursts of mobile elements and duplications should cluster around radiation events; shared viral or symbiotic agents should generate concordant genomic change; and hybrid dysfunction should correlate with divergence in coherence-preserving systems. Evolutionary anomalies, on this view, are not noise but signatures of a genomic meta-programme in action.

{{#ev:vimeo|1181357175 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Andreas Nicolaides studied Medicine at Manchester University (1982) and Philosophy at London University (2024). He is currently employed part-time at York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust as a Consultant Head and Neck Surgeon and is affiliated with Hull York Medical School as an Honorary Senior Lecturer.

He has had a lifelong interest in evolutionary theory, which he has pursued independently of his clinical work. This has led him to advance a systems biology approach to the anomalies of speciation at the molecular level. Through this, he has developed the idea of Genomic Essentialism, based on the Constitutive Genomic Programmes hypothesis: systems-level regulatory architectures encoded in all genomes that direct both the reliable unfolding of embryonic development and the patterned transformation of species.
This project has firm foundations in the naturalised teleology of Aristotle, which recognised the purposiveness of organisms but lacked a mechanism to parallel that of natural selection. By showing how genomic programmes act through well-recognised regulatory pathways, Genomic Essentialism supports an internalist explanation of life’s organisation that subsumes, rather than denies, the externalism of natural selection.

Dr Nicolaides draws on sources from classical philosophy, evolutionary theory, and molecular biology to argue that life’s anomalies — such as episodic bursts in the fossil record, synchrony in molecular evolution, and the peculiar molecular logic observed in the germline — only make sense when understood as parts of an integrated programme. His work aims to bring together systems science, genomics, and philosophy in order to offer a unifying account of life’s organisation.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Andreas Nicolaides]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 22 - Kevin Dye

2026-04-23T10:30:49Z

Laouris: /* Abstract */

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Kevin Dye Portrait in MIT Sloan School Red Bow Tie.jpg
| name=[[Kevin Dye]]
| title=Generative AI in Modeling
| date=Apr 22, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1185665004}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Generative AI in Modeling"</span>

==Abstract==
Examples of the use of Large Language Models to support and simulate Structured Deliberations will be presented. This includes the production of [[Interpretive Structural Models]], [[Causal Loop Diagrams]], [[Text Visualization]], and [[Conversation Analysis]]. A current application case study, hosted by the [[ISSS]] (SIG: Systemic Dialogue]], [[IFSR]], [[Club of Rome]], [[Global Agoras]] and [[Future Worlds Center]] called Reimaging Our World will focus the discussion.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1185665004 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Kevin designs and facilitates interdisciplinary, stakeholder-based, structured deliberations regarding policy, planning and design of collaborative initiatives. Over a 40 year career he completed projects in: a Global Disease Elimination Program with the World Health Organization; rapprochement through Economic Integration and Education Reform with Turkish and Greek Cypriots; Economic Development for Peace initiatives in Northern Ireland and Mexico; Reinventing Democracy in the Digital Era in the Middle East for the UN Democracy Fund; launching new scientific fields in Green Chemistry, Patient Safety, and Regulatory Science with the US Food & Drug Administration; projecting the Future of Energy Efficiency for the Pacific Northwest and the U.S.; Sustainable Coastal Tourism in Cyprus and Denmark; R&D Strategic Planning in the Pharmaceutical sector, Mental Health services on the Internet; the Future of Autonomous Systems and Integration of Electronic and Cyber-warfare for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratories. He co-founded two software companies in Decision Support Systems and led the introduction of Computer Aided Engineering and Knowledge Based Systems in Otis Elevator. He has a degree in Mechanical Engineering and was sponsored as a Sloan Visiting Fellow at MIT.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Kevin Dye]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 22 - Kevin Dye

2026-04-23T10:20:51Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Kevin Dye Portrait in MIT Sloan School Red Bow Tie.jpg
| name=[[Kevin Dye]]
| title=Generative AI in Modeling
| date=Apr 22, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1185665004}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Generative AI in Modeling"</span>

==Abstract==
Examples of the use of Large Language Models to support and simulate Structured Deliberations will be presented. This includes the production of Interpretive Structural Models, Causal Loop Diagrams, Text Visualization, and Conversation Analysis. A current application case study, hosted by the ISSS and Future Worlds Center called Reimaging Our World will focus the discussion.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1185665004 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Kevin designs and facilitates interdisciplinary, stakeholder-based, structured deliberations regarding policy, planning and design of collaborative initiatives. Over a 40 year career he completed projects in: a Global Disease Elimination Program with the World Health Organization; rapprochement through Economic Integration and Education Reform with Turkish and Greek Cypriots; Economic Development for Peace initiatives in Northern Ireland and Mexico; Reinventing Democracy in the Digital Era in the Middle East for the UN Democracy Fund; launching new scientific fields in Green Chemistry, Patient Safety, and Regulatory Science with the US Food & Drug Administration; projecting the Future of Energy Efficiency for the Pacific Northwest and the U.S.; Sustainable Coastal Tourism in Cyprus and Denmark; R&D Strategic Planning in the Pharmaceutical sector, Mental Health services on the Internet; the Future of Autonomous Systems and Integration of Electronic and Cyber-warfare for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratories. He co-founded two software companies in Decision Support Systems and led the introduction of Computer Aided Engineering and Knowledge Based Systems in Otis Elevator. He has a degree in Mechanical Engineering and was sponsored as a Sloan Visiting Fellow at MIT.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Kevin Dye]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 22 - Kevin Dye

2026-04-23T10:19:48Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= ZaidKhan.png
| name=[[Zaid Khan]]
| title=Generative AI in Modeling
| date=Mar 25, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1185665004}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Generative AI in Modeling"</span>

==Abstract==
Examples of the use of Large Language Models to support and simulate Structured Deliberations will be presented. This includes the production of Interpretive Structural Models, Causal Loop Diagrams, Text Visualization, and Conversation Analysis. A current application case study, hosted by the ISSS and Future Worlds Center called Reimaging Our World will focus the discussion.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1185665004 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Kevin designs and facilitates interdisciplinary, stakeholder-based, structured deliberations regarding policy, planning and design of collaborative initiatives. Over a 40 year career he completed projects in: a Global Disease Elimination Program with the World Health Organization; rapprochement through Economic Integration and Education Reform with Turkish and Greek Cypriots; Economic Development for Peace initiatives in Northern Ireland and Mexico; Reinventing Democracy in the Digital Era in the Middle East for the UN Democracy Fund; launching new scientific fields in Green Chemistry, Patient Safety, and Regulatory Science with the US Food & Drug Administration; projecting the Future of Energy Efficiency for the Pacific Northwest and the U.S.; Sustainable Coastal Tourism in Cyprus and Denmark; R&D Strategic Planning in the Pharmaceutical sector, Mental Health services on the Internet; the Future of Autonomous Systems and Integration of Electronic and Cyber-warfare for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratories. He co-founded two software companies in Decision Support Systems and led the introduction of Computer Aided Engineering and Knowledge Based Systems in Otis Elevator. He has a degree in Mechanical Engineering and was sponsored as a Sloan Visiting Fellow at MIT.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Kevin Dye]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 1 - Charles Hall and Timothy McWhirter

2026-04-13T17:01:04Z

Laouris: edited title, photo and PDF

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Hall_McWhirter.png
| name=[[Charles Hall]] & [[Timothy McWhirter]]
| title= Energy and Evolution: A Systems Approach
| date=Apr 1, 2026
| presentation= Webinar_Hall_and_McWhirter_ISSS_Final.pdf
| link=https://vimeo.com/1179359909}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Energy and Evolution: A Systems Approach </span>

==Abstract==
Some scientists have argued that evolutionary biology is poised for a third major synthesis. In the first synthesis, Darwin conceptualized and presented evidence for his evolutionary theory. The second used genetic mechanisms to explain how evolution worked. The third is based on energy. In the wake of Boltzmann’s work, a thermodynamic school of evolutionary theory has emerged, offering a number of principles alleged to guide evolutionary development. These include the principle of maximum energy flux, the maximum power principle, the minimum entropy production principle, the maximum entropy production principle, the constructal law, the maximum efficiency principle, and the equal fitness paradigm. Collectively, these principles have sometimes been described as contradictory, disunited, local, and as referring to apples and oranges. So far, different scientists have championed their principle of choice and argued that it is more “accurate” or more “general” than the other principles. In some cases, scientists have used straw man arguments that portray the other principles inaccurately. This has undermined our ability to understand the relations among these principles. The thesis of this book project is that many of these principles are fundamentally related and interdependent, and we can develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the evolutionary process if we view this process from a systems perspective, as a property that emerges from the interaction of many different parts. Part of the reason for the different optimality principles scientists have developed is that they focus on different parts of the process: the maximization of power, the production of entropy, the persistence of biodiversity, the evolution of design, etc. These principles provide an ability to predict, and in some cases, explain phenomena in these different parts of the evolutionary process. This book seeks to bring the interaction among these parts of the process into clearer focus by accurately describing the relations among these optimality principles and how they can evolve over time. In the process, we hope to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in evolutionary development, which is like listening to only the cellos in Beethoven’s Hymn to Joy when focusing exclusively on one optimality principle. This systems theory of thermodynamic evolution should help to provide a fundamental component of the third major synthesis of evolutionary biology. (383 words)

{{#ev:vimeo| 1179359909 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
[[Charles Hall]] received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina from the great systems ecologist Howard Odum. He has been a research scientist at Brookhaven and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and at the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, and professor at Cornell University, University of Montana, and the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He is the author of 14 books and more than 340 peer-reviewed papers, many in our “best” journals. In his mid-career, he turned his main interests from systems analysis and modeling of the energetics of natural ecosystems to increasingly, human-dominated “economic” systems. He is especially well known within the scientific community for initiating and developing (with colleagues) the concepts of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) and BioPhysical Economics. He is the recipient of many academic awards including the Hubbert Award from the American Society for the Study of Peak Oil and the Lifetime Achievement award from the International Society of BioPhysical Economics. (159 words)

[[Timothy McWhirter]] received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Florida State University. While in graduate school, he published a paper that described the empirical evidence in the contemporary sciences that supported Nietzsche’s principle of the will to power. In 2012, he published a paper on Nietzsche’s critique of morality that described how the will to power appeared to be similar, in important respects, to the maximum power principle developed by H. T. Odum. This was the first published paper that discussed the relation between these two principles. A decade later, he received an email from the ecologist Charles A. S. Hall, who was astonished that he was quoted by a philosopher about the maximum power principle. Since then, they have worked together on a number of projects: the book Maximum Power and its Philosophical Roots, McWhirter as the author and Hall as the editor; they coauthored the paper Maximum Power in Evolution, Ecology, and Economics; and they worked together on a chapter entitled The Equal Fitness Paradigm: a thermodynamic synthesis in evolutionary biology. Their next project is ambitious. They intend to write a book that outlines a systems theory of thermodynamic evolution, which explains the relations between all the different optimality principles that have been described by scientists in the thermodynamic school of evolution. (217 words)

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Charles Hall]]
[[Category: Videos by Timothy McWhirter]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:Webinar Hall and McWhirter ISSS Final.pdf

2026-04-13T17:00:39Z

Laouris:

File:Hall McWhirter.png

2026-04-13T16:59:45Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 1 - Charles Hall and Timothy McWhirter

2026-04-09T18:05:36Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Timothy_McWhirter.jpg
| photo= Charles_A_S_Hall.jpg
| name=[[Charles Hall]] & [[Timothy McWhirter]]
| title=The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach
| date=Apr 1, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1179359909}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach"</span>

==Abstract==
Some scientists have argued that evolutionary biology is poised for a third major synthesis. In the first synthesis, Darwin conceptualized and presented evidence for his evolutionary theory. The second used genetic mechanisms to explain how evolution worked. The third is based on energy. In the wake of Boltzmann’s work, a thermodynamic school of evolutionary theory has emerged, offering a number of principles alleged to guide evolutionary development. These include the principle of maximum energy flux, the maximum power principle, the minimum entropy production principle, the maximum entropy production principle, the constructal law, the maximum efficiency principle, and the equal fitness paradigm. Collectively, these principles have sometimes been described as contradictory, disunited, local, and as referring to apples and oranges. So far, different scientists have championed their principle of choice and argued that it is more “accurate” or more “general” than the other principles. In some cases, scientists have used straw man arguments that portray the other principles inaccurately. This has undermined our ability to understand the relations among these principles. The thesis of this book project is that many of these principles are fundamentally related and interdependent, and we can develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the evolutionary process if we view this process from a systems perspective, as a property that emerges from the interaction of many different parts. Part of the reason for the different optimality principles scientists have developed is that they focus on different parts of the process: the maximization of power, the production of entropy, the persistence of biodiversity, the evolution of design, etc. These principles provide an ability to predict, and in some cases, explain phenomena in these different parts of the evolutionary process. This book seeks to bring the interaction among these parts of the process into clearer focus by accurately describing the relations among these optimality principles and how they can evolve over time. In the process, we hope to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in evolutionary development, which is like listening to only the cellos in Beethoven’s Hymn to Joy when focusing exclusively on one optimality principle. This systems theory of thermodynamic evolution should help to provide a fundamental component of the third major synthesis of evolutionary biology. (383 words)

{{#ev:vimeo| 1179359909 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
[[Charles Hall]] received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina from the great systems ecologist Howard Odum. He has been a research scientist at Brookhaven and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and at the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, and professor at Cornell University, University of Montana, and the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He is the author of 14 books and more than 340 peer-reviewed papers, many in our “best” journals. In his mid-career, he turned his main interests from systems analysis and modeling of the energetics of natural ecosystems to increasingly, human-dominated “economic” systems. He is especially well known within the scientific community for initiating and developing (with colleagues) the concepts of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) and BioPhysical Economics. He is the recipient of many academic awards including the Hubbert Award from the American Society for the Study of Peak Oil and the Lifetime Achievement award from the International Society of BioPhysical Economics. (159 words)

[[Timothy McWhirter]] received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Florida State University. While in graduate school, he published a paper that described the empirical evidence in the contemporary sciences that supported Nietzsche’s principle of the will to power. In 2012, he published a paper on Nietzsche’s critique of morality that described how the will to power appeared to be similar, in important respects, to the maximum power principle developed by H. T. Odum. This was the first published paper that discussed the relation between these two principles. A decade later, he received an email from the ecologist Charles A. S. Hall, who was astonished that he was quoted by a philosopher about the maximum power principle. Since then, they have worked together on a number of projects: the book Maximum Power and its Philosophical Roots, McWhirter as the author and Hall as the editor; they coauthored the paper Maximum Power in Evolution, Ecology, and Economics; and they worked together on a chapter entitled The Equal Fitness Paradigm: a thermodynamic synthesis in evolutionary biology. Their next project is ambitious. They intend to write a book that outlines a systems theory of thermodynamic evolution, which explains the relations between all the different optimality principles that have been described by scientists in the thermodynamic school of evolution. (217 words)

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Charles Hall]]
[[Category: Videos by Timothy McWhirter]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 1 - Charles Hall and Timothy McWhirter

2026-04-09T18:04:56Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Timothy_McWhirter.jpg
| name=[[Charles Hall]] & [[Timothy McWhirter]]
| title=The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach
| date=Apr 1, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1179359909}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach"</span>

==Abstract==
Some scientists have argued that evolutionary biology is poised for a third major synthesis. In the first synthesis, Darwin conceptualized and presented evidence for his evolutionary theory. The second used genetic mechanisms to explain how evolution worked. The third is based on energy. In the wake of Boltzmann’s work, a thermodynamic school of evolutionary theory has emerged, offering a number of principles alleged to guide evolutionary development. These include the principle of maximum energy flux, the maximum power principle, the minimum entropy production principle, the maximum entropy production principle, the constructal law, the maximum efficiency principle, and the equal fitness paradigm. Collectively, these principles have sometimes been described as contradictory, disunited, local, and as referring to apples and oranges. So far, different scientists have championed their principle of choice and argued that it is more “accurate” or more “general” than the other principles. In some cases, scientists have used straw man arguments that portray the other principles inaccurately. This has undermined our ability to understand the relations among these principles. The thesis of this book project is that many of these principles are fundamentally related and interdependent, and we can develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the evolutionary process if we view this process from a systems perspective, as a property that emerges from the interaction of many different parts. Part of the reason for the different optimality principles scientists have developed is that they focus on different parts of the process: the maximization of power, the production of entropy, the persistence of biodiversity, the evolution of design, etc. These principles provide an ability to predict, and in some cases, explain phenomena in these different parts of the evolutionary process. This book seeks to bring the interaction among these parts of the process into clearer focus by accurately describing the relations among these optimality principles and how they can evolve over time. In the process, we hope to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in evolutionary development, which is like listening to only the cellos in Beethoven’s Hymn to Joy when focusing exclusively on one optimality principle. This systems theory of thermodynamic evolution should help to provide a fundamental component of the third major synthesis of evolutionary biology. (383 words)

{{#ev:vimeo| 1179359909 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
[[Charles Hall]] received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina from the great systems ecologist Howard Odum. He has been a research scientist at Brookhaven and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and at the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, and professor at Cornell University, University of Montana, and the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He is the author of 14 books and more than 340 peer-reviewed papers, many in our “best” journals. In his mid-career, he turned his main interests from systems analysis and modeling of the energetics of natural ecosystems to increasingly, human-dominated “economic” systems. He is especially well known within the scientific community for initiating and developing (with colleagues) the concepts of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) and BioPhysical Economics. He is the recipient of many academic awards including the Hubbert Award from the American Society for the Study of Peak Oil and the Lifetime Achievement award from the International Society of BioPhysical Economics. (159 words)

[[Timothy McWhirter]] received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Florida State University. While in graduate school, he published a paper that described the empirical evidence in the contemporary sciences that supported Nietzsche’s principle of the will to power. In 2012, he published a paper on Nietzsche’s critique of morality that described how the will to power appeared to be similar, in important respects, to the maximum power principle developed by H. T. Odum. This was the first published paper that discussed the relation between these two principles. A decade later, he received an email from the ecologist Charles A. S. Hall, who was astonished that he was quoted by a philosopher about the maximum power principle. Since then, they have worked together on a number of projects: the book Maximum Power and its Philosophical Roots, McWhirter as the author and Hall as the editor; they coauthored the paper Maximum Power in Evolution, Ecology, and Economics; and they worked together on a chapter entitled The Equal Fitness Paradigm: a thermodynamic synthesis in evolutionary biology. Their next project is ambitious. They intend to write a book that outlines a systems theory of thermodynamic evolution, which explains the relations between all the different optimality principles that have been described by scientists in the thermodynamic school of evolution. (217 words)

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Charles Hall]]
[[Category: Videos by Timothy McWhirter]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 1 - Charles Hall and Timothy McWhirter

2026-04-09T18:04:37Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Timothy_McWhirter.jpg Charles_A_S_Hall.jpg
| name=[[Charles Hall]] & [[Timothy McWhirter]]
| title=The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach
| date=Apr 1, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1179359909}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach"</span>

==Abstract==
Some scientists have argued that evolutionary biology is poised for a third major synthesis. In the first synthesis, Darwin conceptualized and presented evidence for his evolutionary theory. The second used genetic mechanisms to explain how evolution worked. The third is based on energy. In the wake of Boltzmann’s work, a thermodynamic school of evolutionary theory has emerged, offering a number of principles alleged to guide evolutionary development. These include the principle of maximum energy flux, the maximum power principle, the minimum entropy production principle, the maximum entropy production principle, the constructal law, the maximum efficiency principle, and the equal fitness paradigm. Collectively, these principles have sometimes been described as contradictory, disunited, local, and as referring to apples and oranges. So far, different scientists have championed their principle of choice and argued that it is more “accurate” or more “general” than the other principles. In some cases, scientists have used straw man arguments that portray the other principles inaccurately. This has undermined our ability to understand the relations among these principles. The thesis of this book project is that many of these principles are fundamentally related and interdependent, and we can develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the evolutionary process if we view this process from a systems perspective, as a property that emerges from the interaction of many different parts. Part of the reason for the different optimality principles scientists have developed is that they focus on different parts of the process: the maximization of power, the production of entropy, the persistence of biodiversity, the evolution of design, etc. These principles provide an ability to predict, and in some cases, explain phenomena in these different parts of the evolutionary process. This book seeks to bring the interaction among these parts of the process into clearer focus by accurately describing the relations among these optimality principles and how they can evolve over time. In the process, we hope to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in evolutionary development, which is like listening to only the cellos in Beethoven’s Hymn to Joy when focusing exclusively on one optimality principle. This systems theory of thermodynamic evolution should help to provide a fundamental component of the third major synthesis of evolutionary biology. (383 words)

{{#ev:vimeo| 1179359909 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
[[Charles Hall]] received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina from the great systems ecologist Howard Odum. He has been a research scientist at Brookhaven and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and at the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, and professor at Cornell University, University of Montana, and the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He is the author of 14 books and more than 340 peer-reviewed papers, many in our “best” journals. In his mid-career, he turned his main interests from systems analysis and modeling of the energetics of natural ecosystems to increasingly, human-dominated “economic” systems. He is especially well known within the scientific community for initiating and developing (with colleagues) the concepts of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) and BioPhysical Economics. He is the recipient of many academic awards including the Hubbert Award from the American Society for the Study of Peak Oil and the Lifetime Achievement award from the International Society of BioPhysical Economics. (159 words)

[[Timothy McWhirter]] received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Florida State University. While in graduate school, he published a paper that described the empirical evidence in the contemporary sciences that supported Nietzsche’s principle of the will to power. In 2012, he published a paper on Nietzsche’s critique of morality that described how the will to power appeared to be similar, in important respects, to the maximum power principle developed by H. T. Odum. This was the first published paper that discussed the relation between these two principles. A decade later, he received an email from the ecologist Charles A. S. Hall, who was astonished that he was quoted by a philosopher about the maximum power principle. Since then, they have worked together on a number of projects: the book Maximum Power and its Philosophical Roots, McWhirter as the author and Hall as the editor; they coauthored the paper Maximum Power in Evolution, Ecology, and Economics; and they worked together on a chapter entitled The Equal Fitness Paradigm: a thermodynamic synthesis in evolutionary biology. Their next project is ambitious. They intend to write a book that outlines a systems theory of thermodynamic evolution, which explains the relations between all the different optimality principles that have been described by scientists in the thermodynamic school of evolution. (217 words)

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Charles Hall]]
[[Category: Videos by Timothy McWhirter]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:Timothy McWhirter.jpg

2026-04-09T18:04:21Z

Laouris:

File:Charles A S Hall.jpg

2026-04-09T18:04:03Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 Apr 1 - Charles Hall and Timothy McWhirter

2026-04-09T18:00:52Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo=
| name=[[Charles Hall]] & [[Timothy McWhirter]]
| title=The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach
| date=Apr 1, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1179359909}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> The Evolution of Our Understanding of Thermodynamics: A Systems Approach"</span>

==Abstract==
Some scientists have argued that evolutionary biology is poised for a third major synthesis. In the first synthesis, Darwin conceptualized and presented evidence for his evolutionary theory. The second used genetic mechanisms to explain how evolution worked. The third is based on energy. In the wake of Boltzmann’s work, a thermodynamic school of evolutionary theory has emerged, offering a number of principles alleged to guide evolutionary development. These include the principle of maximum energy flux, the maximum power principle, the minimum entropy production principle, the maximum entropy production principle, the constructal law, the maximum efficiency principle, and the equal fitness paradigm. Collectively, these principles have sometimes been described as contradictory, disunited, local, and as referring to apples and oranges. So far, different scientists have championed their principle of choice and argued that it is more “accurate” or more “general” than the other principles. In some cases, scientists have used straw man arguments that portray the other principles inaccurately. This has undermined our ability to understand the relations among these principles. The thesis of this book project is that many of these principles are fundamentally related and interdependent, and we can develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the evolutionary process if we view this process from a systems perspective, as a property that emerges from the interaction of many different parts. Part of the reason for the different optimality principles scientists have developed is that they focus on different parts of the process: the maximization of power, the production of entropy, the persistence of biodiversity, the evolution of design, etc. These principles provide an ability to predict, and in some cases, explain phenomena in these different parts of the evolutionary process. This book seeks to bring the interaction among these parts of the process into clearer focus by accurately describing the relations among these optimality principles and how they can evolve over time. In the process, we hope to provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the role of energy in evolutionary development, which is like listening to only the cellos in Beethoven’s Hymn to Joy when focusing exclusively on one optimality principle. This systems theory of thermodynamic evolution should help to provide a fundamental component of the third major synthesis of evolutionary biology. (383 words)

{{#ev:vimeo| 1179359909 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
[[Charles Hall]] received his Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina from the great systems ecologist Howard Odum. He has been a research scientist at Brookhaven and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and at the Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, and professor at Cornell University, University of Montana, and the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. He is the author of 14 books and more than 340 peer-reviewed papers, many in our “best” journals. In his mid-career, he turned his main interests from systems analysis and modeling of the energetics of natural ecosystems to increasingly, human-dominated “economic” systems. He is especially well known within the scientific community for initiating and developing (with colleagues) the concepts of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) and BioPhysical Economics. He is the recipient of many academic awards including the Hubbert Award from the American Society for the Study of Peak Oil and the Lifetime Achievement award from the International Society of BioPhysical Economics. (159 words)

[[Timothy McWhirter]] received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Florida State University. While in graduate school, he published a paper that described the empirical evidence in the contemporary sciences that supported Nietzsche’s principle of the will to power. In 2012, he published a paper on Nietzsche’s critique of morality that described how the will to power appeared to be similar, in important respects, to the maximum power principle developed by H. T. Odum. This was the first published paper that discussed the relation between these two principles. A decade later, he received an email from the ecologist Charles A. S. Hall, who was astonished that he was quoted by a philosopher about the maximum power principle. Since then, they have worked together on a number of projects: the book Maximum Power and its Philosophical Roots, McWhirter as the author and Hall as the editor; they coauthored the paper Maximum Power in Evolution, Ecology, and Economics; and they worked together on a chapter entitled The Equal Fitness Paradigm: a thermodynamic synthesis in evolutionary biology. Their next project is ambitious. They intend to write a book that outlines a systems theory of thermodynamic evolution, which explains the relations between all the different optimality principles that have been described by scientists in the thermodynamic school of evolution. (217 words)

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Charles Hall]]
[[Category: Videos by Timothy McWhirter]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Mar 18 - Bruno Vaz

2026-04-09T17:57:26Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Bruno N Vaz.png
| name=[[Bruno Nunes Vaz]]
| title=Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective
| date=Mar 18, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1174909288}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective"</span>

==Abstract==
The space sector is undergoing a profound transformation. The transition from "Old Space" — characterised by state-led programmes and Cold War-era treaties — to "New Space" has introduced unprecedented complexity. Private actors now rival national agencies in capability, the global space economy exceeds $600 billion, and emerging domains such as space mining and in-orbit manufacturing are reshaping the sector's boundaries.
Yet governance structures have not kept pace. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty offers little guidance for an era of mega-constellations, 130 million pieces of orbital debris, space militarisation across multiple nations, and private companies pursuing lunar resource extraction. The recursion levels that once organised the sector — from the UN to governments, agencies, and contractors — are now blurred, whilst bilateral accords like the Artemis Accords compete with multilateral frameworks for legitimacy.
This presentation draws on systems sciences, particularly the Viable System Model, to diagnose these structural deficits in the New Space era.

{{#ev:vimeo| https://vimeo.com/1174909288 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Bruno Nunes Vaz is a PhD candidate at the Technological Institute of Aeronautics (ITA) and a visiting researcher at Politecnico di Milano, focusing on innovation within the New Space sector. With a background in mechanical engineering and orbital mechanics, he bridges the gap between academic research and industrial applications. He is a partner at N7 Ventures, a venture builder for deep-tech startups, and a shareholder at Orbital Engenharia, a Brazilian space and defense company.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Bruno Vaz]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Mar 18 - Bruno Vaz

2026-04-09T17:56:41Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Bruno N Vaz.png
| name=[[Bruno Nunes Vaz]]
| title=Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective
| date=Mar 18, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1174909288}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective"</span>

==Abstract==
The space sector is undergoing a profound transformation. The transition from "Old Space" — characterised by state-led programmes and Cold War-era treaties — to "New Space" has introduced unprecedented complexity. Private actors now rival national agencies in capability, the global space economy exceeds $600 billion, and emerging domains such as space mining and in-orbit manufacturing are reshaping the sector's boundaries.
Yet governance structures have not kept pace. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty offers little guidance for an era of mega-constellations, 130 million pieces of orbital debris, space militarisation across multiple nations, and private companies pursuing lunar resource extraction. The recursion levels that once organised the sector — from the UN to governments, agencies, and contractors — are now blurred, whilst bilateral accords like the Artemis Accords compete with multilateral frameworks for legitimacy.
This presentation draws on systems sciences, particularly the Viable System Model, to diagnose these structural deficits in the New Space era.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1174909288 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Bruno Nunes Vaz is a PhD candidate at the Technological Institute of Aeronautics (ITA) and a visiting researcher at Politecnico di Milano, focusing on innovation within the New Space sector. With a background in mechanical engineering and orbital mechanics, he bridges the gap between academic research and industrial applications. He is a partner at N7 Ventures, a venture builder for deep-tech startups, and a shareholder at Orbital Engenharia, a Brazilian space and defense company.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Bruno Vaz]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 Mar 18 - Bruno Vaz

2026-04-09T17:54:52Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= Bruno N Vaz.png
| name=[[Bruno Vaz]]
| title=Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective
| date=Mar 18, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1174909288}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Space Governance in the New Space Era: A Systems Sciences Perspective"</span>

==Abstract==
The space sector is undergoing a profound transformation. The transition from "Old Space" — characterised by state-led programmes and Cold War-era treaties — to "New Space" has introduced unprecedented complexity. Private actors now rival national agencies in capability, the global space economy exceeds $600 billion, and emerging domains such as space mining and in-orbit manufacturing are reshaping the sector's boundaries.
Yet governance structures have not kept pace. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty offers little guidance for an era of mega-constellations, 130 million pieces of orbital debris, space militarisation across multiple nations, and private companies pursuing lunar resource extraction. The recursion levels that once organised the sector — from the UN to governments, agencies, and contractors — are now blurred, whilst bilateral accords like the Artemis Accords compete with multilateral frameworks for legitimacy.
This presentation draws on systems sciences, particularly the Viable System Model, to diagnose these structural deficits in the New Space era.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1174909288 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Bruno Nunes Vaz is a PhD candidate at the Technological Institute of Aeronautics (ITA) and a visiting researcher at Politecnico di Milano, focusing on innovation within the New Space sector. With a background in mechanical engineering and orbital mechanics, he bridges the gap between academic research and industrial applications. He is a partner at N7 Ventures, a venture builder for deep-tech startups, and a shareholder at Orbital Engenharia, a Brazilian space and defense company.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Bruno Vaz]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:ZaidKhan.png

2026-04-09T17:50:49Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 Mar 25 - Zaid Khan

2026-04-09T17:50:32Z

Laouris: Created and populated page

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= ZaidKhan.png
| name=[[Zaid Khan]]
| title=A Humble Posture Towards Systems Change
| date=Mar 25, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1177081671}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> A Humble Posture Towards Systems Change"</span>

==Abstract==
When faced with complex, interconnected challenges, the traditional impulse is often to try and engineer top-down solutions. "A Humble Posture Towards Systems Change" challenges this instinct, advocating for a fundamental shift from a mindset of control to one of stewardship, deep listening, and adaptability.

This session explores how practitioners can engage with complex systems with greater reverence for their inherent nature and pace. Drawing on a branch of ecological systems thinking, this talk translates these foundational theories through a practical design and strategy lens. Attendees will explore how systems approaches can emphasize a system's natural rhythms to find the right time to foster a shift

{{#ev:vimeo| 1177081671 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Zaid Khan is a strategist and systemic designer based in Toronto who helps organizations navigate complexity. As the co-founder of the systemic design studio Contexture and a co-organizer for Systems Thinking Ontario, his work consistently bridges academic theory and on-the-ground practice. Holding an MDes in Strategic Foresight and Innovation, his practice focuses on building adaptive capacity and guiding institutions through systemic shifts.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Zaid Khan]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides

2026-04-09T17:42:08Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides

2026-04-09T17:41:47Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= AndreasNicolaides.jpg
| name=[[Andreas Nicolaides]]
| title=Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis
| date=Apr 8, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1181357175}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis"</span>

==Abstract==
Darwin’s On the Origin of Species left unresolved the problem named in its title: how new species arise. The Modern Synthesis, though uniting Mendelian genetics with natural selection, has produced no coherent theory of speciation. Instead, evolutionary biology has accumulated a patchwork of mechanisms, often treating anomalies—such as long periods of evolutionary stasis, apparently sudden transformations, reticulated phylogenies (branching complicated by cross-lineage gene flow), and recurrent hybridisation (interbreeding between distinct lineages)—as exceptions rather than signals of a deeper order.

This presentation introduces the Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis: the claim that speciation is not the incidental by-product of auxiliary processes linked to natural selection, but is structured by higher-order regulatory systems, encoded in the germline, that govern the mode and tempo of evolution. These are not fixed typological essences but dynamic, multi-scale architectures intrinsic to life’s organisation. Framed within the broader perspective of Genomic Essentialism, the hypothesis advances the view that biological organisation is driven by genomic programmes that are constitutive of life itself, rather than by emergent properties alone.

Four systemic functions illustrate this architecture:

#Initiators: timers and triggers that delimit and precipitate transformation, including tandem-repeat turnover, germline resets, hybridisation, duplication, and viral invasion.
# Generators: mechanisms that expand and rewire genomic material, such as bursts of transposons, endogenous retroviruses, segmental duplications, retrocopying, and 3-D architectural change.
# Coordinators: processes that synchronise transformations across populations, including viral and symbiotic dynamics and germline programmes that align thresholds.
# Stabilisers: systems that preserve lineage coherence, such as centromeric divergence with drive suppression, piRNA surveillance, inversions, supergenes, imprinting, and incompatibility complexes.

These functions do not direct development itself but transform the regulatory logic that structures it. In this sense, the system constitutes a meta-programme: a higher-order genomic architecture that converts existing developmental programmes into novel ones, linking organisms across space and time. Crucially, they also resolve the anomalies: stasis reflects stability maintained by stabilisers, sudden transformations occur when initiators cross thresholds, reticulated histories arise from coordinating processes across lineages, and hybrid dysfunction stems from divergence in stabilising systems.

On this basis, the hypothesis yields distinctive predictions: genomic turnover should track clade-specific tempos of speciation; bursts of mobile elements and duplications should cluster around radiation events; shared viral or symbiotic agents should generate concordant genomic change; and hybrid dysfunction should correlate with divergence in coherence-preserving systems. Evolutionary anomalies, on this view, are not noise but signatures of a genomic meta-programme in action.

{{#ev:vimeo|1181357175 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Andreas Nicolaides studied Medicine at Manchester University (1982) and Philosophy at London University (2024). He is currently employed part-time at York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust as a Consultant Head and Neck Surgeon and is affiliated with Hull York Medical School as an Honorary Senior Lecturer.

He has had a lifelong interest in evolutionary theory, which he has pursued independently of his clinical work. This has led him to advance a systems biology approach to the anomalies of speciation at the molecular level. Through this, he has developed the idea of Genomic Essentialism, based on the Constitutive Genomic Programmes hypothesis: systems-level regulatory architectures encoded in all genomes that direct both the reliable unfolding of embryonic development and the patterned transformation of species.
This project has firm foundations in the naturalised teleology of Aristotle, which recognised the purposiveness of organisms but lacked a mechanism to parallel that of natural selection. By showing how genomic programmes act through well-recognised regulatory pathways, Genomic Essentialism supports an internalist explanation of life’s organisation that subsumes, rather than denies, the externalism of natural selection.

Dr Nicolaides draws on sources from classical philosophy, evolutionary theory, and molecular biology to argue that life’s anomalies — such as episodic bursts in the fossil record, synchrony in molecular evolution, and the peculiar molecular logic observed in the germline — only make sense when understood as parts of an integrated programme. His work aims to bring together systems science, genomics, and philosophy in order to offer a unifying account of life’s organisation.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Andreas Nicolaides]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

Mini Symposium 2026 04 08 Andreas Nicolaides

2026-04-09T17:41:22Z

Laouris: created and polulated

{{Mini Symposia
| photo= AndreasNicolaides.jpg
| name=[[Andreas Nicolaides]]
| title=Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis
| date=Apr 8, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1181357175}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Speciation through Genomic Reorganisation: The Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis"</span>

==Abstract==
Darwin’s On the Origin of Species left unresolved the problem named in its title: how new species arise. The Modern Synthesis, though uniting Mendelian genetics with natural selection, has produced no coherent theory of speciation. Instead, evolutionary biology has accumulated a patchwork of mechanisms, often treating anomalies—such as long periods of evolutionary stasis, apparently sudden transformations, reticulated phylogenies (branching complicated by cross-lineage gene flow), and recurrent hybridisation (interbreeding between distinct lineages)—as exceptions rather than signals of a deeper order.

This presentation introduces the Phylogenetic Meta-Programme Hypothesis: the claim that speciation is not the incidental by-product of auxiliary processes linked to natural selection, but is structured by higher-order regulatory systems, encoded in the germline, that govern the mode and tempo of evolution. These are not fixed typological essences but dynamic, multi-scale architectures intrinsic to life’s organisation. Framed within the broader perspective of Genomic Essentialism, the hypothesis advances the view that biological organisation is driven by genomic programmes that are constitutive of life itself, rather than by emergent properties alone.

Four systemic functions illustrate this architecture:

#Initiators: timers and triggers that delimit and precipitate transformation, including tandem-repeat turnover, germline resets, hybridisation, duplication, and viral invasion.
# Generators: mechanisms that expand and rewire genomic material, such as bursts of transposons, endogenous retroviruses, segmental duplications, retrocopying, and 3-D architectural change.
# Coordinators: processes that synchronise transformations across populations, including viral and symbiotic dynamics and germline programmes that align thresholds.
# Stabilisers: systems that preserve lineage coherence, such as centromeric divergence with drive suppression, piRNA surveillance, inversions, supergenes, imprinting, and incompatibility complexes.

These functions do not direct development itself but transform the regulatory logic that structures it. In this sense, the system constitutes a meta-programme: a higher-order genomic architecture that converts existing developmental programmes into novel ones, linking organisms across space and time. Crucially, they also resolve the anomalies: stasis reflects stability maintained by stabilisers, sudden transformations occur when initiators cross thresholds, reticulated histories arise from coordinating processes across lineages, and hybrid dysfunction stems from divergence in stabilising systems.

On this basis, the hypothesis yields distinctive predictions: genomic turnover should track clade-specific tempos of speciation; bursts of mobile elements and duplications should cluster around radiation events; shared viral or symbiotic agents should generate concordant genomic change; and hybrid dysfunction should correlate with divergence in coherence-preserving systems. Evolutionary anomalies, on this view, are not noise but signatures of a genomic meta-programme in action.

{{#ev:vimeo|1181357175 |600|left|}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Andreas Nicolaides studied Medicine at Manchester University (1982) and Philosophy at London University (2024). He is currently employed part-time at York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust as a Consultant Head and Neck Surgeon and is affiliated with Hull York Medical School as an Honorary Senior Lecturer.

He has had a lifelong interest in evolutionary theory, which he has pursued independently of his clinical work. This has led him to advance a systems biology approach to the anomalies of speciation at the molecular level. Through this, he has developed the idea of Genomic Essentialism, based on the Constitutive Genomic Programmes hypothesis: systems-level regulatory architectures encoded in all genomes that direct both the reliable unfolding of embryonic development and the patterned transformation of species.
This project has firm foundations in the naturalised teleology of Aristotle, which recognised the purposiveness of organisms but lacked a mechanism to parallel that of natural selection. By showing how genomic programmes act through well-recognised regulatory pathways, Genomic Essentialism supports an internalist explanation of life’s organisation that subsumes, rather than denies, the externalism of natural selection.

Dr Nicolaides draws on sources from classical philosophy, evolutionary theory, and molecular biology to argue that life’s anomalies — such as episodic bursts in the fossil record, synchrony in molecular evolution, and the peculiar molecular logic observed in the germline — only make sense when understood as parts of an integrated programme. His work aims to bring together systems science, genomics, and philosophy in order to offer a unifying account of life’s organisation.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Andreas Nicolaides]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]

File:AndreasNicolaides.jpg

2026-04-09T17:41:04Z

Laouris:

Mini Symposium 2026 Mar 11 - Peter Erdi

2026-04-09T17:34:51Z

Laouris:

{{Mini Symposia
| photo=Peter-Erdi-at_Kalamazoo.jpg
| name=[[Peter Erdi]]
| title=Students exploring agent-based modeling software, NetLogo, through its applications to complex systems in daily life
| date=Mar 11, 2026
| presentation=
| link=https://vimeo.com/1172648251?share=copy&fl=sv&fe=ci
}}

<span style="font-size:200%"> Students exploring agent-based modeling software, NetLogo, through its applications to complex systems in daily life"</span>

==Abstract==
In this project, students will explore agent-based modeling software, NetLogo, through its applications to complex systems in daily life. You will have the opportunity to model complex systems without coding knowledge. Examples of models include population dynamics, social networks (e.g., voting), chemical kinetics, epidemics, economics (e.g., wealth distributions, cash flow), medicine (e.g., kidney health, disease spread, CRISPR), and animal collective behavior.
Six eight-minute-long presentations will be delivered, followed by a Q/A session.

{{#ev:vimeo| 1172648251|600|left|RStudents exploring agent-based modeling software, NetLogo, through its applications to complex systems in daily life: Peter Erdi}}

<div style="clear: both"></div>

==Short Bio==
Péter Érdi teaches a class INTRODUCTION TO COMPLEX SYSTEMS (25th time this year) at Kalamazoo College. During the minisymposium, the students will present their group project. While the exact projects are not known, the call will be given.

[[Category: Videos]]
[[Category: Videos by Peter Erdi]]
[[Category: Videos from Mini Symposia]]
[[Category: Mini Symposia]]