Skip to content
Create an account for full access.

System levels are distinguished by attention. Example of body work methods

People poorly think about "behaviors," poorly differentiate parts and wholes in dynamic systems (changing their states over time), requiring 4D representations of parts in space-time. Let's describe the methods/cultures/styles and roles used by the community of dancers, practicing social/partnerdances[1] as a typical example.

The work on a "dance performance"/"dance execution"::method is interesting in that it exists only for a few minutes. The method of this work is performed by artists::role, in which a dancer::"artist's sub-role" participates. In our case, the artist (with the involved sub-role of a dancer) is performing the method of conducting a dance performance as the sub-role of "a member of the social dance community"::"cultural person"::a person, an example of other sub-roles of the roles of people who are members of social dance communities

  • event organizers, DJs. One can easily add another systemic level, for example, taking not just the entire social dance community, but also the additional level of a specific social dance style community, for example, the salsa community. Reiterating: in these communities/get-togethers, not only dancing artists participate, but also event organizers, photographers, videographers, DJs, teachers - and the "artists" of these places are not mentioned, unless they are professionals earning a living through their dance creativity. The collectively performed style/culture of behavior in these styles within this community - the subculture, for the entire community of social dances, sometimes referred to as the culture "subculture," sometimes just "culture," it all depends on the project, for which modeling/assignment of types for important objects in the subject area is carried out. The artists prefer to call themselves "dancers," but this characterizes their general dancing preparation, we will see further that "dancer" here is at a fairly deep systemic level, above the "dancer" there are still many different roles.

Thinking systemically about the dance community or even an individual artist::role is more complex than thinking systemically about some electronic gadget. You can physically assemble/disassemble the mechanical gadget from its structural parts, the functionally notable parts of the gadget at least approximately correspond to the constructive parts of this gadget, that is components and their assemblies. An artist or, more narrowly, an artist with the sub-role of a dancer (that is considered as systems named by their role in the environment and not by the construction of the agent like "human" or "robot") cannot be mentally assembled or disassembled in the form of an "explosion diagram." The problem is that "explosion diagrams" are not about highlighting functional moving and changing parts during operation, but about physical separation (although it may be done mentally) of the constructives, which are usually considered during system creation rather than system operation. Here is an example of an explosion diagram of a bicycle: If we consider a human body as having a functional decomposition into organs::"roles in the body," then an error becomes immediately apparent: such "a physically dismantled organism from the constructives" cannot be imagined as living-working: it would be dead in that state, "dismantling time"! You cannot explain "how it works" through an explosion diagram; the changes/behavior during operation cannot be explained by the explosion diagram. To show changes, you need to somehow show substance or energy flow, potential differences. For this purpose, "functional diagrams"/"circuit diagrams," where something flows between functional parts like fluid, electrical energy, mechanical energy, heat, causing changes in functional parts, are used. More about this will be discussed a bit further.

The problem with explosion diagrams often appears unconsciously during functional consideration, as an unconscious representation of functional decomposition. This is a rough error in systemic thinking. Note that the bicycle construct does not move; its motion cannot be described. Here is an exploded diagram of a clock: Such clocks are static. But we need to discuss systems primarily during their operation/exploitation and distinguish entirely different parts in them - this can only be done through attention. The correct way: try to imagine systems during their operation not as static pictures, but as short videos, GIFs - even if there are no moving parts during the operation/functioning of the system, imagine flows of heat, electricity.

About the artist::role (singer::sub-role, dancer::sub-role, juggler::sub-role, including the sub-roles of a specific genre/style for the relevant artistic activities/methods of a singer, dancer, juggler, etc.) we think during their performance/execution, and their functional (i.e., during work/use) parts have to be highlighted in attention "on the fly," rather than disassembled. Once broken down into constructive parts in reality, not by attention - all system does not exist and it's still "under construction," or if it's a living system - already "dead."

There is only one way to think about a system: to highlight the functional (not constructive) partsof the used/exploited/operating system with attention during its operation - design is meant here.

Here is a picture of social dancers, in which even the required individual dancer has to be chosen with attention, and this could even be not the first dancer who appears (who is only a distraction, looking straight at us, even in the foreground, and shown very sharply). No, we need the one we need - for example, the dancer framed in red:

If we consider the work system, then besides dance mastery, one must also have a healthy (physiologically speaking) body. If the body is not healthy, the physiologist's role is to intervene. The physiologist does not even care - this was salsa or tango, in fact, he did not notice dance movement, a high system level for his mastery, for him, it's not "dance movement", but "body movement."

Each level of system mastery as part of personality of participants of this dance party (sub-roles of participants, "functional breakdown" of personality) is being worked on by the team to create and develop their professional roles. But at the lower levels, the creator:: doctor and trainer::doctor focus not only and not as much on the individual's personality (mastery) as a target system but on the body of the individual (although both the doctor and the trainer also teach body management mastery, we remember that the body of each participant is repaired and maintained here, not in terms of managing the body in a specific cultural/style dance movement).

If we want a universal agent (universal in the sense of a universal constructor, "programmed for any transformation tasks of the physical world") to function well as an artist, in the project of its creation and development, various creators' roles must work well. Engineers build their systems as a team. People, too, need to be "built" (educated) by teams! Here we are not only talking about dividing labor between instructor sub-roles, specializing in education (in the course "Personal Engineering


  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_dance ↩︎