.

The manager as a teacher: selected aspects of stimulation of scientific thinking

Язык: русский
Формат: дипломна
Тип документа: Word Doc
0 6906
Скачать документ

2

RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF GOVERNMENT

SERVICE AT THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIAN

FEDERATION

***

INSTITUTE OF INCREASE OF QUALIFICATION

OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

ATTESTATION WORK

THE MANAGER AS A TEACHER:

SELECTED ASPECTS

OF STIMULATION OF SCIENTIFIC THINKING

Author: Vladislav I. Kaganovskiy,

student of the Group # 02.313

of professional re-training

in sphere «HR management»

MOSCOW

2006

“Wars are won by school teacher”

Otto von Bismark

Selected aspects of stimulation of scientific thinking

As is generally known, science and education are one of strategic
resources of the state, one of fundamental forms of culture of
civilization, as well as competitive advantage of every individual.
Global discoveries of modern life occur both deep in and at the junction
of various sciences, and at that, often and often the more unusual the
combination of sciences is, the wider range of scientific prospects is
promised by non-standard conspectus of their combination, for example,
biology and electronics, philology and mathematics, etc. Discoveries in
one area stimulate development in other spheres of science as well.
Scientific development of a society is a programmable and predictable
phenomenon, and this issue is specifically dealt by the futurology
science. Modern techniques of pedagogy, psychology, medicine and other
sciences do not only enable orientation and informational “pumping” of
human brain, but also the formation of an individual’s character
optimally suitable for the role of scientist. Unlike a computer, any
human being has intuition – the element of thinking so far in no way
replaceable (although some developments in this sphere are coming into
being). Narrow specialization of scientists tapers the scope of their
activity and is explained by an immense volume of information required
for modern scientist. This problem is being solved (partially though)
through a variety of actions – intellectualization of computers,
“simplification” of information (its reduction to short, but data
intensive/high-capacity formulas and formulations), application of
psycho-technologies. Psycho-technologies (mnemonics, educational games,
hypnopaedia, (auto-) hypnosis, propaganda and advertising methods and
techniques, including technotronic and pharmacological /nootropic
preparations/, etc.) make it possible to solve the following problem. A
“black box” concept applied in computer science designates a system into
which the chaotic information is entered, and in a little while a
version, hypothesis or theory is produced. A human being represents
(with some reservations though) such a system. Information processing
occurs consciously and subconsciously based on certain rules (program).
The more information processing rules we enter, the fewer number of
degrees of freedom remains in the system. Hence, it is desirable to
enter the very basic axioms. Differences in programs (even mere default
– but without lack of key information) form differences in opinions and
argumentation. The longer the period of program operation is (including
based on internal biological clock), the greater the effect one can
expect. The provability of success is directly proportional to the
quantity of samples/tests, hence it is desirable to build in basic
mechanisms of scientific thinking at the earliest age possible in a
maximum wide audience and to stimulate their active work, and in certain
time intervals make evaluation and update of “programs” of thinking.
“Comprehension by an individual of new skills occurs only step-wise.
Transition between two following mental conditions takes place: “I’ll
never understand how this can be done and I’ll never be able to do it”
and “it is so obvious that I can’t understand what needs to be explained
here”. Except for early childhood, the leaps of this kind occur when
mastering reading and mastering writing, mastering all standard
extensions of set of numbers (fractional, negative, rational numbers,
but not complex numbers), when mastering the concept of infinitesimal
value and its consequences (the limits), differentiation, when mastering
integration, complex of specific abilities forming the phenomenon of
information generating (in other words, in the course of transition from
studying science or art to purposeful/conscious professional creative
work). We hereby note that at any of these stages, for the reasons not
quite clear to us, the leap may not occur. It means that certain ability
has not turned into a stage of subconscious professional application and
cannot be used randomly by an individual for the solution of problems
he/she faces. At that, the required algorithm may be well known. In
other words, an individual knows letters. He/she knows how to write
them. He/she can form words from them. He/she can write a sentence. But!
This work would require all his/her intellectual and mainly physical
effort. For the reason that all resources of the brain are spent for
the process of writing, errors are inevitable. It is obvious that
despite formal literacy (the presence of knowledge of algorithm) an
individual cannot be engaged in any activity for which the ability to
write is one of the basic or at least essential skills. Similar state of
an individual is widely known in modern pedagogy and is called
functional illiteracy. Similarly, one can speak of functional inability
to integrate (quite a frequent reason for the exclusion of the 1st and
2nd grade students from physical and mathematical departments).
Curiously enough, at higher levels the leap does not occur so often, to
the extent that it is even considered normal. The formula: “An excellent
student, but failed to make proper choice of vocation. Well, he’s not a
physicist by virtue of thinking – well, that’s the way” (the leap
allowing to mechanically employ specific style of thinking / physical in
this case / did not occur). As to automatic creativity, these concepts
in general are considered disconnected, and individuals for whom the
process of creation of new essentialities in science and culture is the
ordinary professional work not demanding special strain of effort are
named geniuses. However, a child sick with functional illiteracy would
perceive his peer who has mastered writing to the extent of being able
of doing it without looking into a writing-book, a genius, too! Thus, we
arrive at the conclusion that creativity at the level of simple genius
is basically accessible to everyone. Modern education translates to
pupils’ knowledge (of which, according to research, 90 % is being well
and almost immediately forgotten) and very limited number of skills
which would in a step-wise manner move the individual to the following
stage of intellectual or physical development. One should know right
well that endless school classes and home work, exhausting sports
trainings are no more than eternal “throwing of cube” in the hope that
lucky number will come out – in the hope of a “click”. And the “click”
may occur at the first dash. It may never occur as well. Accordingly,
the philosophy “repetition is the mother of learning” in effect adds up
to a “trial-and-error method” which has been for a long time and fairly
branded as such by TRIZists (the followers of Inventive Problems
Solution Theory). As a matter of fact, the uneven nature of transition
between “in”-and “out”- states at the moment of “click” suggests that it
is a question of structural transformation of mentality. That is,
“click” requires destruction of a structure (a pattern of thought, a
picture of the world) and creation of another one in which a new skill
is included “hardwarily” to be used automatically. Restrictions
stimulate internal activity. It is proven that creative task “Draw
something” without setting pre-determined conditions with restrictions
is carried out less productively and less originally than the task:
“Draw an unusual animal with a pencil during 30 minutes” (Sergey
Pereslegin). Required personal qualities – traits of character
/temperamental attributes/ may be divided into four conventional groups:
necessary, desirable, undesirable and inadmissible. Knowledge can be
divided into two groups: means and ways of information processing
(including philosophy, logic, mathematics, etc.), the so-called
meta-skills or meta-knowledge/ which are universal and applicable in any
field of activity), and the subject (subjects) matter per se. From the
view point of methodology all methods of scientific knowledge can be
divided into five basic groups: 1. Philosophical methods. These include
dialectics and metaphysics. 2. General scientific (general logical)
approaches and research methods – analysis and synthesis, induction and
deduction, abstraction, generalization, idealization, analogy, modeling,
stochastic-statistical methods, systemic approach, etc. 3.
Special-scientific methods: totality of techniques, research methods
used in one or another field of knowledge. 4. Disciplinary methods, i.e.
a set of methods applied in one or another discipline. 5. Methods of
interdisciplinary research – a set of several synthetic, integrative
methods generated mainly at the cross-disciplinary junction of branches
of science. Scientific cognition is characterized by two levels –
empirical and theoretical. Characteristic feature of empirical knowledge
is the fact fixing activity. Theoretical cognition is substantial
cognition /knowledge per se/ which occurs at the level of high order
abstraction. There two ways to attempt to solve a problem: search for
the necessary information or investigate it independently by means of
observation, experiments and theoretical thinking. Observation and
experiment are the most important methods of research in the process of
scientific cognition. It is often said that theory is generalization of
practice, experience or observations. Scientific generalizations often
imply the use of a number of special logical methods: 1)
Universalization /globbing/ method which consists in that general
points/aspects/ and properties observed in the limited set of
experiments hold true for all possible cases; 2) Idealization method
consisting in that conditions are specified at which processes described
in laws occur in their pure form, i.e. the way they cannot occur in
reality; 3) Conceptualization method consisting in that concepts
borrowed from other theories are entered into the formulation of laws,
these concepts acquiring acceptably /accurate/ exact meaning and
significance. Major methods of scientific cognition are: 1) Method of
ascending from abstract to concrete. The process of scientific cognition
is always connected with transition from extremely simple concepts to
more difficult concrete ones. 2) Method of modeling and principle of
system. It consists in that the object inaccessible to direct research
is replaced with its model. A model possesses similarity with the object
in terms of its properties that are of interest for the researcher. 3)
Experiment and observation. In the course of experiment the observer
would isolate artificially a number of characteristics of the
investigated system and examine their dependence on other parameters. It
is necessary to take into account that about 10 – 25 % of scientific
information is proven outdated annually and in the near future this
figure can reach 70%; according to other sources, the volume of
information doubles every 5 years. It means that the system of
education/teaching and “non-stop” retraining applied in some cases will
become a universal and mandatory phenomenon, whereas the boundary
between necessary and desirable knowledge will become more vague and
conventional. In modern conditions active and purposeful studying of
someone’s future sphere (spheres) of activity should start 4-5 years
prior to entering the university. Considerable development will be seen
in “preventive” (pre-emptive, anticipatory) education taking into
account prospects of development of science for 3-5-10 years from no on.
Masterful knowledge of methods of scientific-analytical and creative
thinking is becoming the same social standard and a sign of affiliation
to elite social groups as, for example, the presence of higher education
diploma. The law of inverse proportionality of controllability and the
ability to development says the more the system is controllable, the
less it is capable of development. Controllable development may only be
overtaking/catching up/. Now, a few thoughts about errors in the course
of training. Traditional approach tends to consider an error as the
lack of learning, assiduity, attention, diligence, etc. As a result the
one to blame is a trainee. Error should be perceived as a constructive
element in the system of heuristic training. An educational institution
is just the institute where the person should make mistakes under the
guidance of a teacher. An important element of cognitive system is
professional terminology. The lack of knowledge of terms would not
release anyone from the need to understand … Each term contains the
concentrated mass of nuances and details distinguishing the scientific
vision of the matter in question from the ordinary, unscientific
understanding… It should be mentioned that the process of
teaching/educating/ is a stress which has pluses and minuses, whereas
the process of studying is a much smaller stress. One of the main tasks
in terms of (self-) education may be the formation of active desire
(internal requirement) to study and be engaged in (self-) education with
independent search of appropriate means and possibilities. Special
consideration should be given to teaching/training means and methods,
i.e. what is comprehensible to one group of trainees may be useless for
others. Major differentiation would be seen in age categories plus
individual features. Training games are quite a universal tool used for
a wide range of subjects and development of practical skills, since the
game reflects the trainee’s behavior in reality. It is a system that
provides an immediate feedback. Instead of listening to a lecture the
trainee is given the individual lesson adapted for his/her needs. Game
is modeling of reality and method of influencing it by the trainee. Some
minuses of game include conventionality and schematic nature of what is
going on and the development of the trainee’s behavioral and cogitative
stereotypes. Major strategic consequences of wide spread of scientific
thinking skills may include systemic (including quantitative –
qualitative) changes in the system of science, education and industry,
sharp increase of labor force mobility (both “white” and “blue collar”)
and possible global social-economic and social-political changes.

Part 1. Meta-skills:

Pass preliminary test by means of Kettel’s 16-factor questionnaire
(form C), test your IQ (Intelligence Quotient) using Aizenc’s test.
Undergo testing for operative and long-term memory, attention
distribution, noise immunity and will. Plan the development of these
qualities in your character.

Methods of work with the text

(W. Tuckman “Educational Psychology. From Theory to Application”.
Florida. State University. 1992):

1. Look through the text before reading it in detail to determine what
it is about.

2. Focus your attention on the most significant places (semantic nodes)
in the text.

3. Keep short record (summary/synopsis) of the most significant facts.

4. Keep close watch of understanding of what you read. If something
appears not quite understood, re-read the paragraph once again.

5. Check up and generalize (analyze) what you have read in respect to
the purpose of your reading.

6. Check up the correctness of understanding of separate words and
thoughts in reference literature.

7. Quickly resume the work (reading) if you have been interrupted.

Training of fast reading – “Fast Reader 32” Program. Download the
program:
http://www.nodevice.ru/soft/windows/education/trenning/5072.html
http://kornjakov.ru/index.htm, http://www.freesoft.ru/? id=670591 – for
handheld computer. Plan 2-week “result-oriented” trainings – your
current maximum is + 50%.

Methods of critical and creative thinking

Critical thinking:

1. Analytical thinking (information analysis, selection of necessary
facts, comparison, collation of facts, phenomena). Useful questions in
this connection are “who?”, “what?”, “where?”, “when?”, “why?”,
“where?”, “what for?”, “how?”, “how many/much?”, “what?”(“which?”) to be
asked in the most unusual combinations, while trying to find (to
suppose) all options of answers.

2. Associative thinking (determination of associations with the
previously studied familiar facts, phenomena, determination of
associations with new qualities of a subject, phenomenon, etc.).

3. Independence of thinking (the absence of dependence on authorities
and/or stereotypes, prejudices, etc.).

4. Logic thinking (the ability to build the logic of provability of the
decision made, the internal logic of a problem being solved, the logic
of sequence of actions undertaken for the solution of the problem,
etc.).

5. Systemic thinking (the ability to consider the object, the problem in
question within the integrity of their ties/relations and
characteristics).

Creative thinking:

1. Ability of mental experimentation, spatial imagination.

2. Ability of independent transfer of knowledge for the decision of new
problem, task, search of new decisions.

3. Combinatory abilities (the ability to combine the earlier known
methods, ways of task/problem solution in a new combined, complex way –
the morphological analysis).

4. Prognostic abilities (the ability to anticipate possible consequences
of the decisions made, ability to establish cause-and-effect relations).

5. Heuristic way of thinking, intuitive inspiration, insight. The above
stated abilities can be supplemented by specific abilities to work with
information, for which purpose it is important to be able to select
required (for specific goals) information from various sources to
analyze it, systematize and generalize the data obtained in accordance
with the cognitive task set forth, the ability to reveal problems in
various fields of knowledge, in the surrounding reality, to make
grounded hypotheses for their solution. It is also necessary to be able
to put experiments (not only mental, but also natural), make
well-reasoned conclusions, build the system of proofs, to be able to
process statistically the data obtained from test and experimental
checks, to be able to generate new ideas, possible ways of search of
decisions, registration of results, to be able to work in the
collective, while solving cognitive, creative tasks in cooperation with
others, at that playing different social roles, as well as to be master
of art and culture of communication.

Research and search methods of information processing:

1. Independent search and selection of information on specific problem.

2. Information analysis for the purpose of selection of facts, data
necessary for the description of the object of study, its
characteristics, qualities; for selection of facts conducive to the
provability and/or refutation of the vision of the task/problem
solution; building of facts, data analyzed in the logical sequence of
proofs, etc.

3. Definition, vision of problems that need examination and solution.

4. Making hypotheses with definition of ways to check (solve) them.

5. Determination of methods, ways of solution of the investigated
problem, stages of its solution by an individual or joint, group effort.

6. Registration of results of research or search activity.

7. Argumentation of the results achieved.

8. Projecting the occurrence of new problems in the given area of
knowledge, practical activities.

Universal plan of scientific management (SM)

1. Statement of an overall goal (task) – minimum, optimum and maximum.

2. Setting of intermediate goals (tasks), their prioritization,
time-frames of implementation.

3. Mechanisms (methods, schemes) of their achievement.

4. Required logistical, informational and financial support.

5. Personnel (including statement of problem before each employee
following detailed instructional advice and determination of
implementation time-frames).

6. Ways and means of control, possible failures and disturbances,
methods, time-frames, personnel, materials, equipment, information and
finance to rectify the latter.

7. Task adjustment in case of changes of situation, adaptation of the
work performed (at all stages) to a new problem.

TRIZ – Inventive Problems Solution Theory (IPST)

Algorithm of activity:

1. A. Set a task. B. Imagine ideal result (is there a problem at all?).
C. What prevents from the achievement of a goal (find contradiction),
why does it prevent from its achievement (reveal cause-and-effect
relations). D. On what conditions prevention will not occur?

2. A. Required (possible) internal changes (the sizes: larger, smaller,
longer, shorter, thicker, thinner, deeper, shallower, vertically,
horizontally, sloping, in parallel, in ledges, in layers/slices,
transpose/rearrange, crosswise, convergence, to surround, to mix/stir,
borders; the quantity: more, less, proportions, to divide, attach, add,
remove; form: usual, unusual, rounded, straight, jags, unevenness,
rough, equal, even/smooth, damage proof, delays, accidents,
“foolproofing” and protection from larceny, to add; movement: to
accelerate, slow down, stir up/revive/brighten up, stop, direction,
deviation, pulling, pushing away, to block, lift, lower/pull down,
rotate, fluctuate, arouse; condition: hot, cooler, firmer, softer,
opened, closed, pre-assembled, disposable, combined, divided, hardening,
liquid, gaseous, powder-like, wearability, to grease, moist, dry,
isolated, gelatinous, plasmic, elastic, resists, superposes/matches). B.
Division of an object (and/or subject) into independent parts: a.
Segregation of weak (including potentially weak) part (parts). b.
Segregation of required and sufficient part (parts). c. Segregation of
identical (including duplicating, similar) parts (including in other
systems). d. Division into parts with different functions. C. External
changes. D. Changes in the adjacent objects. a. Establishment of links
between the previously independent objects performing one work
(including a network). b. Removal of objects because of transfer of
their functions to other objects. c. Increase in the number of objects
at the expense of the reverse side of the area. E. Measurement of time:
faster, more slowly, longer, eternal, single-step, cyclic, time-wise
marked, update, variable. F. Ascertainment of ties with other fields of
knowledge (how is this contradiction solved there? what can be borrowed
from there at all?). Prototypes in nature. G. Read the dictionaries for
verbal associations (including non-standard). H. In case of failure
revert to the initial problem to expand its situation/formulation.

3. A. Introduce necessary changes in the object (work). B. Introduce
changes in other objects connected with the given one. C. Introduce
changes in methods and expand the sphere of use of the object. D. Ask
questions “how can we achieve the same result without using this product
(using it partially) or without doing this work (doing it partially)?”,
“how can we make the product (work) easier, more durable, safer,
cheaper, in a more accelerated manner, pleasant, useful, universal,
convenient, “friendly”, more ergonomic, harmless, pure, reliable,
effective, attractive and bright, portable, valuable, status ranking,
etc. E. Conduct preliminary tests, finish off, if necessary. Develop IGM
(income generation mechanism). F. Check the applicability of the
solution(s) found in respect of other problems. G. Take out a patent for
the idea. See also: www.triz-journal.com, http://www.altshuller.ru/

Concepts, substance and laws of dialectics

1) The world (the being, reality) exists objectively, i.e. irrespective
of the will and conscience of a human being. 2) The world has not been
created by anybody and cannot be destroyed by anybody. It exists and
develops in accordance with natural laws. There are no supernatural
forces in it. 3) The world is unique and there are no “extra-mundane”
spheres and phenomena in it (standing “above the world” or “beyond the
world”) that are absolutely abjoint from each other. Diverse objects and
the phenomena of the reality represent various kinds of moving matter
and energy. 4) The world is coherent and is in eternal, continuous
movement, development. Objects of the reality interact with each other,
influence upon each other. In the process of development qualitative
changes in objects, including natural transition from the lowest forms
to the higher, take place. 5) Natural development of a matter through a
number of natural steps (the inorganic/inanimate nature/abiocoen/ – life
– society) has led to the origin of human being, intellect, conscience.
The crucial role in the segregation of human being from animality and
the formation of its conscience was played by labor, its social nature,
transition of the human being’s animal ancestors to regular production
and application of instruments of labor. 6) Society being the higher
step of development of substance includes all lowest forms and levels
(mechanical, physical, chemical, biological) on the basis of which it
has arisen, but is not reduced to them only. It exists and develops on
the basis of social laws which qualitatively differ from the laws of the
lowest forms. The paramount law of social development is the determinant
role of production in the life of the society. Mode of production of
material life conditions social, political and spiritual processes of
life in general. 7) The world is knowable. Human knowledge is unlimited
by nature, but is limited historically at each stage of its development
and for each separate individual. The criterion for the verity of
thinking and cognition is public practice. In recent years the need
arose for the formation of higher form of dialectic-materialistic
outlook – “spiritual materialism”. Spiritual materialism extends the
line of classical materialism in terms of recognition of objective
character of existence, its cognoscibility, natural evolution of
substance from the lowest to the higher forms, exclusion of notions of
supernatural from scientific beliefs/notions, etc. At the same time,
spiritual materialism overcomes absolutization of superiority of
material over the spiritual, contraposition and discontinuity of these
fundamentals inherent in the former forms of materialism, and directs
towards the revelation of their unity, complex interrelation,
interpenetration, definite fixation of relations in which the material
and spiritual determine each other in the process of functioning and
development of objects. Three main laws of dialectics are: the law of
transition from quantity to quality, the law of unity and conflict of
opposites and the law of negation of negation. There is more to it than
these three major laws in dialectics. Abscque hoc, there are a number of
other dialectic laws concretizing and supplementing organic laws of
dialectics expressed in categories “substance and phenomenon”, “content
and form”, “contingency and necessity”, “cause and effect”, “possibility
and reality”, “individual, special and general”, the dialectic triad:
thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Categories and laws of dialectics
exist within a certain system in which the substance/essence of
dialectics proper is expressed.

Analysis of the decision-making methods without use of numerical values
of probability (exemplificative of the investment projects).

In practice situations are often found when it is difficult enough to
estimate the value of probability of an event. In such cases methods are
often times applied which do not involve using numerical values of
probabilities: maximax – maximization of the maximum result of the
project; maximin – maximization of the minimum result of the project;
minimax – minimization of maximum losses; compromise – Gurvitz’s
criterion: weighing of minimum and maximum results of the project. For
decision-making on realization of investment projects a matrix is built.
Matrix columns correspond to the possible states of nature, i.e.
situations which are beyond of control of the head of an enterprise.
Lines of the matrix correspond to possible alternatives of realization
of the investment project – strategies which may be chosen by the
director. The matrix cells specify the results of each strategy for each
state of nature. Example: The enterprise analyzes the investment
civil-engineering design of a line for the production of new kind of
product. There are two possibilities: the construction of a high power
capacity line or to construct low power line. Net present value of the
project depends on the demand for production, whereas the exact volume
of demand is unknown, however, it is known that there are three basic
possibilities: absence of demand, average demand and great demand. The
matrix cells (see table 1) show net present value of the project at a
certain state of nature, provided that the enterprise will choose the
appropriate strategy. The last line shows what strategy is optimum in
each state of nature. The maximax decision would be to construct a high
power capacity line: the maximum net present value will thus be 300
which correspond to the great demand situation. The maximum criterion
reflects the position of the enterprise director – the optimist ignoring
possible losses. The maximin decision, i.e. to construct a low power
line: the minimum result of this strategy is the loss of 100 (which is
better than possible loss of 200 in case of construction of a high power
capacity line). The maximin criterion reflects the position of the
director who is in no way disposed towards taking risk and is notable
for his/her extreme pessimism. This criterion is quite useful in
situations where risk is especially high (for example when the existence
of an enterprise depends on the results of the investment project).
Threat is determined by two components: possibilities and intention of
the contestant.

Table 1.

Example of construction of the matrix of strategy and states of nature
for the investment project.

StrategyState of nature : absence of demandState of nature : medium
demandState of nature : great demandConstruct a low power
line100150150Construct a high power capacity line200200300Optimum
strategy for the given state of natureConstruct a low power line

Construct a high power capacity lineConstruct a high power capacity line

To apply the minimax criterion let us construct “a matrix of regrets”
(see table 2). The cells of this matrix show the extent/value of
“regret”, i.e the difference between actual and the best results which
could have been achieved by the enterprise at the given state of nature.
“Regret” shows what is being lost by the enterprise as a result of
making wrong decision. The minimax decision corresponds to the strategy,
whereby the maximum regret is minimal. In our case of low power line
maximum regret makes 150 (in great demand situation) and for a high
power capacity line – 100 (in the absence of demand). As 100 <150, the minimax decision would be to construct a high power capacity line. The minimax criterion is oriented not so much towards actual as possible damages or loss of profit.Table 2.Example of structure of the “matrix of regrets” for minimax criterionStrategyState of nature: absence of demandState of nature: medium demand State of nature: great demandConstruct a low power line(-100) – (-100) =0200 – 150=50300 – 150=150Construct a high power capacity line(-100) – (-200) =100200 – 200=0300 – 300=0Optimum strategy for the given state of natureConstruct a low power lineConstruct a high power capacity lineConstruct a high power capacity lineGurvitz’s criterion consists in that minimum and maximum results of each strategy are assigned “weight”. Evaluation of result of each strategy equals to the sum of maximum and minimum results multiplied by corresponding weight.Let’s assume that the weight of the minimum result is equal to 0.5, the weight of the maximum result equals to 0.5 as well (it is the probabilistic characteristic; in this case probability of onset of any option of events = 50 %, as far as we have 2 options : 50 % + 50 % = 100 %; if there will be 3 options, then the ratio can be 33,33 (%) for each or, for example, 20 %, 25 % and 55 %). Then the calculation for each strategy will be the following:Low power line: 0.5 х (-100) + 0.5 х 150 = (-50) + 75 = 25;High power capacity line: 0.5 х (-200) + 0.5 х 300 = (-100) + 150 = 50.Gurvitz’s criterion testifies in favor of the construction of high power capacity line (as 50> 25). Advantage and simultaneously disadvantage of
Gurvitz’s criterion consists in the necessity of assigning weights to
the possible outcomes; it allows taking into account specificity of
situation, however, assigning weights always implies some subjectivity.
As a result of the fact that in real situations there is often lack of
information on the probabilities of outcomes the use of the above
methods in engineering of investment projects is quite justified.
However, the choice of concrete criterion depends on the specificity of
situations and individual preferences of an analyst (the company’s
strategy).

“Data mining”, getting/acquisition of information (it should be noted
that many modern “data mining” techniques focus mainly on search of
information based on key parameters (words, images, matrixes,
algorithms), but in that way we will only be able to bring out
ties/links that have already been exposed by someone else). According to
the theory of information (Stanislav Yankovsky), requisite condition of
activity of intellectual (higher) system is the redundancy of incoming
and generated information, read and think “to lay up in store/as a
reserve”, accumulate “assets” which expands your possibilities and get
rid of “liabilities” which reduce your potential. Any phenomenon should
be analyzed from the view point of what it gives to you and what it
takes from you. Even two most universal resources – money and
information (sometimes “time” is added thereto) – also limit to some
extent the possibilities of their holder. A very important point in the
evaluation of information is reliability of the source of information
and credibility of data itself. Specific code of marking information
carriers is applied for this purpose. Reliability of source: A –
absolutely reliable source; B – usually reliable source; C – quite
reliable source; D – not always reliable source; E – unreliable source;
F – reliability of source cannot be defined. Credibility of data: 1 –
credibility of data is proven by data from other sources; 2 – data are
probably correct; 3 – data are possibly correct; 4 – doubtful data; 5 –
data are improbable; 6 – credibility of data cannot be established. It
should be noted that many elements of scientific, research and
analytical activity are weakly formalizable, in which connection
practical experience in the concrete field of activity gains great
importance.

Issues recommended for independent study: the Game theory, the theory of
fields, the theory of crises, the chaos theory, the theory of
relativity, the management, strategy and tactics theories, basics of
logic and statistics – concepts, substance/essence, stereotypes,
paradoxes. See also: Software “Archivarius 3000” http://www.likasoft.com
– highly effective searcher in database on the basis of keywords.

Now, be prepared, it is going to be a little bit difficult.

Part 2. Basics of general theory of systems (GTS) and systemic analysis

The world as a whole is a system which, in turn, consists of multitude
of large and small systems. In the classical theory of systems one can
single out three various classes of objects: the primitive systems,
which structure is invariable (for example, the mathematical pendulum);
analytical systems, which almost always have fixed structure, but
sometimes undergo bifurcations – spasmodic changes of structure (simple
ecosystem); chaotic systems continually changing their structure (for
example, atmosphere of the Earth). Chaos is essentially an unstable
structural system. In this sense chaos is a synonym of changeable,
internally inconsistent, unstable developing system which cannot be
referred to analytical structures. Having established the general
principles of management in any systems, one can try to determine how
the system should be organized to work most effectively. This approach
to research of problems of management from general to particular, from
abstract to concrete is named organizational or systemic. Such approach
provides the possibility of studying of a considerable quantity of
alternative variants, the analysis of limitations and consequences of
decisions made. “The system is a set of interacting elements”, said
Berthalanfie, one of the founders of the modern General Theory of
Systems (GTS) emphasizing that the system is a structure in which
elements somehow or other affect each other (interact). Is such
definition sufficient to distinguish a system from non-system?
Obviously, it is not, because in any structure its elements passively or
actively somehow interact with each other (press, push, attract/draw,
induce, heat up, get on someone nerves, feel nervous, deceive, absorb,
etc.). Any set of elements always operates somehow or other and it is
impossible to find an object which would not make any actions. However,
these actions can be accidental, purposeless, although accidentally and
unpredictably, they can be conducive to the achievement of some goal.
Though a sign of action is the core, it determines not the concept of
the system, but one of the essential conditions of this concept. “The
system is an isolated part, a fragment of the world, the Universe,
possessing a special property emergence/emergent factor, relative
self-sufficiency (thermodynamic isolation)”, said P. Etkins. But any
object is a part or a Universe fragment, and each object differs from
the others in some special property (emergence/emergent factor – a
property which is not characteristic of simple sum of all parts of the
given system), including a place of its location, period of existence,
etc. And at that, each object is to a certain degree thermodynamically
independent, although is dependent on its environment. Hence, this
definition also defines not only a system itself, but some consequences
of systemic nature as well. Adequate/comprehensive/ definition of the
concept “system” is possibly, non-existent, because the concept
“goal/purpose” has been underestimated. Any properties of systems are
ultimately connected with the concept of goal/purpose because any system
differs from other systems in the constancy of its actions, and the
aspiration to keep this constancy is a distinctive feature of any
system. Nowadays the goal/purpose is treated as one of the elements of
behavior and conscious activity of an individual which characterizes
anticipation/vision of comprehension of the result of activity and the
way of its realization by means of certain ways and methods. The
purpose/goal acts as the way of integration of various actions of an
individual in some kind of sequence or system. So, the purpose is
interpreted as purely human factor inherent only in human being. There’s
nothing for it but to apply the concept of “purpose/goal” not only to
psychological activity of an individual, but to the concept of “system”,
because the basic distinctive feature of any system is it designation
for some purpose/goal. Any system is always intended for something, is
purposeful and serves some definite purpose/goal, and the goal is set
not only before the individual, but before each system as well,
regardless of its complexity. Nevertheless, none of definitions of a
system does practically contain the concept of purpose/goal, although it
is the aim, but not the signs of action, emergence factor or something
else, which is a system forming factor. There are no systems without
goal/purpose, and to achieve this purpose the group of elements
consolidates in a system and operates. Purposefulness is defined by a
question “What can this object do?” “The system is a complex of
discretionary involved elements jointly contributing to the achievement
of the predetermined benefit, which is assumed to be the core system
forming factor”. One can only facilitate the achievement of specific
goal, while the predetermined benefits can only be the goal. The only
thing to be clarified now is who or what determines the usefulness of
the result. In other words, who or what sets the goal before the system?
The entire theory of systems is built on the basis of four axioms and
four laws which are deduced from the axioms: axiom #1: a system always
has one consistent/invariable general goal/purpose (the principle of
system purposefulness, predestination); axiom #2: the goal for the
systems is set from the outside (the principle of goal setting for the
systems); axiom #3: to achieve the goal the system should operate in a
certain mode (the principle of systems’ performance) – law #1: the law
of conservation (the principle of consistency of systems’ performance
for the conservation of the consistency of goal/ purpose), law #2: the
law of cause-and-effect limitations (the principle of determinism of
systems’ performance), law #3: the law of hierarchies of goals/purposes
(the principle of breakdown of goal/purpose into
sub-goals/sub-purposes), law #4: the law of hierarchies of systems (the
principle of distribution of sub-goals/sub-purposes between subsystems
and the principle of subordination of subsystems); axiom №4: the result
of systems’ performance exists independently from the systems themselves
(the principle of independence of the performance result). Axiom #1: the
principle of purposefulness. At first it is necessary to determine what
meaning we attach to the concept “system”, as far as at first sight
there are at least two groups of objects”: “systems” and “non-systems”.
In which case the object presents a system? It is not likely that any
object can be a system, although both systems and non-systems consist of
a set of parts (components, elements, etc.). In some cases a heap of
sand is a structure, but not a system, although it consists of a set of
elements representing heterogeneity of density in space (grains of sand
in conjunction with hollows). However, in other cases the same heap of
sand can be a system. So, what is the difference then between the
structure-system and the structure-non-system, since after all both do
consist of elements? All objects can be divided into two big groups, if
certain equal external influence is exerted upon them: those with
consistent retaliatory actions and those with variable and unpredictable
response action. Thus, if we change external influence we then again
will get the same two groups, but their structure will change: other
objects will now be characterized by the consistency of response actions
under the influence of new factors, while those previously characterized
by such constancy under the former influencing factors will have no such
characteristics under the influence of new factors any more. Let us call
the systems those objects consisting of a set of elements and
characterized by the constancy/consistency of actions in response to
certain external influences. Those not characterized by the constancy of
response actions under the same influences may be called casual sets of
elements with respect to these influences. Hence, the concept of
“system” is relative depending on how the given group of elements reacts
to the given certain external influence. The constancy and similarity of
reaction of the interacting group of elements in respect of certain
external influence is the criterion of system. The constancy of actions
in response to certain external influence is the goal/purpose of the
given system. Hence, the goal/purpose stipulates direction of the
system’s performance. Any systems differ in constancy of
performance/actions and differ from each other in purposefulness
(predestination for something concrete). There is no system “in
general”, but there are always concrete systems intended for some
specific goals/purposes. Any object of our World differs from another
only in purpose, predetermination for something. Different systems have
different goals/purposes and they determine distinction between the
systems. Hence, the opposite conclusion may be drawn: if there any
system exists, it means it has a goal/purpose. We do not always
understand the goals/purposes of either systems, but they
(goals/purposes) are always present in any systems. We cannot tell, for
example, what for is the atom of hydrogen needed, but we can not deny
that it is necessary for the creation of polymeric organic chains or,
for example, for the formation of a molecule of water. Anyway, if we
need to construct a water molecule, we need to take, besides the atom of
oxygen, two atoms of hydrogen instead of carbon or any other element.
The system may be such group of elements only in which the result of
their general interaction differs from the results of separate actions
of each of these elements. The result may differ both qualitatively and
quantitatively. The mass of the heap of sand is more than the mass of a
separate grain of sand (quantitative difference). The room which walls
are built of bricks has a property to limit space volume which is not
the case with separate bricks (qualitative difference). Any system is
always predetermined for some purpose, but it always has one and the
same purpose. Haemoglobin as a system is always intended for the
transfer of oxygen only, a car is intended for transportation and the
juice extractor for squeezing of juice from fruit. One can use the juice
extractor made of iron to hammer in a nail, but it is not the juice
extractor system’s purpose. This constancy of purpose obliges any
systems to always operate to achieve one and the same goal predetermined
for them.

The principle of goal-setting. A car is intended for transportation, a
calculator – for calculations, a lantern – for illumination, etc. But
the goal of transportation is needed not for the car but for someone or
something external with respect to it. The car only needs its ability to
implement the function in order to achieve this goal. The goal is to
meet the need of something external in something, and this system only
implements the goal while serving this external “something”. Hence, the
goal for a system is set from the outside, and the only thing required
from the system is the ability to implement this goal. This external
“something” is another system or systems, because the World is tamped
only with systems. Goal-setting always excludes independent choice of
the goal by the system. The goal can be set to the system as the
order/command and directive. There is a difference between these
concepts. The order/command is a rigid instruction, it requires
execution of just “IT” with the preset accuracy and only “IN THAT
MANNER” and not in any other way, i.e. the system is not given the
“right” to choose actions for the achievement of the goal and all its
actions are strictly defined. Directive is a milder concept, whereby the
“IT” is set only the given or approximate accuracy, but the right to
choose actions is given to the system itself. Directive can be set only
to systems with well developed management unit/control block which can
make choice of necessary actions by itself. None of the systems does
possess free will and can set the goal before itself; it comes to it
from the outside. But are there any systems which are self-sufficient
and set the goals before themselves? For example, we, the people, are
sort of able of setting goals before ourselves and carry them out. Well
then, are we the example of independent systems? But it is not as simple
as it may seem. There is a dualism (dual nature) of one and the same
concept of goal: the goal as the task for some system and the goal as an
aspiration (desire) of this system to execute the goal set before it:
the Goal is a task representing the need of external operating system
(super system) to achieve certain predetermined result; the Goal is an
aspiration (desire) to achieve certain result of performance of the
given system always equal to the preset result (preset by order or
directive). The fundamental point is that one super system cannot set
the goal before the system (subsystem) of other super system. It can set
the goal only before this super system which becomes a subsystem in
respect of the latter. We can set the goal before ourselves, but we
always set the goal only when we are missing/lacking something, when we
suffer. Suffering is an unachieved desire. Any physiological (hunger,
thirst), aesthetic and other unachieved desires makes us suffer and
suffering forces us to aspire to act until desires are satisfied. The
depth of suffering is always equal to the intensity of desire. We want
to eat and we suffer from hunger until we satisfy this desire. As soon
as we take some food, the suffering ceases immediately. At that, the new
desire arises according to “Maslow pyramid”. Desire is our
goal-aspiration. When we realize our wish we achieve the objective/goal.
If we achieve the objective we cease to act, because the goal is
achieved and the wish disappears. If we have everything we can only
think of, we will not set any goals before ourselves, because there is
nothing to wish, since we have everything. Therefore, even a human being
with all its complexity and developmental evolution cannot be absolutely
independent of other systems (of external environment). Our goals-tasks
are always set before us by the external environment and it incites our
desire (goal-aspiration) which is dictated by shortage of something. We
are free to choose our actions to achieve the goal, but it is at this
point where we are limited by our possibilities. We do not set the
goal-task, we set the goals-aspirations. Then if it is not us, can there
be other systems which can set goals before themselves regardless of
whatsoever? Perhaps, starting from any certain level of complication the
systems can do it themselves? Such examples are unknown to us. For any
however large and difficult system there might be another, even higher
system found which will dictate the former its goals and conditions.
Nature is integrated and almost put in (good) order. It is “almost” put
in order, because at the level of quantum phenomena there is probably
some uncertainty and unpredictability, i.e. unconformity of the
phenomena to our knowledge of physical laws (for example, tunnel
effects). It is this unpredictability which is the cause of
contingencies and unpredictability. Contingency /stochasticity and
purposefulness are mutually exclusive.

Principle of performance of action. Any system is intended for any well
defined and concrete goal specific for it, and for this purpose it
performs only specific (target-oriented) actions. Hence, the goal of a
system is the aspiration to perform certain purposeful actions for the
achievement of target-oriented (appropriate) result of action. The plane
is designed for air transportation, but cannot float; for this purpose
there is an amphibian aircraft. The result of aircraft performance is
moving by air. This result of action is expectable and predictable. The
constancy and predictability of functional performance is a distinctive
feature of any systems – living, natural, social, financial, technical,
etc. Consequently, in order to achieve the goal any object of our World
should function, make any purposeful actions, operations (in this case
the purposeful, deliberate inaction is in some sense an action, too).
Action is manifestation of some energy, activity, as well as force
itself, the functioning of something; condition, process arising in
response to some influence, stimulant/irritant, impression (for example,
reaction in psychology, chemical reactions, nuclear reactions). The
object’s action is followed by the result of action (not always
expected, but always logical and conditioned). The purpose of any system
is the aspiration to yield appropriate (targeted) result of action. At
that, the given object is the donor of the result of action. The result
of action of donor system can be directed towards any other system which
in this case will be the recipient (target) for the result of action. In
this case the result of action of the donor system becomes the external
influence for the recipient system. Interaction between the systems is
carried out only through the results of action. In that way the chain of
actions is built as follows: … ? (external influence) ? result of
action (external influence) ?… The system produces single result of
action for single external influence. No object operates in itself. It
cannot decide on its own “Here now I will start to operate” because it
has no freedom of will and it cannot set the goal before itself and
produce the result of action on its own. It can only react (act) in
response to certain external influence. Any actions of any objects are
always their reaction to something. Any influence causes
response/reaction. Lack of influence causes no reaction. Reaction can
sometimes be delayed, therefore it may seem causeless. But if one digs
and delves, it is always possible to find the cause, i.e. external
influence. Cognition of the world only falls to our lot through the
reactions of its elements. Reaction (from Latin “re” – return and
“actio” – action) is an action, condition, process arising in response
to some influence, irritant/stimulant, impression (for example, reaction
in psychology, chemical reactions, nuclear reactions). Consequently, the
system’s action in response to the external influence is the reaction of
the system. When the system has worked (responded) and the required
result of action has been received, it means that it has already
achieved (“quenched”) the goal and after that it has no any more goal to
aspire to. Reaction is always secondary and occurs only and only
following the external influence exerted upon the element. Reaction can
sometimes occur after a long time following the external influence if,
for example, the given element has been specially “programmed” for the
delay. But it will surely occur, provided that the force of the external
influence exceeds the threshold of the element’s sensitivity to the
external influence and that the element is capable to respond to the
given influence in general. If the element is able of reacting to
pressure above 1 atmosphere it will necessarily react if the pressure is
in excess of 1 atmosphere. If the pressure is less than 1 atmosphere it
will not react to the lower pressure. If it is influenced by
temperature, humidity or electric induction, it will also not react,
howsoever we try to “persuade” it, as it is only capable to react to
pressure higher than 1 atmosphere. In no pressure case (no pressure
above 1 atmosphere), it will never react. Since the result of the
system’s performance appears only following some external influence, it
is always secondary, because the external influence is primary. External
influence is the cause and the result of action is a consequence
(function). It is obvious that donor systems can produce one or several
results of action, while the recipient systems may only react to one or
several external influences. But donor elements can interact with the
recipient systems only in case of qualitatively homogeneous actions. If
the recipient systems can react only to pressure, then the systems able
of interacting with them may be those which result of action is
pressure, but not temperature, electric current or something else.
Interaction between donor systems and recipient systems is only possible
in case of qualitative uniformity (homoreactivity, the principle of
homogeneous interactivity). We can listen to the performance of the
musician on a stage first of all because we have ears. The earthworm is
not able to understand our delight from the performance of the musician
at least for the reason that it has no ears, it cannot perceive a sound
and it has no idea about a sound even if (hypothetically) it could have
an intelligence equal to ours. The result of action of the recipient
element can be both homogeneous (homoreactive) and non-homogeneous,
unequal in terms of quality of action (heteroreactive) of external
influence in respect of it. For example, the element reacts to pressure,
and its result of action can be either pressure or temperature, or
frequency, or a stream/flow of something, or the number of inhabitants
of the forest (apartment, city, country) etc. Hence, the reaction of an
element to the external influence can be both homoreactive and
heteroreactive. In the first case the elements are the action
transmitters, in the second case they are converters of quality of
action. If the result of the system’s actions completely corresponds to
the implementation of goal, it speaks of the sufficiency of this system
(the given group of interacting elements) for the given purpose. If not,
the given group of elements mismatches the given goal/purpose and/or is
insufficient, or is not the proper system for the achievement of a
degree of quality and quantity of the preset goal. Therefore, any
existing object can be characterized by answering the basic question:
“What can the given object do?” This question characterizes the concept
of the “result of action of an object” which in turn consists of two
subquestions: What action can be done by given object? (the quality of
result of action); How much of such action can be done by the given
object? (the quantity of result of action). These two subquestions
characterize the aspiration of a system to implement the goal. And the
goal-setting may be characterized by answering another question: “What
should the given object do?” which also consists of two subquestions:
what action should the given object do? (the quality of the result of
action); how much of such action should the given object do? (the
quantity of the result of action). These last two subquestions are the
ones that determine the goal as a task (the order/command, the
instruction) for the given object or group of objects, and the system is
being sought or built to achieve this goal. The closer the
correspondence between what should and what can be done by the given
object, the closer the given object is to the ideal system. The real
result of action of the system should correspond to preset (expected)
result. This correspondence is the basic characteristic of any system.
Wide variety of systems may be built of a very limited number of
elements. All the diverse material physical universe is built of various
combinations of protons, electrons and neutrons and these combinations
are the systems with specific goals/purposes. We do not know the taste
of protons, neutrons and electrons, but we do know the taste of sugar
which molecular atoms are composed of these elements. Same elements are
the constructional material of both the human being and a stone. The
result of the action of pendulum would be just swaying, but not
secretion of hormones, transmission of impulse, etc. Hence, its
goal/purpose and result of action is nothing more but only swaying at
constant frequency. The symphonic orchestra can only play pieces of
music, but not build, fight or merchandize, etc. Generator of random
numbers should generate only random numbers. If all of a sudden it
starts generate series of interdependent numbers, it will cease to be
the generator of random numbers. Real and ideal systems differ from each
other in that the former always have additional properties determined by
the imperfection of real systems. Massive golden royal seal, for
example, may be used to crack nuts just as well as by means of a hammer
or a plain stone, but it is intended for other purpose. Therefore, as it
has already been noted above, the concept of “system” is relative, but
not absolute, depending on correspondence between what should and what
can be done by the given object. If the object can implement the goal
set before it, it is the system intended for the achievement of this
goal. If it cannot do so, it is not the system for the given goal, but
can be a system intended for other goals. It does not mater for the
achievement of the goal what the system consists of, but what is
important is what it can do. In any case the possibility to implement
the goal determines the system. Therefore, the system is determined not
by the structure of its elements, but by the extent of
precision/accuracy of implementation of the expected result. What is
important is the result of action, rather than the way it was achieved.
Absolutely different elements may be used to build the systems for the
solution of identical problems (goals). The sum of US$200 in the form of
US$1 value coins each and the check for the same amount can perform the
same action (may be used to make the same purchase), although they
consist of different elements. In one case it is metal disks with the
engraved signs, while in other case it is a piece of a paper with the
text drawn on it. Hence, they are systems named “money” with identical
purposes, provided that they may be used for purchase and sale without
taking into account, for example, conveniences of carrying them over or
a guarantee against theft. But the more conditions are stipulated, the
less number of elements are suitable for the achievement of the goal. If
we, for example, need large amount of money, say, US$1.000.000 in cash,
and want it not to be bulky and the guarantee that it is not counterfeit
we will only accept US$100 bank notes received only from bank. The more
the goal is specified, the less is the choice of elements suitable for
it. Thus, the system is determined by the correspondence of the goal set
to the result of its action. The goal is both the task for an object
(what it should make) and its aspiration or desire (what it aspires to).
If the given group of elements can realize this goal, it is a system for
the achievement of the goal set. If it cannot realize this goal, it is
not the system intended for the achievement of the given goal, although
it can be the system for the achievement of other goals. The system
operates for the achievement of the goal. Actually, the system
transforms through its actions the goal into the result of action, thus
spending its energy. Look around and everything you’ll see are someone’s
materialized goals and realized desires. On a large scale everything
that populates our World is systems and just systems, and all of them
are intended for a wide range of various purposes. But we do not always
know the purposes of many of these systems and therefore not all objects
are perceived by us as systems. Reactions of systems to similar external
influences are always constant, because the goal is always determined
and constant. Therefore, the result of action should always be
determined, i.e. identical and constant (a principle of consistency of
correspondence of the system’s action result to the appropriate result),
and for this purpose the system’s actions should be the same (the
principle of a constancy of correspondence of actual actions of the
system to the due ones). If the result fails to be constant it cannot be
appropriate and equal to the preset result (the principle of
consistency/permanency of the result of action). The conservation law
proceeds/results/ from the principle of consistency/permanency of
action. Let us call the permanency of reaction “purposefulness”, as
maintaining the similarity (permanency/consistency) of reaction is the
goal of a system. Hence, the law of conservation is determined by the
goal/purpose. The things conserved would be those only, which correspond
to the achievement of the system’s goal. This includes both actions per
se and the sequence of actions and elements needed to perform these
actions, and the energy spent for the performance of these actions,
because the system would seek to maintain its movement towards the goal
and this movement will be purposeful. Therefore, the purpose determines
the conservation law and the law of cause-and-effect limitations (see
below), rather than other way round. The conservation law is one of the
organic, if not the most fundamental, laws of our universe. One of
particular consequences of the conservation law is that the substance
never emerges from nothing and does not transform into nothing (the law
of conservation of matter). It always exists. It might have been
non-existent before origination of the World, if there was origination
of the World per se, and it might not be existent after its end, if it
is to end, but in our World it does neither emerge, nor disappear. A
matter is substance and energy. The substance (deriving from the /Rus/
word “thing”, “object” ) may exist in various combinations of its forms
(liquid, solid, gaseous and other, as well as various bodies), including
the living forms. But matter is always some kind of objects, from
elementary particles to galaxies, including living objects.Substance
consists of elements. Some forms of substances may turn into others
(chemical, nuclear and other structural transformations) at the expense
of regrouping of elements by change of ties between them. Physical form
of the conservation law is represented by Einstein’s formula. A
substance may turn into energy and other way round. Energy (from Greek
“energeia” – action, activity) is the general quantitative measure of
movement and interaction of all kinds of matter. Energy in nature does
not arise from anything and does not disappear; it only can change its
one form into another. The concept of energy brings all natural
phenomena together. Interaction between the systems or between the
elements of systems is in effect the link between them. From the
standpoint of system, energy is the measure (quantity) of interaction
between the elements of the system or between the systems which needs to
be accomplished for the establishment of link between them. For example,
one watt may be material measure of energy. Measures of energy in other
systems, such as social, biological, mental and other, are not yet
developed. Any objects represent the systems, therefore interactions
between them are interactions between the systems. But systems are
formed at the expense of interaction between their elements and
formations of inter-element relations between them. In the process of
interaction between the systems intersystem relations are established.
Any action, including interaction, needs energy. Therefore, when
establishing relations/links/ the energy is being “input”. Consequently,
as interaction between the elements of the system or different systems
is the relation/link between them, the latter is the energy-related
concept. In other words, when creating a system from elements and its
restructuring from simple into complex, the energy is spent for the
establishment of new relations /links /connections between the elements.
When the system is destructed the links between the elements collapse
and energy is released. Systems are conserved at the expense of energy
of relations/links between its elements. It is the internal energy of a
system. When these relations/links are destructed the energy is
released, but the system itself as an object disappears. Consequently,
the internal energy of a system is the energy of relations/link between
the elements of the system. In endothermic reactions the energy used for
the establishment of connections/links/relations comes to the system
from the outside. In exothermic reactions internal energy of the system
is released at the expense of rupture of these connections between its
internal own elements which already existed prior to the moment when
reaction occurred. But when the connection is already formed, by virtue
of conservation law its energy is not changed any more, if no influence
is exerted upon the system. For example, in establishing of
connections/links between the two nuclei of deuterium (2D2) the nucleus
1Не4 is formed and the energy is released (for the purpose of simplicity
details are omitted, for example, reaction proton-proton). And the 1Не4
nucleus mass becomes slightly less than the sum of masses of two
deuterium nuclei by the value multiple of the energy released, in
accordance with the physical expression of the conservation law. Thus,
in process of merge of deuterium nuclei part of their intra-nuclear
bonds collapses and it is for this reason that the merge of these nuclei
becomes possible. The energy of connection between the elements of
deuterium nuclei is much stronger than that of the bond between the two
deuterium nuclei. Therefore, when part of connections between elements
of deuterium nuclei is destructed the energy is released, part of it
being used for thermonuclear synthesis, i.e. the establishment of
connection/bond between the two deuterium nuclei (extra-nuclear
connection/bond in respect to deuterium nuclei), while other part is
released outside helium nucleus. But our World is tamped not only with
matter. Other objects, including social, spiritual, cultural,
biological, medical and others, are real as well. Their reality is
manifested in that they can actively influence both each other and other
kinds of matter (through the performance of other systems and human
beings). And they also exist and perform not chaotically, but are
subjected to specific, though strict laws of existence. The law of
conservation applies to them as well, because they possess their own
kinds of “energy” and they did not come into being in a day, but may
only turn one into another. Any system can be described in terms of
qualitative and quantitative characteristics. Unlike material objects,
the behavior of other objects can be described nowadays only
qualitatively, as they for the present the have no their own
“thermodynamics”, for example, “psychodynamics”. We do not know, for
example, what quantity of “Watt” of spiritual energy needs to be applied
to solve difficult psychological problem, but we know that spiritual
energy is needed for such a solution. Nevertheless, these objects are
the full-value systems as well, and they are structured based on the
same principles as other material systems. As systems are the groups of
elements, and changes of forms of substances represent the change of
connections/bonds between the elements of substance, then changes of
forms of substances represent the changes of forms of systems. Hence,
the form is determined by the specificity of connections/bonds/ties
between the elements of systems. “Nothing in this world lasts for ever”,
the world is continually changing, whereby one kind of forms of matter
turn into other, but it is only forms that vary, while matter is
indestructible and always conserved. At the same time, alteration of
forms is also subjected to the law of conservation and it is this law
that determines the way in which one kind of forms should replace other
forms of matter. Forms only alter on account of change of
connections/ties between the elements of systems. As far as each
connection between the system elements has energetic equivalent, any
system contains internal energy which is the sum of energies of
connections/bonds between all elements. The “form: (Latin, philos.) is a
totality of relations determining the object. The form is contraposed to
matter, the content of an object. According to Aristotle, the form is
the actuating force that forms the objects and exists beyond the latter.
According to Kant, form is everything brought in by the subject of
cognition to the content of the cognizable matter – space, time and
substance of the form of cognitive ability; all categories of thinking:
quantity, quality, relation, substance, place, time, etc., are forms,
the product of ability of abstraction, formation of general concepts of
our intellect. However, these are not quite correct definitions. The
form cannot be contraposed to matter because it is inseparably linked
with the latter, it is the form of matter itself. The form cannot be a
force either, although it probably pertains to energy because it is
determined by energy-bearing connections within the system. According to
Kant, form is a purely subjective concept, as it only correlates with
intellectual systems and their cognitive abilities. Why, do not the
forms exist without knowing them? Any system has one or other shape/look
of form. And the system’s form is determined by type and nature of
connections/relations/bonds between the system elements. Therefore, the
form is a kind of connections between the system elements. Since the
systems may interact, new connections/bonds between them are thus
established and new forms of systems emerge. In other words, in process
of interaction between the systems new systems emerge as new forms. The
energy is always expended in the course of interaction between the
systems. Logic form of the conservation law is the law of
cause-and-effect limitations because it is corresponded by a logical
connective “if….., then….” Possible choice of external influences
(causes) to which the system should react is limited by the first part
of this connective “if…”, whereas the actions of systems
(consequences) are limited by the second part “then…”. It is for this
reason that the law is called the law of cause-and-effect limitations.
This law reads “Any consequence has its cause /every why has a
wherefore/”. Nothing appears without the reason/cause and nothing
disappears for no special reason/cause. There are no consequences
without the reason/cause, there is no reaction without the influence. It
is unambiguousness and certainty of reaction of systems to the external
influence that lays the cornerstone of determinism in nature. Every
specific cause is followed by specific consequence. The system should
always react only to certain external influences and always react only
in a certain way. Chemoreceptor intended for О2 would always react only
to О2, but not to Na +, Ca ++ or glucose. At that, it will give out
certain potential of action, rather than a portion of hormone,
mechanical contraction or something else. Any system differs in
specificity of the external influence and specificity of the reaction.
The certainty of external influences and the reactions to them imposes
limitations on the types of the latter. Therefore, the need in the
following arises from the law of cause-and-effect limitations: execution
of any specific (certain) action to achieve specific (certain) purpose;
existence of any specific (certain) system (subsystem) for the
implementation of such action, as no action occurs by itself; sequences
of actions: the system would always start to perform and produce the
result of action only after external influence is exerted on it because
it does not have free will for making decision on the implementation of
the action. Hence, the result of the system performance can always
appear only after certain actions are done by the system. These actions
can only be done following the external influence. External influence is
primary and the result of action is secondary. Of all possible actions
those will be implemented only which are caused by external influence
and limited (stipulated) by the possibilities of the responding system.
If, following the former external influence, the goal is already
achieved and there is no new external influence after delivery of the
result of action, the system should be in a state of absolute rest and
not operate, because it is only the goal that makes the system operate,
and this goal is already achieved. No purpose – no actions. If new
external influence arises a new goal appears as well, and then the
system will start again to operate and new result of action will be
produced.

Major characteristics of systems. To carry out purposeful actions the
system should have appropriate elements. It is a consequence of the laws
of conservation and cause-and-effect limitations since nothing occurs by
itself. Therefore, any systems are multi-component objects and their
structure is not casual. The structure of systems in many respects
determines their possibilities to perform certain actions. For example,
the system made of bricks can be a house, but cannot be a computer. But
it is not the structure only that determines the possibilities of
systems. Strictly determined specific interaction between them
determined by their mutual relation is required. Two hands can make what
is impossible to make by one hand or “solitary” hands, if one can put it
in that way. The hand of a monkey has same five fingers as a hand of a
human being does. But the hand of a human being coupled with its
intellect has transformed the world on the Earth. Two essential signs
thereby determine the quality and quantity of results of action of any
systems – the structure of elements and their relations. Any object has
only two basic characteristics: what and how much work/many things/ it
can do. New quality can only be present in the group of elements
interacting in a specific defined mode/manner. “Defined” means
target-oriented. “Interacting in a defined mode/manner” means having
definite goal, being constructed and operating in a definite mode/manner
for the achievement of the given goal. Defined mode/manner cannot be
found/inherent in separate given elements and randomly interacting
elements. As a result of certain interaction of elements part of their
properties would be neutralized and other part used for the achievement
of the goal. Transformation of one set of forms of a matter into others
occurs for the account of neutralization of some properties of these
forms of a matter. And neutralization occurs for the account of change
of some connections/bonds between the elements of an object, as these
connections/bonds determine the form of an object. For this reason we
say “would be neutralized” rather than “destroyed”, because nothing in
this world does disappear and appear (the conservation law). The whole
world consists of protons, neutrons and electrons, but we see various
objects which differ in color, consistence, taste, form, molecular and
atomic composition, etc. It means that in the course of specific
interaction of protons, neutrons and electrons certain inter-elementary
connections are established. At that, some of their properties would be
neutralized, while others conserved or even amplified in such a manner
that the whole of diversity of our world stems from it. The goal of any
system is the fulfillment of the preset (defined) condition, achievement
of the preset result of action (goal/objective). If the preset result of
action came out incidentally, then the next moment it might not be
achieved and the designated/preset result would disappear. But if for
some reason there is a need in the result of action being always exactly
identical to this one and not to any other (goal-setting), it is
necessary that the group of interacting elements retain this new result
of action. To this end the given group of elements should continually
seek to retain the designated/preset condition (implementation of
goal/objective).

Simple systemic functional unit (SFU). The system may consist of any
quantity of functional elements/executive component, provided that each
of the latter can participate (contribute to) the achievement of the
goal/objective and the quantity of such components is sufficient enough
for realization of this goal. The minimal system is such group of “k”
elements which, in case of removal of at least one of the elements from
its structure, loses the quality inherent in this group of elements, but
not present in any of the given “k” elements. Such group of elements is
a simple systemic functional unit (simple, not composite SFU), the
minimal elementary system having some property (ability to make action)
which is not present in any of its separate elements. Any SFU reacts to
external influence under the “all-or-none” law. This law is resulting
from the definition of simple SFU (removal of any of its elements would
terminate its function as a system) and discrecity of its structure. Any
of its elements may either be or not be a part of simple SFU. And since
simple SFU by definition consists of finite and minimal set of function
elements and all of them should be within the SFU structure and be
functional (operational), termination of functioning of any of these
elements would terminate the function of the entire SFU as a system.
Regardless of the force of external influence, but given the condition
of its being in excess of a certain threshold, the result of its
performance will be maximal, ( “all”). If there is no external
influence, the SFU would nowise prove out (would not react, “none”).
Simple SFU, despite its name, may be arbitrary complex – from elementary
minimal SFU to maximal complex ones. The molecule of any substance
consists of several atoms. Removal of any atom transforms this molecule
from one substance into another. And even each atom represents a very
complex constitution. Removal of any of its elements transforms it into
an ion, other atom or other isotope. A soldier is a simple SFU of the
system called “the army”. A soldier is a human being’s body plus full
soldier’s outfit. The body of a human being is an extremely complex
object, but removal of any of its parts would render the soldier
invalid. At that, the soldier’s outfit/equipment is multi-component as
well. But the equipment cannot shoot without man and the man cannot
shoot without the equipment. They can only carry out together the
functions inherent in SFU named “soldier”. Despite the internal
complexity which may be however big, simple SFU is a separate element
which looks as a whole unit with certain single property (quality) to
fulfill one certain action elementary in relation to the entire system,
i.e. to grasp a ball, molecule, push a portion of blood, produce
force/load of 0.03 grams, provide living conditions for the animal (for
example, one specific unit of forest area) or to an individual
(apartment), fire a shot, etc. Any SFU, once it is divided into parts,
ceases to be an SFU for the designated goal. It is due to interaction of
the parts only that the group of elements can show its worth as SFU.
When something breaks a good owner would always think at first where in
his household the fragments may be applied and only thereafter he would
throw them out, because one broken thing (one SFU) can be transformed
into another, more simple one (another SFU). Haemoglobin is an element
of blood circulation system and serves for capturing and subsequent
return of oxygen. Hence, haemoglobin molecules are the SFU of
erythrocytes. Ligands of haemoglobin molecules are the SFU of
haemoglobin, as each of them can serve a trap for oxygen molecules.
However, further division of ligand brings to a stop the function of
retention of oxygen molecules, etc. The SFU analogues in an inorganic
nature/abiocoen are, for example, all material particles possessing
ability to lose their properties when dividing – elementary particles
(?), atoms, molecules, etc. Viruses may probably be the systemic
functional units of heredity (FUH). Thus, it is likely that at first
polymeric molecules of DNA type came into being in the claypan strata or
even in the interplanetary dust or on comets, based on a type of
auto-catalytic Butler’s reaction, i.e. synthesis of various sugars
including ribose from formaldehyde in the presence of Ca and Mg ions,
ribose being a basis for the creation of RNA and DNA, and thereafter
cellular structures emerged. These examples of various concrete SFU show
that SFU is not something indivisible, since each of them is
multicomponent and therefore can be divided into parts. Only
intra-atomic elementary particles may pretend to be true SFU that are
the basis of the whole of matter of our entire world as it is still
impossible to split them into parts. It is for this reason that they are
called elementary. It may well be that they are of a very complex
structure, too, but formed not from the elements of physical nature, but
of some different matter, and are the result of action of performance of
systems of non-physical nature, or rather not of the forms of the World
of ours. It is indicative of the existence of binate virtual particles,
for example, positron and electron, emerging ostensibly from emptiness,
vacuum and disappearing thereto after all. We cannot cut paper with
scissors made of the same paper material. It’s unlikely that we can
“cut” elementary particles with the “scissors” made of the same matter
either.

Elementary block of management (direct positive connection/bond, DPC).
In order for any SFU to be able to perform it should contain certain
elements for implementation of its actions according to the laws of
conservation and cause-and-effect limitations. To implement
target-oriented actions the system should contain performance
/“executive”/ elements and in order to render the executive element’s
interaction target-oriented, the system should contain the elements
(block) of management/control. Executive elements (effectors) carry out
certain (target-oriented) action of a system to ensure the achievement
of the preset result of action. The result of action would not come out
by itself. In order to achieve it performance of certain objects is
required. On the example of plain with a feeler /trial balloon/ such
elements are plains themselves. But it (the executive element) exists on
itself and produces its own results of action in response to certain
influences external with respect to it. It will react if something
influences upon it and will not react in the absence of any influence.
Interaction with its other elements would pertain to it so far as the
results of action of other elements are the external influence in
respect of it per se and may invoke its reaction in response to these
influences. This reaction will already be shown in the form of its own
result of action which would also be the external influence in respect
to other elements of the system, and no more than that. Not a single
action of any element of the system can be the result of action of the
system itself by definition. It does not matter for any separate
executive element whether or not the preset condition (the goal of the
system) was fulfilled haphazardly, whether or not the given group of
elements produced a qualitatively new preset result of action or
something prevented it from happening. It in no way affects the way the
executive elements “feel”, i.e. their own functions, and none of their
inherent property would force them to “watch” the fulfillment of the
general goal of the system. They are simply “not able” of doing so. The
elements of management (the control block) are needed for the
achievement of the particular preset result, rather than of any other
result of action. Since the goal is the reaction in response to specific
external influence, at first there is a need to “feel” it, to segregate
it from the multitude of other nonspecific external influences, “make
decision” on any specific actions and begin to perform. If, for example,
the SFU reacts to pressure it should be able to “feel” just pressure
(reception), rather than temperature or something else. For this purpose
it should have a special “organ” (receptor) which is able of doing so.
In order to react only to specific external influence which may pertain
to the fulfillment of the goal, the SFU should not only have reception,
but also single it out from all other external influences affecting it
(selection). For this purpose it should have a special organ (selector
or analyzer) which is able to segregate the right signal from a
multitude of others. Thereafter, having “felt” and segregated the
external influence, it should “make decision” that there is a need to
act (decision-making). For this purpose it should have a special or
decision-making organ able of making decisions. Then it should realize
this decision, i.e. force the executive elements to act (implementation
of decision). For this purpose it should have elements (stimulators)
with the help of which it would be possible to communicate decision to
the executive elements. Therefore, in order to react to certain external
influence and to achieve the required result of action it is necessary
to accomplish the following chain of guiding actions: reception ?
selection ? decision-making ? implementation of decisions (stimulation).
What elements should carry out this chain of guiding actions? The
executive elements (for example, plains) cannot do it, because they
perform the action per se, for example, the capturing action, but not
guiding actions. For this reason they are also called executive
elements. All guiding actions should be accomplished by guiding elements
(the control block) and these should be a part of SFU. The control block
consists of: “X” receptor (segregates specific signal and detects the
presence of external influence); afferent channels (transfer of
information from the receptor to analyzer); the analyzer-informant (on
the basis of the information from the “Х” receptor makes decisions on
the activation of executive elements); efferent cannels (of a
stimulator) (implementation of decision, channeling of the guiding
actions to the effectors).

The “Х” receptor, afferent channels, analyzer-informant (activator of
action) and efferent channels (stimulator) comprise the control block.
The receptor and afferent channels represent direct positive
communication (DPC). It is direct because inside SFU the guiding signal
(information on the presence of external influence) goes in the same
direction as the external influence itself. It is positive because if
there is a signal there is a reaction, if there is no signal, there is
no reaction. Thus, the SFU control block reacts to the external
influence. It can feel and detect/segregate specific signal of external
influence from the multitude of other external influences and depending
on the presence or absence of specific signal it may decide whether or
not it should undertake its own action. Its own action is the inducement
(stimulation) of the executive elements to operate. There exist
uncontrollable and controllable SFU. The control block of uncontrollable
SFU decides whether or not it should act, and it would make such
decision only depending on the presence of the external influence. The
control block of controllable SFU would also decide whether or not it
should act depending on the presence of the external signal and in the
presence of additional condition as well, i.e. the permission to perform
this action which is communicated to its command entry point. The
uncontrollable SFU has one entry point for the external influence and
one outlet /exit point/ for the result of action. The logic of work of
such SFU is extremely simple: it would act if there is certain external
influence (result of action), and no result of action is produced in the
absence of external influence. For uncontrollable SFU the action
regulator is the external influence itself. It has its own management
which function is performed by the internal control block. But external
management with such SFU is impossible. It would “decide” on its own
whether or not it should act. That is why it is called uncontrollable.
This decision would only depend on the presence of external influence.
In the presence of external influence it would function and no external
decision (not the influence) can change the internal decision of this
SFU. The uncontrollable SFU is independent of external decisions. It
will perform the action once it “made a decision”. The example of
uncontrollable SFU is, for instance, the nitroglycerine molecule (SFU
for micro-explosion). If it is shaken (external influence is shaking) it
will start to disintegrate, thereby releasing energy, and during this
process nothing would stop its disintegration. The analogues of
uncontrollable SFU in a living organism are sarcomeres, ligands of
haemoglobin, etc. Once sarcomere starts to reduce, it would not stop
until the reduction is finished. Once the ligand of haemoglobin starts
capturing oxygen, it would not stop until the capturing process is
finished. Unlike uncontrollable SFU, the controllable SFU have two entry
points (one for the entry of external influence and another one for the
entry of the command to the analyzer) and one outlet/exit point/ for the
result of action. The logic of work of controllable SFU is slightly
different from that of the uncontrollable SFU. Such SFU will produce the
result of action not only depending on the presence of the external
influence, but the presence of permission at the command entry point.
Implementation of action will start in the presence of certain external
influence and permission at the command entry point. The action would
not be performed in the presence of the external influence and the
absence of permission at the command entry point. For the controllable
SFU the action regulator is the permission at the command entry point.
That is why such SFU are called controllable. The analogues of
controllable SFU in a living organism are, for example, pulmonary
functional ventilation units (FVU) or functional perfusion units (FPU),
histic functional perfusion units (FPU), secretion functional units
(cells of various secretion glands, SFU), kidney nephrons, liver
acinuses, etc. The control block’s elements are built of (assembled
from) other ordinary elements suitable in terms of their
characteristics. It can be built both of executive elements combined in
a certain manner and simultaneously performing the function of both
execution and management, and from other executive elements not
belonging to the given group and segregated in a separate chain of
management. In the latter case they may be precisely the same as
executive elements, but may be made of other elements as well. For
example, muscular contraction functional units consist of muscular
cells, but are managed by nervous centers consisting of nerve cells. At
the same time, all kinds of cells, both nerve and muscular, are built of
almost identical building materials – proteins, fats, carbohydrates and
minerals. The difference between the controllable and uncontrollable FSU
is only in the availability of command entry point. It is it that
determines the change of the algorithm of its work. Performance of the
controllable SFU depends not only on the external influence, but on the
M disabling at the command entry point. The control block is very
simple, if it contains only DPC (the “Х” receptor and afferent
channels), the analyzer-informant and a stimulator. SFU are primary
cells, executive elements of any systems. As we can see, despite their
elementary character, they represent a fairly complex and
multi-component object. Each of them contains not less than two types of
elements (management/control and executive) and each type includes more
and more, but these elements are mandatory attributes of any SFU. The
SFU complexity is the complexity of hierarchy of their elements. There
is no any special difference between the executive elements and the
elements of management/control. Ultimately all in this world consists
of electrons, protons and neutrons. The difference between them lies
only in their position in the hierarchy of systems, i.e. in their
positional relationship. The composite SFU contains 4 simple SFU. In the
absence of the external influence all simple SFU are inactive and no
result of action is produced. In the presence of the external influence
of “Х”, if the command says “no” (disabling of /ban on action), all SFU
would be inactive and no result of action produced. In the presence of
external influence and if the command says “yes” (permission for
action), all SFU would be active and the result of action produced. The
“capacity” of the composite SFU is 4 times higher than the “capacity” of
simple SFU. SFU is activated through the inputs of command of their
control blocks. Every simple SFU has its own DPC and DPC common for all
of them. Uncontrollable and controllable SFU may be used to build other
(composite) SFU, more powerful than single SFU. In the real world there
are few simple SFU which bring about minimal indivisible result of
action. There are a lot more of composite SFU. For instance, the
cartridge filled with grains of gunpowder is a constituent part of SFU
(SFU for a shot), but its explosion energy is much higher that that of
single grain of gunpowder. The composite SFU flow diagram is very
similar to that of simple SFU. It is only quantity variance that
stipulates the difference between the composite and simple SFU. Simple
SFU contains only one SFU, just SFU itself, whereas the composite SFU
contains several SFU, so there is a possibility of strengthening of the
result of action. Thus, simple and composite SFU contain two types of
elements: executive elements (effectors performing specific actions for
the achievement of the system’s preset ovearll goal) and the elements of
management (block) (DPC, the analyzer-informant and the stimulator
activating SFU). Composite SFU has the same control block as the
separate SFU, i.e. the elementary one with direct positive (guiding)
connection (DPC). Composite SFU perform based on the “all-or-none”
principle, too, i.e. they either produce maximal result of action in
response to external influence or wait for this external influence and
do not perform any actions. Composite SFU only differ from simple SFU in
the force or amplitude of reaction which is proportional to the number
of simple SFU. If the domino dices are placed in a sequential row the
result of their action would be the lasting sound of the falling dices
which duration would be equal to the sum of series of drops of every
dice (extension of duration of the result of action). If the domino
dices are placed in a parallel row the result of their action would be
the short, but loud sound equal to the total sound volume resulting from
the drop of each separate dice (capacity extension). The performance
cycle of an ideal simple and composite SFU is formed by micro cycles:
perception and selection of external influence by the “X” receptor and
decision-making; influence on the executive elements (SFU);
response/operation of executive elements (SFU); function termination.
The “X” receptor starts to operate following the onset of external
influence (the 1st micro cycle). Subsequently some time would be spent
for the decision-making, since this decision itself is the result of
action of certain SFU comprising the control block (the 2nd micro
cycle). Thereafter all SFU would be activated (joined in) (the 3rd micro
cycle). The operating time of the SFU response/operation depends on the
speed of utilization of energy spent for the SFU performance, for
example, the speed of reduction of sarcomere in a muscular cell which is
determined by speed of biochemical reactions in the muscular cell. After
that all SFU terminate their function (the 4th micro cycle). At that,
the SFU spends its entire energy it had and could use to perform this
action. As far as the sequence of actions and result of action would
always be the same, the measure of energy would always be the same as
well (energy quantum). In order for the SFU to be able to perform a new
action it needs to be “recharged”. It may also take some time (the time
of charging). The way it happens is discussed in the section devoted to
passive and active systems (see below). Any SFU’s performance cycle
consists of these micro cycles. Therefore, its operating cycle time
would always be the same and equal to the sum of these micro cycles.
Once SFU started its actions, it would not stop until it has
accomplished its full cycle. This is the reason of uncontrollability of
any SFU in the course of their performance (absolute adiaphoria),
whereby the external influence may quickly finish and resume, but it
would not stop and react to the new external influence until the SFU has
finished its performance. In real composite SFU these micro cycles may
be supplemented by micro cycles caused by imperfection of real objects,
for example, non-synchronism of the executive elements’ operation due to
their dissimilarity. Hence, it follows that even the elementary systems
represented by SFU do not react/operate immediately and they need some
time to produce the result of action. It is this fact that explains the
inertness/lag effect/ of systems which can be measured by using the time
constant parameter. But generally speaking it is not inertness/lag
effect/, but rater a transitory (intermittent) inertness of an object
(adiaphoria), its inability to respond to the external influence at
certain phases of its performance. True inertness is explained by
independence of the result of action of the system which produced this
result (see below). Time constant is the time between the onset of
external influence and readiness for a new external influence after the
achievement of the result of action. The analogues of composite SFU are
all objects which operate similarly to avalanche. The “domino principle”
works in such cases. One impact brings about the downfall of the whole.
However, the number of downfalls would be equal to the number of SFU.
Pushing one domino dice will cause its drop resulting just in one click.
Pushing a row of domino dices will result in as many clicks as is the
number of dices in the row. Biological analogues of composite SFU are,
for example, functional ventilation units (FVU), each of which
consisting of large group (several hundred) of alveoli which are
simultaneously joining in process of ventilation or escape from it.
Liver acynuses, vascular segments of mesentery, pulmonary vascular
functional units, etc., are the analogues of composite SFU. Thus, simple
SFU is the object which can react to certain external influence, while
the result of its performance would always be maximal because the
control block would not control it, i.e. it works under the
“all-or-none” law. The type of its reaction is caused by the type of
SFU. There are two kinds of simple SFU: uncontrollable and controllable.
Both react to the specific external influence. But additional external
permission signal at the command entry point is required for the
operation of controllable SFU, whereas the uncontrollable SFU have no
command entry point. Therefore, the uncontrollable SFU does not depend
on any external guiding signals. The control block of controllable and
uncontrollable SFU consists of the analyzer-informant and has only DPC
(the “Х” informant and afferent channels). The composite Systemic
Functional Unit is a kind of an object similar to simple SFU, but the
result of its action is stronger. It works under the “all-or-none” law,
too, and its reaction is stipulated by type and number of its SFU. It
can really be that the constituent parts of composite SFU may be
controllable and uncontrollable, and the difference between them may
only be stipulated by the presence of command entry point in the general
control block through which the permission for the performance of action
is communicated. The control block of a system is elementary, too, and
has only DPC and analyzer-informant. Hence, any SFU function under the
“all-or-none” law. SFU is arranged in such a way that it either does
nothing, or gives out a maximal result of action. Its elementary result
of action is either delivered or not delivered. There might be SFU which
delivers the result of action, for example, twice as large as the result
of action of another SFU. But it will always be twice as large. Each
result of action of a simple SFU is quantum of action (indivisible
portion), at that being maximal for the given SFU. It is indivisible
because SFU cannot deliver part (for instance, half) of the result of
action. And as far as it is “the indivisible portion” there can not be a
gradation. For instance, SFU may be opened or closed, generate or not
generate electric current, secrete or not secrete something, etc. But it
cannot regulate the quantity of the result of action as its result
always is either not delivered or is maximal. Such operating mode is
very rough, inaccurate and unfavorable both for the SFU per se and its
goal/objective. Let’s imagine that instead of a steering wheel in our
car there will be a device which will right away maximally swerve to the
right when we turn a steering wheel to the right or will maximally
swerve to the left if we turn it to the left. Instead of smooth and
accurate trimming to follow the designate course of movement the car
will be harshly rushing about from right to left and other way round.
The goal will not be achieved and the car will be destroyed. Basically
the composite Systemic Functional Unit could have delivered graded
result of action since it has several SFU which it could actuate in a
variable sequence. But such system cannot do so because it “does not
see” the result of action and cannot compare it with what should be
done/what it should be.

Quantity of the result of action. To achieve the preset goal the
designation of the quality of the result of action only is not
sufficient. The goal sets not only “what action the object should
deliver” (quality of the result of action), but also “how much of this
action” the given object should deliver (quantity of the result of
action). And the system should seek to perform exactly as much of
specific action as it is necessary, neither more nor less than that. The
quality of action is determined by SFU type. The quantity is determined
by the quantity of SFU. There are three quantitative characteristics of
the result of action: maximum, minimum and optimum quantity of action.
In the real world gradation of the results of action is required from
the real systems. Therefore, the system performance should deliver
neither maximum nor minimum, but optimum result. Optimum means
performance based on the principle “it is necessary and sufficient”. It
is necessary that the result of action should be such-and-such, but not
another in terms of quality and adequate in terms of quantity, neither
more nor less. Hence, the SFU cannot be the full-fledged systems. The
systems are needed in which controllable/adjustable grading of the
result of action would be possible. For example, it is required that the
pressure of 100 mm Hg is maintained in the tissue capillaries. This
phrase encompasses presetting of everything what is included in the
concept “necessary and sufficient” at once. It is necessary… pressure,
and it is enough… 10 mm Hg. It is possible to collate the SFU
providing pressure, but not of 10 mm Hg, but, for instance, 100 mm Hg.
It is too much. It is probably possible to collate the SFU which can
provide pressure of 10 mm Hg and at the moment it might be sufficient.
But if the situation has suddenly changed and the requirement is now 100
mm Hg rather than 10 mm Hg, what should be done then? Should one run
about and search for SFU which may provide the 100 mm Hg? And what if
it’s impossible to make such system which would be able to provide any
pressure in a range, for example, from 0 to 100 mm Hg, depending on a
situation? In order to provide the quantity of the result of action
which is necessary at the moment, the grading of the results of action
of systems is required. It could have been achieved by building the
systems from a set of homotypic SFU of a type of composite SFU flow
diagram. It has what is needed for the graduation of the result of
action as it contains numerous SFU. If it could be possible to do it so
that it enables actuating from one to all of SFU, depending on the need,
the result of action would have as much gradation as many SFU is present
in the system. The higher the required degree of accuracy, the more of
minor gradations of the result of action should be available. Therefore,
instead of one SFU with its extremely large scale result of action it is
necessary to use such amount of SFU with minor result of action which
sum is equal to the required maximum, while the accuracy of
implementation of the goal is equal to the result of action of one SFU.
However, composite SFU has no possibility to control the result of
action as it has no the unit able of doing it. To deliver the result of
action precisely equal to the preset one, it (the result of action)
needs to be continually measured and measuring data compared with the
task (with command, with “database”). The “database” is a list of those
due values of result of action which the system should deliver depending
on the magnitude of external influence and algorithm of the control
block operation. The goal of the system is that each value of the
measured external influence should be corresponded by strictly
determined value of the result of action (due value). To this effect it
is necessary “to see” (to measure) the result of action of the system to
compare it to the appropriate/due result. And for this purpose the
control block should have a “Y” receptor which can measure the result of
action and there should be a communication/transmission link (reciprocal
paths) through which the information from a “Y” receptor would pass to
the analyzer-informant, where the result of this measurement should be
compared with what should be/occur (with “database”). The control block
of the system should compare external influence with the due value,
whereas the due value should be compared with own result of action to
see its conformity or discrepancy with the due value. Composite SFU
still can compare external influence with eigen result of action,
because it has DPC, whereas it can not any longer compare due value with
the result of eigen action just because it does not have anything able
of doing it (there are no appropriate elements).

Simple control block (negative feedback – NF). In order for the control
block of the system to “see” (to feel and measure) the result of action
of the system, it should have a corresponding “Y” receptor at the
outlet/exit point/ of system and the communication link between it and a
“Y” receptor (reciprocal path). The logic of operation of such control
consists in that if the scale of the result of action is lager than that
of the preset result it is necessary to reduce it, having activated
smaller number of SFU, and if it is small-scale it is necessary to
increase it by actuating larger number of SFU. For this reason such link
is called negative. And as the information moves back from the outlet of
system towards its beginning, it is called feedback/back action. As a
result the negative feedback (NF) occurs. A “Y” receptor and reciprocate
path comprise NF and together with the analyzer-informant and efferent
cannels (stimulator) form a NF loop. Depending on the need and based on
the NF information the control block would engage or disengage the
functions of controllable SFU as necessary. The difference of this
system from the composite SFU lies only in the presence of a “Y”
receptor which measures the result of action and reciprocal paths
through which the information is transferred from this receptor to the
analyzer. The number of active SFU is determined by NF. The NF is
realized by means of NF loop which includes the “Y” receptor, reciprocal
path, through which information from “Y” receptor is transferred to the
analyzer-informant, analyzer proper and efferent channels through which
the control block decisions are transferred to the effectors
(controllable SFU). Thus, the system, unlike SFU, contains both DPC and
NF. Direct positive (controllable) communication activates the system,
while negative feedback determines the number of activated SFU. For
example, if larger number of alveolar capillaries in lungs will be
opened compared to the number of the alveoli with appropriate gas
composition, arterialization of venous blood will be incomplete, and
there will be a need to close a part of alveolar capillaries which
“wash” by bloodstream the alveoli with gas composition not suitable for
gas exchange. If the number of such opened capillaries will be smaller,
overloading of pulmonary blood circulation would occur and the pressure
in pulmonary artery will increase and there will be a need to open part
of alveolar capillaries. In any case the informant of pulmonary blood
circulation would snap into action and the control block would decide
what part of capillaries needs to be opened or closed. Hence, the
diffusion part of vascular channel of pulmonary bloodstream is the
system containing simple control block. The goal of the system is that
the result of action of “Y” should be equal to the command “M” (Y=M).
Actions of system aimed at the achievement of goal are implemented by
executive elements. Control block would watch the accuracy of
implementation of actions. The control block containing DPC and NF loop
is simple. The algorithm of simple control blocks operation is not
complex. The NF loop would trace continually the result of performance
of executive elements (SFU). If the result of action turns out to be of
a larger scale than the preset result, it needs to be reduced, and if
the result is of a smaller scale than the preset one it needs to be
increased. Control parameters (the “database”) are set through the
command; for example, what should be the correlation between external
influence and the result of action, or what level of the result of
action will need to be retained, etc. At that, the maximum accuracy
would be the result of action of one SFU (quantum of action). Systems
with NF, as well as composite SFU, also contain two types of objects:
executive elements (SFU) (effectors which carry out specific actions for
the achievement of the preset overall goal of the system) and the
control block (DPC and NF loop). But besides the “Х” informant, control
block of the system also contains the “Y” informant (NF). Therefore, it
has information both on the external influence and the result of action.
Some complexification of the control block brings about a very essential
result. The reason for such a complexification is the need to achieve
optimally accurate implementation of the goal of the system. The NF
ensures the possibility of regulation of quantity of the result of
action, i.e. the system with NF may perform any required action in an
optimal way, from minimum to maximum, accurate to one quantum of action.
Generally speaking, any real system at that has the third type of
objects: service elements, i.e. substructure elements without which
executive elements cannot operate. For example, the aircraft has wings
to fly, but it also has wheels to take off and land. The haemoglobin
molecule contains haem which contains 4 SFU (ligands) and globin, the
protein which does not participate directly in transportation of oxygen
but without which haem cannot work. We have slightly touched upon the
issue of existence of the third type of objects (service elements) for
one purpose only to know that they are always present in any system, but
we will not go into detail of their function. We will only note that
they represent the same ordinary systems aimed at serving other systems.
Systems with NF can solve most of the tasks in a far better manner than
simple or composite SFU. The presence of NF almost does not complexicate
the system. We have seen that even simple SFU is a very complex
formation including a set of components. Composite SFU is as many times
more complex compared to simple SFU as is the number almost equal to
that of simple SFU. The system with NF is only supplemented by one
receptor and the communication link between receptor and analyzer
(reciprocal path). But the effect of such change in the structure of
control block is very large-scale and only depends on the algorithm of
the control block operation. Any SFU (simple and composite) can
implement only minimum or maximum action. Systems with NF can surely
deliver the optimal result of action, from minimum to maximum; they are
accurate and stable. Their accuracy depends only on the value of quantum
of action of separate SFU and the NF profundity/intensity/ (see below).
Stability is stipulated by that the system always “sees” the result of
action and can compare it with the appropriate/due one and correct it if
divergence occurs. In real systems the causes for the divergence are
always present, since they exist in the real world where there always
exists perturbation action/disturbing influences. Hence, one can see
that it is NF that turns SFU into real systems. How does the control
block manage the system? What parameters are characteristic of it? Any
control block is characterized by three DPC parameters and the same
number of NF loop parameters. For DPC it is a minimal level of
controllable input stimulus (threshold of sensitivity); maximal level of
controllable input stimulus (range of input stimulus sensitivity); time
of engagement of control (decision-making time). For NF loop it is
minimal level of controllable result of action (threshold of sensitivity
of NF loop – NF profundity/intensity); maximal level of controllable
result of action (range of sensitivity of the result of action); time of
engagement of control (decision-making time). Minimal level of
controllable input signal for DPC is the sensitivity threshold of signal
of the “Х” receptor wherefrom the analyzer-informant recognizes that the
external influence has already begun. For example, if рО2 has reached 60
mm Hg the sphincter should be opened (1 SFU is actuated), if the рО2
value is smaller, then it is closed. Any values of рО2 smaller than 60
mm Hg would not lead to the opening of sphincter, because these are
sub-threshold values. Consequently, 60 mm Hg is the operational
threshold of sphincter. Maximum level of controllable entrance signal
(range) for DPC is the level of signal about external influence at which
all SFU are actuated. The system cannot react to the further increase in
the input signal by the extension of its function, as it does not have
any more of SFU reserves. For example, if рО2 has reached 100 mm Hg all
sphincters should be opened (all SFU are activated). Any values of рО2
larger than 100 mm Hg will not lead to the opening of additional
sphincters, because all of them are already opened, i.e. the values of
60-100 mm Hg are the range of activation of the system of sphincters.
Time of DPC activation is a time interval between the onset of external
influence and the beginning of the system’s operation. The system would
never respond immediately after the onset of external influence.
Receptors need to feel a signal, the analyzer-informant needs to make
the decision, the effectors transfer the guiding impact to the command
entry points of the executive elements – all this takes time. The
minimal level of the controllable exit signal for NF is a threshold of
sensitivity of a signal of the “Y” receptor, wherefrom the
analyzer-informant recognizes whether there is a discrepancy between the
result of action of the system and its due value. The discrepancy should
be equal to or more than the quantum of action of single SFU. For
example, if one sphincter is to be opened and the bloodstream should be
minimal (one quantum of action), whereas two sphincters are actually
opened and the bloodstream is twice as intensive (two quanta of action),
the “Y” receptor should feel an extra quantum. If it is able of doing
so, its sensitivity is equal to one quantum. Sensitivity is defined by
the NF profundity/intensity. The NF profundity/intensity is a number of
quanta of action of the single SFU system which sum is identified as the
discrepancy between the actual and appropriate/proper action. The NF
profundity/intensity is preset by the command. The highest possible NF
profundity/intensity is the sensitivity of discrepancy in one quantum of
action of single SFU. The less the NF profundity/intensity, the less is
sensitivity, the more it is “rough”. In other words, the less the NF
profundity/intensity, the larger value of the discrepancy between the
result of action and the proper result is interpreted as discrepancy.
For example, even two (three, ten, etc.) quanta of action of two (three,
ten, etc.) SFU is interpreted as discrepancy. Minimal NF
profundity/intensity is its absence. In this case any discrepancy of the
result of action with the proper one is not interpreted by the control
block as discrepancy. The result of action would be maximal and the
system with simple control block with zero NF profundity/intensity would
turn into composite SFU with DPC (with simplest/elementary control
block). For example, the system of the Big Circle of Blood circulation
for microcirculation in fabric capillaries should hold average pressure
of 100 mm Hg accurate to 1 mm Hg. At the same time, average arterial
pressure can fluctuate from 80 to 200 mm Hg. The value “100 mm Hg”
determines the level of controllable result of action. The value “from
80 to 200 mm Hg” is the range of controllable external (entry)
influence. The value of “1 mm Hg” is determined by NF
profundity/intensity. Smaller NF profundity/intensity would control the
parameter with smaller degree of accuracy, for example, to within 10 mm
Hg (more roughly) or 50 mm Hg (even more roughly), while the higher NF
profundity/intensity would do it with higher degree of accuracy, for
example to within 0.1 mm Hg (finer). Maximal NF sensitivity is limited
to the value of quantum of action of SFU which are part of the system,
and the NF profundity/intensity. But in any case, if discrepancy between
the level of the controllable and preset parameters occurs to the extent
higher than the value of the preset accuracy, the NF loop should “feel”
this divergence and “force” executive elements to perform so that to
eliminate the discrepancy of the goal and the result of action. Maximal
level of controllable outlet/exit signal (range) for NF is the level of
signal about the result of action of the system at which all SFU are
actuated. The system cannot react to the further increase in entry
signal by increase in its function any more, because it has no more of
SFU reserves. The time of actuating of NF control is the time interval
between the onset of discrepancy of signal about the result of action
with the preset result and the beginning of the system’s operation. All
these parameters can be “built in” DPC and NF loops or set primordially
(the command is entered at their “birth” and they do not further vary
any more), or can be entered through the command later, and these
parameters can be changed by means of input of a new command from the
outside. For this purpose there should be a channel of input of the
command. Simple control block in itself cannot change any of these
parameters. Absolutely all systems have control block, but it cannot be
always found explicitly. In the aircraft or a spaceship this block is
presented by the on-board computer, a box with electronics. In human
beings and animals such block is the brain, or at least nervous system.
But where is the control block located in a plant or bacterium? Where is
the control block located in atom or molecule, or, for example, the
control block in a nail? The easier the system, the more difficult it is
for us to single out forms of control block habitual for us. However, it
is present in any systems. Executive elements are responsible for the
quality of result of action, while the control block – for its quantity.
The control block can be, for example, intra- or internuclear and
intermolecular connections/bonds. For example, in atom the SFU functions
are performed by electrons, protons and neutrons, and those of control
block by intra-nuclear forces or, in other words, interactions. The
intra-atomic command, for example, is the condition that there can be no
more than 2 electrons at the first electronic level, 8 electrons at the
second level, etc., (periodic law determined by Pauli principle), this
level being rigidly designated by quantum numbers. If the electron has
somewise received additional energy and has risen above its level it
cannot retain it for a long time and will go back, thereby releasing
surplus of energy in the form of a photon. At that, not just any energy
can lift the electron onto the other level, but only and only specific
one (the corresponding quantum of energy). It also rises not just onto
any level, but only onto the strictly preset one. If the energy of the
external influence is less than the corresponding quantum, the electron
level stabilization system would keep it in a former orbit (in a former
condition) until the energy of external influence exceeded the
corresponding level. If the energy of external influence is being
continually accrued in a ramp-up mode, the electron would rise from one
level to other not in a linear mode but by leaps (which are strictly
defined by quantum laws) into higher orbits as soon as the energy of
influence exceeds certain threshold levels. The number of levels of an
electron’s orbit in atom is probably very large and equal to the number
of spectral lines of corresponding atom, but each level is strictly
fixed and determined by quantum laws. Hence, some kind of mechanism
(system of stabilization of quantum levels) strictly watches the
performance of these laws, and this mechanism should have its own SFU
and control blocks. The number of levels of the electron’s orbit is
possibly determined by the number of intranuclear SFU (protons and
neutrons or other elementary particles), which result of action is the
positioning of electron in an electronic orbit. For example, in a nail
system the command would be its form and geometrical values. This
command is entered into the control block one-time at the moment of nail
manufacture when its values (at the moment of its “birth”) are measured
and is not entered later any more. But when the command is already
entered the system should execute this command, i.e. in this case the
nail should keep its form and values even if it is being hammered. In
any control block type the command should be entered into at some point
of time in one way or another. We cannot make just a nail “in general”,
but only the one with concrete form and preset values. Therefore, at the
moment of its manufacture (i.e. one-time) we give it the “task” to be of
such-and-such form and values. The command can vary if there is a
channel of input of the command. For example, when turning on the air
conditioner we can “give it a task” to hold air temperature at 20°С and
thereafter change the command for 25°С. The nail does not have a channel
of input of the order, while the air conditioner does. Consequently, the
system with simple control block is the object which can react to
certain external influence, and the result of its action is graduated
and stable. The number of gradation is determined by the number SFU in
the system and the accuracy is determined by quantum of action (the
size, result) of single SFU and NF profundity/intensity. The result of
action is accurate because the control block supervises it by means of
NF. Type of control is based on mismatch/error plus error-rate control/.
Control would only start after the occurrence of external influence or
delivery of the result of action. Stability of the result of action is
determined by NF profundity/intensity. System reaction is conditioned by
type and number of its SFU. Simple control block has three channels of
control: one external (command) and two internal (DPC and NF). It reacts
to external influence through DPC (the “Х” informant) and to its own
result of action of the system (the “Y” informant) through NF, whereas
it controls executive elements of the system through efferent channels.
Analogues of systems with simple control block are all objects of
inanimate/inorganic world: gas clouds, crystals, various solid bodies,
planets, planetary and stellar systems, etc. Biological analogues of
systems with simple control block are protophytes and metaphytes,
bacteria and all vegetative/autonomic systems of an organism, including,
for example, external gas exchange system, blood circulation system,
external gaseous metabolism system, digestion or immune systems. Even
single-celled animal organisms of amoebas and infusorian type, inferior
animal classes (jellyfish etc.) are the systems with complex control
blocks/units (see below). All vegetative and many motor reflexes of
higher animals which actuate at all levels starting from intramural
nerve ganglia through hypothalamus are structured as simple control
blocks. If they are affected by guiding influence of cerebral cortex,
higher type (complex) reflexes come into service (see below). Analogues
of the “Х” informant receptors are all sensitive receptors (haemo-,
baro-, thermo- and other receptors located in various bodies, except
visual, acoustical and olfactory receptors which are part of the “C”
informant, see below). Analogues of the “Y” informant receptors are all
proprio-sensitive receptors which can also be haemo-, baro-, thermo- and
other receptors located in different organs. Analogues of the control
block stimulators are all motor and effector nerves stimulating
cross-striped, unstriated muscular systems and secretory cells, as well
as hormones, prostaglandins and other metabolites having any effect on
the functions of any systems of organism. Analogues of the
analyzer-informant in the mineral and vegetative media are only
connections/bonds between the elements of a type of direct connection of
“X” and “Y” informants with effectors (axon reflexes). In vegetative
systems of animals connections are also of a type of direct connection
of “X” and “Y” informants with effectors (humoral and metabolic
regulation), as well as axon reflex (controls only nervules without
involvement of nerve cell itself) and unconditioned reflexes (at the
level of intra-organ intramural and other neuronic formations right up
to hypothalamus). Thus, using DPC and NF and regulating the performance
of its SFU the system produces the results of action qualitatively and
quantitatively meeting the preset goal.

Principle of independence of the result of action. As it was already
repeatedly underlined, the purpose/goal of any system is to get the
appropriate/due (target-oriented) result of action arising from the
performance of the system. Actually external influence, “having entered”
the system, would be transformed to the result of action of the system.
That is why systems are actually the converters of external influence
into the result of action and of the cause into effect. External
influence is in turn the result of action of other system which
interacted with the former. Consequently, the result of action, once it
has “left” one system and “entered” into another, would now exist
independently of the system which produced it. For example, a civil
engineering firm had a goal to build a house from certain quantity of
building material (external influence). After a number of actions of
this firm the house was built (the result of action). The firm could
further proceed to the construction of other house, or cease to exist or
change the line of business from construction to sewing shop. But the
constructed house will already exist independently of the firm which
constructed it. The purpose of the automobile engine (the car subsystem)
is burning certain quantity of fuel (external influence for the engine)
to receive certain quantity of mechanical energy (the result of action
of the engine). The purpose of a running gear (other subsystem of the
car) is transformation of mechanical energy of the engine (external
influence for running gear) into certain number of revolutions of wheels
(result of action of running gear). The purpose of wheels is
transformation of certain number of revolutions (external influence for
wheels) into the kilometers of travel (result of action of wheels). All
in all, the result of action of the car will be kilometers of travel
which will already exist independently of the car which has driven them
through. Photon released from atom which can infinitely roam the space
of the Universe throughout many billions years will be the result of
action of the exited electron. Result of a slap of an oar by water is
the depression/hollow on the water surface which could have also
remained there forever if it were not for the fluidity of water and the
influence on it of thousand other external influences. However, after
thousand influences it will not any more remain in the form of
depression/hollow, but in the form of other long chain of results of
actions of other systems because nothing disappears in this world, but
transforms into other forms. Conservation law is inviolable.

System cycles and transition processes. Systems just like SFU have
cycles of their activity as well. Different systems can have different
cycles of activity and they depend on the complexity and algorithm of
the control block. The simplest cycle of work is characteristic of a
system with simple control block. It is formed of the following micro
cycles: perception, selection and measurement of external influence by
the “X” receptor; selection from “database” of due value of the result
of action; transition process (NF multi-micro-cycle);

a) perception and measurement of the result of action by the “Y”
receptor – b) comparison of this result with the due value – c)
development of the decision and corresponding influence on SFU for the
purpose of correction of the result of action – d) influence on SFU, if
the result of action is not equal to the appropriate/due one, or
transition to the 1st micro cycle if it is equal to the proper one – e)
actuation of SFU – f) return to “a)”.

After the onset of external influence the “X” receptor would snap into
action (1st micro cycle). Thereafter the value of the result of action
which has to correspond to the given external influence (2nd micro
cycle) is selected from the “database”. It is then followed by
transition process (transition period, 3rd multi-micro-cycle, NF cycle):
actuation of the “Y” receptor, comparison of the result of action with
the due value selected from the “database”, corrective influence on SFU
(the number of actuated SFU mill be the one determined by control block
in the micro cycle “c”) and again return to the actuation of the “Y”
receptor. It would last in that way until the result of action is equal
to the preset one. From this point the purpose/goal is reached and after
that the control block comes back to the 1st micro cycle, to the
reception of external influence. System performance for the achievement
of the result of action would not stop until there new external
influence emerges. The aforementioned should be supplemented by a very
essential addition. It has already been mentioned when we were examining
the SFU performance cycles that after any SFU is actuated it completely
spends all its stored energy intended for the performance of action.
Therefore, after completion of action SFU is unable of performing any
new action until it restores its power capacity, and it takes additional
time which can substantially increase the duration of the transition
period. That is why a speed of movement (e.g., running) of a sportsman’s
body whose system of oxygen delivery to the tissues is large (high speed
of energy delivery) would be fast as well. And the speed of movement of
a cardiac patient’s body would be slow because the speed of energy
delivery is reduced due to the affection of blood circulation system
which is a part of the body’s system of power supply. Sick persons spent
a long time to restore energy potential of muscular cells because of the
delayed ATP production that requires a lot of oxygen. Micro cycles from
1st to 2nd constitute the starting period of control block performance.
In case of short-term external influence control block would determine
it during the start cycle and pass to the transition period during which
it would seek to achieve the actual result of action equal to the proper
one. If external influence appears again during the transition period
the control block will not react to it because during this moment it
would not measure “Х” (refractory phase). Upon termination of the
transition period the control block would go back/resort/ to the
starting stage, but while it does so (resorts), the achieved due value
of the result of action would remain invariable (the steady-state
period). If external influence would be long enough and not vary so that
after the first achievement of the goal the control block has time to
resort to reception “X” again, the steady value of the result of action
would be retained as long as the external influence continues. At that,
the transition cycle will not start, because the steady-state value of
the result of action is equal to the proper/due one. If long external
influence continues and changes its amplitude, the onset of new
transition cycle may occur. At that, the more the change in the
amplitude of external influence, the larger would be the amplitude of
oscillation of functions. Therefore, sharp differences of amplitude of
external influence are inadmissible, since they cause diverse
undesirable effects associated with transition period.

If external influence is equal to zero, all SFU are deactivated, as zero
external influence is corresponded by zero activation of SFU. If, after
a short while there would be new external influence, the system would
repeat all in a former order. Duration of the system performance cycle
is also seriously affected by processes of restoration of energy
potential of the actuated SFU. Every SFU, when being actuated, would
spend definite (quantized) amount of energy, which is either brought in
by external influence per se or is being accumulated by some subsystems
of power supply of the given system. In any case, energy potential
restoration also needs time, but we do not consider these processes as
they associated only with the executive elements (SFU), while we only
examine the processes occurring in the control blocks of the systems.
Thus, the system continually performs in cycles, while accomplishing its
micro cycles. In the absence of external influence or if it does not
vary, the system would remain at one of its stationary levels and in the
same functional condition with the same number of functioning SFU, from
zero to all. In such a mode it would not have transition
multi-micro-cycle (long-time repeat of the 3rd micro cycle). Every
change of level of external influence causes transition processes.
Transition of function to a new level would only become possible when
the system is ready to do it. Such micro cycles in various systems may
differ in details, but all systems without exception have the NF
multi-micro-cycle. With all its advantages the NF has a very essential
fault, i.e. the presence of transition processes. The intensity of
transition process depends on a variety of factors. It can range from
minimal to maximal, but transition processes are always present in all
systems in a varying degree of intensity. They are unavoidable in
essence, since NF actuates as soon as the result of action of the system
is produced. It would take some time until affectors of the system feel
a mismatch, until the control block makes corresponding decision, until
effectors execute this decision, until the NF measures the result of
action and corrects the decision and the process is repeated several
times until necessary correlation “… external influence ? result of
action…” is achieved. Therefore, at this time there can be any
unexpected nonlinear transition processes breaking normal operating mode
of the system. For this reason at the time of the first “actuation” of
the system or in case of sharp loading variations it needs quite a long
period of setting/adjustment. And even in the steady-state mode due to
various casual fluctuations in the environment there can be a minor
failure in the NF operation and minor transition processes (“noise” of
the result of action of real system). The presence of transition
processes imposes certain restrictions on the performance and scope of
use of systems. Slow inertial systems are not suitable for fast external
influences as the speed of systems’ operation is primarily determined by
the speed of NF loop operation. Indeed, the speed of executive element’s
operation is the basis of the speed of system operation on the whole,
but NF multi-micro-cycle contributes considerably to the extension of
the system’s operation cycle. Therefore, when choosing the load on the
living organism it is necessary to take into consideration the speed of
system operation and to select speed of loading so as to ensure the
least intensity of transition processes. The slower the variation of
external influence, the shorter is the transition process. Transition
period becomes practically unapparent when the variation of external
influence is sufficiently slow. Consequently, if external influence
varies, the duration of transition period may vary from zero to maximum
depending on the speed of such variation and the speed of operation of
the system’s elements. Transition period is the process of transition
from one level of functional state to another. The “smaller” the steps
of transition from one level on another, the less is the amplitude of
transition processes. In case of smooth change of loading no transition
processes take place. The intensity of transition processes depends on
the SFU caliber, force of external influence, duration of SFU charging,
sensitivity of receptors, the time of their operation, the NF
intensity/profundity and algorithm of the control block operation. But
these cycles of systems’ performance and transition processes are
present both in atoms and electronic circuitry, planetary systems and
all other systems of our World, including human body.

If systems did not have transition processes, transition process period
would have been always equal to zero and the systems would have been
completely inertia-free. But such systems are non-existent and inertness
is inherent in a varying degree in any system. For example, in
electronics the presence of transition processes generates additional
harmonics of electric current fluctuations in various amplifiers or
current generators. Sophisticated circuit solutions are applied to
suppress thereof, but they are present in any electronic devices,
considerably suppressed though. Time constant of systems with simple
control blocks includes time constants of every SFU plus changeable
durations of NF transition periods. Therefore, constant of time of such
systems is not quite constant since duration of NF transition periods
can vary depending on the force of external impact. Transition processes
in systems with simple control blocks increase the inertness of such
systems. Inertness of systems leads to various phase disturbances of
synchronization and balance of interaction between systems. There are
numerous ways to deal with transition processes. External impacts may be
filtered in such a way that to prevent from sharp shock impacts
(filtration, a principle of graduality of loading). Knowing the
character of external impacts/influences in advance and foreseeing
thereof which requires seeing them first (and it can only be done, at
the minimum, by complex control blocks) would enable designing of such
an appropriate algorithm of control block operation which would ensure
finding correct decision by the 3rd micro cycle (prediction based
control/management). However, it is only feasible for intellectual
control blocks. Apparently it’s impossible for us to completely get rid
of the systems’ inertness so far. Therefore, if the external
impact/influence does not vary and the transition processes are
practically equal to zero the system would operate cyclically and
accurately on one of its stationary levels, or smoothly shift from one
stationary level to another if external influence varies, but does it
quite slowly. If transition processes become notable, the system
operation cycles become unequal due to the emergence of transition
multi-micro-cycles, i.e. period of transition processes. At that,
nonlinear effects reduce the system’s overall performance. In our
everyday life we often face transition processes when, being absolutely
unprepared, we leave a warm room and get into the cold air outside and
catch cold. In the warm room all systems of our organism were in a
certain balance of interactions and everything was all right. But here
we got into the cold air outside and all systems should immediately
re-arrange on a new balance. If they have no time to do it and highly
intensive transition processes emerge that cause unexpected fluctuations
of results of actions of body systems, imbalance of interactions of
systems occurs which is called “cold” (we hereby do not specify the
particulars associated with the change of condition of the immune
system). After a while the imbalance would disappear and the cold would
be over as well. If we make ourselves fit, we can train our “control
blocks” to foresee sharp strikes of external impacts to reduce
transition processes; we then will be able even to bathe in an ice hole.
Transition processes of special importance for us are those arising from
sharp change of situation around us. Stress-syndrome is directly
associated with this phenomenon. The sharper the change of the situation
around us, the more it gets threatening (external influence is
stronger), the sharper transition processes are, right up to paradoxical
reactions of a type of stupor. At that, the imbalance of performance of
various sites of nervous system (control blocks) arises, which leads to
imbalance of various systems of organism and the onset of various
pathological reactions and processes of a type of vegetative neurosis
and depressions, ischaemia up to infarction and ulcers, starting from
mouth cavity (aphtae) to large intestine ulcers (ulcerative colitis,
gastric and duodenum ulcers, etc.), arterial hypertension, etc.

Cyclic recurrence is a property of systems not of a living organism
only. Any system operates in cycles. If external influence is retained
at a stable level, the system would operate based on this minimal
steady-state cycle. But external influence may change cyclically as
well, for example, from a sleep to sleep, from dinner to dinner, etc.
These are in fact secondary, tertiary, etc., cycles. Provided
constructing the graphs of functions of a system, we get wavy curves
characterizing recurrence. Examples include pneumotachogram,
electrocardiogram curves, curves of variability of gastric juice
acidity, sphygmogram curves, curves of electric activity of neurons,
periodicity of the EEG alpha rhythm, etc. Sea waves, changes of seasons,
movements of planets, movements of trains, etc., – these are all the
examples of cyclic recurrence of various systems. The forms of cyclic
recurrence curves may be of all sorts. The electrocardiogram curve
differs from the arterial pressure curve, and the arterial pressure
curve differs from the pressure curve in the aortic ventricle. Variety
of cyclic recurrence curves is infinite. Two key parameters characterize
recurrence: the period (or its reciprocal variable – frequency) and
nonuniformity of the period, which concept includes the notion of
frequency harmonics. Nonuniformity of the cycle period should not be
resident in SFU (the elementary system) as its performance cycles are
always identical. However, the systems have transition periods which may
have various cycle periods. Besides, various systems have their own
cyclic periods and in process of interaction of systems interference
(overlap) of periods may occur. Therefore, additional shifting of own
systems’ periods takes place and harmonics of cycles emerge. The
number of such wave overlaps can be arbitrary large. That is why in
reality we observe a very wide variety of curves: regular sinusoids,
irregular curves, etc. However, any curves can be disintegrated into
constituent waves thereof, i.e. disintegration of interference into its
components using special analytical methods, e.g. Fourier
transformations. Resulting may be a spectrum of simpler waves of a
sinusoid type. The more detailed (and more labour-consuming, though) the
analysis, the nearer is the form of each component to a sinusoid and the
larger is the number of sinusoidal waves with different periods.

The period of system cycle is a very important parameter for
understanding the processes occurring in any system, including in living
organisms. Its duration depends on time constant of the system’s
reaction to external impact/influence. Once the system starts recurrent
performance cycle, it would not stop until it has not finished it. One
may try to affect the system when it has not yet finished the cycle of
actions, but the system’s reaction to such interference would be
inadequate. The speed of the system’s functions progression depends
completely on the duration of the system performance cycle. The longer
the cycle period, the slower the system would transit from one level to
another. The concepts of absolute and relative adiaphoria are directly
associated with the concept of period and phase of system cycle. If, for
example, the myocardium has not finished its “systole-diastole” cycle,
extraordinary (pre-term) impulse of rhythm pacemaker or extrasystolic
impulse cannot force the ventricle to produce adequate stroke
release/discharge. The value of stroke discharge may vary from zero to
maximum possible, depending on at which phase of adiphoria period
extrasystolic impulse occurs. If the actuating pulse falls on the 2nd
and 3rd micro cycles, the myocardium would not react to them at all
(absolute adiphoria), since information from the “X” receptor is not
measured at the right time. Myocardium, following the contraction, would
need, as any other cell would do following its excitation, some time to
restore its energy potential (ATP accumulation) and ensure setting of
all SFU in “startup” condition. If extraordinary impulse emerges at this
time, the system’s response might be dependent on the amount of ATP
already accumulated or the degree in which actomyosin fibers of
myocardium sarcomeres diverged/separated in order to join in the
function again (relative adiphoria). Excitability of an unexcited cell
is the highest. At the moment of its excitation excitability sharply
falls to zero (all SFU in operation, 2nd micro cycle) – absolute
adiphoria. Thereafter, if there is no subsequent excitation, the system
would gradually restore its excitability, while passing through the
phases of relative adiphoria up to initial or even higher level
(super-excitability, which is not examined in this work) and then again
to initial level. Therefore, pulse irregularity may be observed in
patients with impaired cardial function, when sphygmic beats are
force-wise uneven. Extreme manifestation of such irregularity is the
so-called “Jackson’s symptom” /pulse deficiency/, i.e. cardiac electric
activity is shown on the electrocardiogram, but there is no its
mechanical (haemodynamic) analogue on the sphygmogram and sphygmic beats
are not felt when palpating the pulse. The main conclusions from all the
above are as follows: any systems operate in cycles passing through
micro cycles; any system goes through transition process; cycle period
may differ in various systems depending on time constant of the
system’s reaction to the external impact/influence (in living systems –
on the speed of biochemical reactions and the speed of command/actuating
signals); irregularity of the system’s cycle period depends on the
presence of transition processes, consequently, to a certain degree on
the force of external exposure/influence; irregularity of the system
cycle period depends on overlapping of cycle periods of interacting
systems; upon termination of cycle of actions after single influence the
system reverts to the original state, in which it was prior to the
beginning of external influence (one single result of action with one
single external influence). The latter does not apply to the so-called
generating systems. It is associated with the fact that after the result
of action has been achieved by the system, it becomes independent of the
system which produced it and may become external influence in respect to
it. If it is conducted to the external influence entry point of the same
system, the latter would again get excited and again produce new result
of action (positive feedback, PF). This is how all generators work.
Thus, if the first external influence affects the system or external
influence is ever changing, the number of functioning SFU systems
varies. If no external influence is exerted on the system or is being
exerted but is invariable, the number of functioning system SFU would
not vary. Based on the above we can draw the definitions of stationary
conditions and dynamism of process.

Functional condition of system. Functional condition of the system is
defined by the number of active SFU. If all SFU function simultaneously,
it shows high functional condition which arises in case of maximum
external influence. If none SFU is active it shows minimum functional
condition. It may occur in the absence of external influence. External
environment always exerts some kind of influence on some systems,
including the systems of organism. Even in quiescent state the Earth
gravitational force makes part of our muscles work and consequently
absolute rest is non-existent. So, when we are kind of in quiescent
state we actually are in one of the low level states of physical
activity with the corresponding certain low level of functional state of
the organism. Any external influence requiring additional vigorous
activity would transfer to a new level of a functional condition unless
the SFU reserve is exhausted. When new influence is set at a new
invariable (stationary) level, functional condition of a system is set
on a new invariable (stationary) functional level.

Stationary states/modes. Stationary state is such a mode of systems when
one and the same number of SFU function and no change occurs in their
functional state. For example, in quiescence state all systems of
organism do not change their functional mode as far as about the same
number of SFU is operational. A female runner who runs a long distance
for quite a long time without changing the speed is also in a stationary
state/mode. Her load does not vary and consequently the number of
working (functioning) SFU does not change either, i.e. the functional
state of her organism does not change. Her organism has already “got
used” to this unchangeable loading and as there is no increase of load
there is no increase in the number of working SFU, too. The number of
working SFU remains constant and therefore the functional state/mode of
the organism does not change. What may change in this female runner’s
body is, e.g. the status of tissue energy generation system and the
status of tissue energy consumption system, which is in fact the process
of exhaustion of organism. However, if the female runner has duly
planned her run tactics so that not to find herself in condition of
anaerobic metabolism, the condition of external gas metabolism and blood
circulation systems would not change. So, regardless of whether or not
physical activity is present, but if it does not vary (stationary
physical loadings /steady state/, provided it is adequate to the
possibilities of the organism), the organism of the subject would be in
a stationary state/mode. But if the female runner runs in conditions of
anaerobic metabolism the “vicious circle” will be activated and
functional condition of her organism will start change steadily to the
worse. (The vicious circle is the system’s reaction to its own result of
action. Its basis is hyper reaction of system to routine influence,
since the force of routine external influence is supplemented by the
eigen result of action of the system which is independent of the latter
and presents external influence in respect to it. Thus, routine external
influence plus the influence of the system’s own result of action all in
all brings about hyper influence resulting in hyper reaction of the
system (system overload). The outcome of this reaction is the
destruction own SFU coupled with accumulation of defects and progressing
decline in the quality of life. At the initial stages while functional
reserves are still large, the vicious circle becomes activated under the
influence of quite a strong external action (heavy load condition). But
in process of SFU destruction and accumulation of defects the overload
of adjacent systems and their destruction would accrue (the domino
principle), whereas the level of load tolerance would recede and with
the lapse of time even weak external influences will cause vicious
circle actuation and may prove to be excessive. Eventually even the
quiescent state will be the excessive loading for an organism with
destroyed SFU which condition is incompatible with life. Usually
termination of loading would discontinue this vicious circle.

Dynamic processes. Dynamic process is the process of changing functional
state/mode/condition of the system. The system is in dynamic process
when the change in the number of its actuated SFU occurs. The number of
continually actuated SFU would determine stationary state/mode/condition
of the system. Hence, dynamic process is the process of the system’s
transition from one stationary level to another. If the speed of change
in external influences exceeds the speed of fixing the preset result of
action of the system, transition processes (multi-micro-cycles) occur
during which variation of number of functioning SFU also takes place.
Therefore, these transition processes are also dynamic. Consequently,
there are two types of dynamic processes: when the system is shifting
from one stationary condition (level) to another and when it is in
transient multi-micro-cycle. The former is target-oriented, whereas the
latter is caused by imperfection of systems and is parasitic, as its
actions take away additional energy which was intended for target
actions. When the system is in stationary condition some definite number
of SFU (from zero to all) is actuated. The minimum step of change of
level of functional condition is the value determined by the level of
operation of one SFU (one quantum of action). Hence, basically
transition from one level of functional condition to another is always
discrete (quantized) rather than smooth, and this discrecity is
determined by the SFU “caliber”. Then umber of stationary conditions is
equal to the number of SFU of the system. Systems with considerable
quantity of “small” SFU would pass through dynamic processes more
smoothly and without strenuous jerks, than systems with small amount of
“large” SFU. Hence, dynamic process is characterized by an amplitude of
increment of the system’s functions from minimum to maximum (the
system’s minimax; depends on its absolute number of SFU), discrecity or
pace of increment of functions (depends on the “caliber” or quantum of
individual SFU) and parameters of the function’s cyclic recurrence
(speed of increase of actions of system, the period of phases of a
cycle, etc.). It can be targeted or parasitic. It should be noted that
stationary condition is also a process, but it’s the steady-state
(stationary) process. In such cases the condition of systems does not
vary from cycle to cycle. But during each cycle a number of various
dynamic processes take place in the system as the system itself consists
of subsystems, each of which in turn consists of cycles and processes.
The steady-state process keeps system in one and the same functional
condition and at one and the same stationary level. In accordance with
the above definition, if a system does not change its functional
condition, it is in stationary condition. Consequently, the steady-state
process and stationary condition mean one the same thing, because
irrespective of whether the systems are in stationary condition or in
dynamic process, some kind of stationary or dynamic processes may take
place in their subsystems. For example, even just a mere reception by
the “Х” receptor is a dynamic process. Hence, there are no absolutely
inert (inactive) objects and any object of our World somewise operates
in one way or another. It is assumed that the object may be completely
“inactive” at zero degrees of Kelvin scale (absolute zero). Attempts to
obtain absolutely inactive systems were undertaken by freezing of bodies
up to percentage of Kelvin degrees. It’s unlikely though, that any
attempts to freeze a body to absolute zero would be a success, because
the body would still move in space, cross some kind of magnetic,
gravitational or electric fields and interact with them. For this reason
at present it is probably impossible in principle to get absolutely
inert and inactive body. The integral organism represents mosaic of
systems which are either in different stationary conditions, or in
dynamic processes. One could possibly make an objection that there are
no systems in stationary condition in the organism at all, as far as
some kind of dynamic processes continually occur in some of its systems.
During systole the pressure in the aorta increases and during diastole
it goes down, the heart functions continuously and blood continuously
flows through the vessels, etc. That is all very true, but evaluation of
the system’s functions is not made based on its current condition, but
the cycles of its activity. Since all processes in any systems are
cyclic, including in the organism, the criterion of stationarity is the
invariance of integral condition of the system from one cycle to
another. Aorta reacts to external influence (stroke/systolic discharge
of the left ventricle) in such a way that in process of increase of
pressure its walls’ tension increases, while it falls in process of
pressure reduction. However, take, for example, the longer time period
than the one of the cardiocycle, the integrated condition of the aorta
would not vary from one cardiocycle to another and remain stationary.

Evaluation of functional state of systems. Evaluation may be qualitative
and quantitative. The presence (absence) of any waves on the curve
presents quality evaluation, whereas their amplitude or frequency is
their quantitative evaluation. For the evaluation of functional
condition of any systems comparison of the results of measurements of
function parameters to those that should be with the given system is
needed. In order to be able to judge about the presence (absence) of
pathology, it is not enough to measure just any parameter. For example,
we have measured someone’s blood pressure and received the value of
190/100 mm Hg. Is it a high pressure or it is not? And what it should be
like? To answer these questions it is necessary to compare the obtained
result to a standard scale, i.e. to the due value. If the value obtained
differs from the appropriate one, it speaks of the presence of
pathology, if it does not, then it means there is no pathology. If blood
pressure value of an order of 190/100 mm Hg is observed in quiescent
state it would speak of pathology, while at the peak maximum load this
value would be a norm. Hence, due values depend on the condition in
which the given system is. There exist standard scales for the
estimation of due values. There exist maximum and minimum due values,
due values of quiescence state and peak load values, as well as due
curves of functions. Minimum and maximum due values should not always
correspond to those of quiescence state or peak load. For example, total
peripheral vascular resistance should be maximum in quiescence state and
minimum when loaded. Modern medicine makes extensive use of these kinds
of due values, but is almost unfamiliar with the concept of due curves.
Due value is what may be observed in most normal and healthy individuals
with account taken of affiliation of a subject to certain standard group
of alike subjects. If all have such-and-such value and normally exist in
the given conditions, then in order for such subject to be also able to
exist normally in the same conditions, he/she should be characterized by
the same value. For this purpose statistical standard scales are applied
which are derived by extensive detailed statistical research in specific
groups of subjects. These are so-called statistical mathematical models.
They show what parameters should be present in the given group of
subjects. However, the use of standard tables is a primitive way of
evaluation of systems’ functions. First, they provide due values
characterizing only a group of healthy individuals rather than the given
concrete subject. Secondly, we already know that systems at each moment
of time are in one of their functional states and it depends on external
influences. For example, when the system is in quiescence state it is at
its lowest level of functional condition, while being at peak load it is
at its highest level. What do these tables suggest then? They probably
suggest due values for the systems of organism in quiescence state or at
their peak load condition. But, after all, the problems of patients are
not those associated with their status in quiescence state, and the
level of their daily normal (routine) load is not their maximum load.
For normal evaluation of the functional condition of the patient’s
organism it is necessary to use not tabular data of due values, but due
curves of functions of the body systems which nowadays are almost not
applied. Coincidence or non-coincidence of actual curves of the body
systems’ functions with due curves would be a criterion of their
sufficiency or insufficiency. Hence, application of standard tables is
insufficient and does not meet the requirements of adequate diagnostics.
Application of due curves is more of informative character (see below).
Statistical mathematical models do not provide such accuracy, howsoever
exact we measure parameters. They show what values of parameters should
be in a certain group of subjects alike in terms of certain properties,
for example, males aged 20-30 years, of 165-175 cm height, smokers or
non-smokers, married or single, paleface, yellow- or black-skinned, etc.
Statistical models are much simpler than those determined, but less
exact though, since in relation to the given subject we can only know
something with certain degree (e.g. 80%) of probability. Statistical
models apply when we do not know all elements of the system and laws of
their interaction. Then we hunt for similar systems on the basis of
significant features, we somewise measure the results of action of all
these systems operating in similar conditions (clinical tests) and
calculate mean value of the result of action. Having assumed that the
given subject closely approximates the others, because otherwise he/she
would not be similar to them, we say: “Once these (people) have
such-and-such parameters of the given system in such-and-such conditions
and they live without any problems, then he/she should have these same
parameters if he/she is in the same conditions”. However, a subject’s
living conditions do always vary. Change or failure to account even one
significant parameter can change considerably the results of statistical
researches, and this is a serious drawback of statistical mathematical
models. Moreover, statistical models often do not reveal the essence of
pathological process at all. The functional residual capacity (FRC) of
lungs shows volume of lungs in the end of normal exhalation and is a
certain indicator of the number of functional units of ventilation
(FUV). Hence, the increase in FRC indicates the increase in the number
FUV? But in patients with pulmonary emphysema FRC is considerably
oversized. All right then, does this mean that the number of FUV in such
patients is increased? It is nonsense, as we know that due to emphysema
destruction of FUV occurs! And in patients with insufficiency of pumping
function of left ventricle reduction of FRC is observed. Does this mean
that the number of FUV is reduced in such patients? It is impossible to
give definite answer to these questions without the knowledge of the
dynamics of external respiration system function and pulmonary blood
circulation. Hence, the major drawback of statistical models consists in
that sufficiently reliable results of researches can be obtained only in
the event that all significant conditions defining the given group of
subjects are strictly observed. Alteration or addition of one or several
significant conditions of research, for example, stature/height, sex,
weight, the colour of eyes, open window during sleep, place of
residence, etc., may alter very much the final result by adding a new
group of subjects. As a result, if we wish to know, e.g. vital capacity
of lungs in the inhabitants of New York we must conduct research among
the inhabitants of New York rather than the inhabitants of Moscow, Paris
or Beijing, and these data may not apply, for example, to the
inhabitants of Rio de Janeiro. Moreover, standards/norms may differ in
the inhabitants of different areas of New York depending on
national/ethnic/ identity, environmental pollution in these areas,
social level and etc. Surely, one may investigate all conceivable
variety of groups of subjects and develop specifications/standards, for
example, for males aged from… to…, smokers or non-smokers of cigars
(tobacco pipes, cigarettes or cigarettes with cardboard holder) with
high (low) concentration of nicotine, aboriginals (emigrants), white,
dark- or yellow-skinned, etc. It would require enormous efforts and
still would not be justified, since the world is continually changing
and one would have to do this work every time again. It’s all the more
so impossible to develop statistical specifications/standards for
infinite number of groups of subjects in the course of dynamic
processes, for example, physical activities and at different phases of
pathological processes, etc., when the number of values of each separate
parameter is quite large. When the system’s details are completely
uncertain, although the variants of the system’s reaction and their
probabilistic weighting factors are known, statistical mathematical
model of system arises. Inaccuracy of these models is of fundamental
character and is stipulated by probabilistic character of functions. In
process of studying of the system details of its structure become
apparent. As a result an empirical model emerges in the form of a
formula. The degree of accuracy of this model is higher than that of
statistical, but it is still of probabilistic character. When all
details of the system are known and the mechanism of its operation is
entirely exposed the deterministic mathematical model appears in the
form of the formula. Its accuracy is only stipulated by the accuracy of
measurement methods. Application of statistical mathematical models is
justified at the first stages of any cognition process when details of
phenomenon in question are unknown. At this stage of cognition a “black
box” concept is introduced when we know nothing about the structure of
this “box”, but we do know its reaction to certain influences. Types of
its reactions are revealed by means of statistical models and
thereafter, with the help of logic, details of its systems and their
interaction are becoming exposed. When all that is revealed,
deterministic models come into play and the evaluation of the systems’
functions is made not on the basis of tabular data, but on the basis of
due curve of the system function. Due curve of a system’s function is a
due range of values of function of the given concrete system in the
given concrete subject, with its load varying from minimum to maximum.
Nowadays due curves are scarcely used, instead extreme minimum and
maximum due values are applied. For example, due ventilation of lungs in
quiescence state and in the state of peak load. For this purpose maximum
load is given to individuals in homotypic groups and pulmonary
ventilation in quiescence state and in the state of peak load is
measured. Following statistical processing due values of pulmonary
ventilation for the conditions of rest and peak load are obtained. The
drawback of extreme due values consists in that this method is of little
use for the patients. Not all patients are able to normally perform a
stress test and discontinue it long before due maximum value is
achieved. The patient, for example, could have shown due pulmonary
ventilation, but he/she just stopped the load test too early. How can
the function be estimated then? It can be only done by means of due
curve. If the actual curve coincides with the due curve, the function is
normal at the site where coincidence occurred. If actual curve is lower
than the due one, it is a lagging curve. Inclined straight line
consisting of vertical pieces of line is the due curve. Vertical dotted
straight line is the boundary of transition of normal or lagging
function into the inadequate line (a plateau). The drawback of due
curves is that in order to build them it is necessary to use
deterministic mathematical models of systems which number is currently
very low. They are built on the basis of knowledge of cause-and-effect
relationship between the system elements. These models are the most
complex, labor-consuming and for the time being are in many cases
impracticable. Therefore, these models are scarcely used in the sphere
of applied medicine and this is the reason for the absence of analytical
medicine. But they are the most accurate and show what parameters should
be present in the given concrete subject at any point of time. Only the
use of due curve functions allows for evaluating actual curves properly.
The difference of the deterministic mathematical models from statistical
tables consists in that in the first case due values for the concrete
given subject (the individual’s due values) are obtained, while in the
second case due values for the group of persons alike the given subject
are developed. The possibility of building deterministic models depends
only on the extent of our knowledge of executive elements of the system
and laws of their interaction. Calculation of probability of a thrown
stone hitting a designated target can be drawn as an example of
statistical standard scale in the mechanic. After a series of throws,
having made certain statistical calculations it is possible to predict
that the next throw with such degree of probability will hit the mark.
If deterministic mathematical model (ballistics) is used for this
purpose, then knowing the stone weight, the force and the angle of
throw, viscosity of air, speed and direction of wind, etc., it is
possible to calculate and predict precisely the place where a stone will
fall. “Give me a spot of support and I will up-end the globe”, said
Archimedes, having in view that he had deterministic mathematical model
of mechanics of movements. Any living organism is a very complex and
multi-component system. It’s impossible to account all parameters and
their interrelations, therefore statistical mathematical models cannot
describe adequately the condition of systems of organism. However, joint
use of statistical and deterministic models allows, with sufficient
degree of accuracy, to evaluate parameters of living system. In the
lapse of time in process of accumulation of knowledge statistical models
are replaced by deterministic. Engineering/technology is much simpler
than biology and medicine because the objects of its knowledge are
rather simple systems (machinery/vehicles) constructed by a man.
Therefore, its development and process of replacement of statistical
mathematical models for deterministic ones has made great strides as
compared with medicine. Nevertheless, on the front line of any science
including technical, where there is still no clarity about many things
and still a lot has to be learnt, statistics stands its ground as it
helps to reveal elements of systems and laws of their interaction. What
do we examine the subject and conduct estimation of functions of the
systems of his organism for? Do we do it in order to know to which
extent he/she differs from the homothetic subject? Probably, yes. But,
perhaps, the main objective of examination of a patient is to determine
whether he/she can normally exist without medical aid and if not, what
kind of help might be provided. Pathological process is a process of
destruction of some SFU of the organism’s systems in which one of the
key roles is played by a vicious circle. However, vicious circles start
to actuate only if certain degree of load is present. They do not emerge
below this level and do not destroy SFU, i.e. no pathological process
emerges and no illness occurs below a certain threshold of loading
(mechanical, thermal, toxic, etc.). Hence, having defined a threshold of
the onset of the existence of vicious circle, we can learn the upper
“ceiling” of quality of life of the given patient. If his/her living
conditions (tempo of life) allow him/her not to exceed this “ceiling”,
it suggests that the given subject will not be in poor health under
these conditions. If the tempo of life requires more than the capacity
of his/her organism may provide, he/she will be in poor health. In order
not to be ill he/she should stint himself/herself in some actions. To
limit oneself in actions means to reduce one’s living standard, to
deprive oneself of the possibility to undertake certain actions which
others can do or which he/she did earlier, but which are now
inaccessible to the given patient on the grounds of restricted resources
of his/her organism because of defects. If these restrictions have to do
only with pleasure/delight, such as, for example, playing football, this
may be somehow sustained. But if these restrictions have to do with
conditions of life of the patient it has to be somehow taken into
account. For example, if his/her apartment is located on the ground
floor, then to provide for quite normal way of life his/her maximum
consumption of О2 should be, e.g., 1000 ml a minute. But what one should
do if he/she lives, e.g., on the third floor and in the house with no
elevator, and to be able to get to the third floor on foot he/she should
be able to take up 2000 ml/min О2, while he/she is able to uptake take
up only 1000 ml/min О2,? The patient would then have a problem which can
be solved only by means of some kind of health care actions or by
changing conditions of life. In clinical practice we almost do not
assess the patient’s functional condition from the stand point of its
correspondence to living conditions. Of course, it is trivial and we
guess it, but for the time being there are no objective criteria and
corresponding methodology for the evaluation of conformity of the
functional reserves of the patient’s organism with the conditions of
his/her life activity. Ergonomics is impossible without systemic
analysis. Major criterion of sufficiency of the organism’s functions in
the given conditions of life is the absence of the occurrence of vicious
circles (see below) at the given level of routine existential loads. If
vicious circles arise in the given conditions, it is necessary either to
somehow strengthen the function of the organism’s systems or the patient
will have to change his/her living conditions so that vicious circles do
not work, or otherwise he/she will always be in poor health with all the
ensuing consequences. So, we need not only to know due minimum or
maximum values which we may obtain using statistical mathematical
models. We also need to know the patient’s everyday due values of the
same parameters specific for the given concrete patient so that his/her
living conditions do not cause the development of pathological processes
and destroy his/her organism. To this effect we need deterministic
mathematical models.

Stabilization systems and proportional systems. There exist a great
number of types of various systems. But stabilization systems and
proportional systems are of special importance for us. In respect of the
first one the result of action always remains the same (stable), it does
not depend on the force of external influence, but on the command. For
example, рН of blood should be always equal to 7.4, blood pressure to
120/80 mm Hg, etc., (homeostasis systems) regardless of external
influences. In respect of the second one the result of action depends on
the force of external influence under any specific law designated by the
command and is proportional to it. For example, the more physical work
we perform the more О2 we should consume and excrete СО2. Stabilization
system uses two receptors, “Х” and “Y”. The “Х” receptor is used to
start up the system depending on the presence of external influence,
while the “Y” receptor is used for the measurement of the result of
action. The command (the task specifying the value of the result of
action) is entered to the command entry point of the stabilization
system’s control block. Stabilization system should fulfill this task,
i.e. support (stabilize) the result of action at the designated level
irrespective of the force of external influence. Stability of the result
of action is ensured by that the “database” of the control block
contains the ratios/correlations of the number of active SFU and forces
of external influence and is sustained according to the NF logic: if the
result of action has increased, it is necessary to reduce it, and if it
has decreased it’s necessary to increase it. For this purpose the
control block should contain DPC and NF. Hence, the elementary control
block (DPC) is not suitable for stabilization systems. At least simple
control block which contains NF as well is necessary. In stabilization
system the result of action of the system up to vertical dotted straight
line is stable (normal function, the curve goes horizontally). Beyond
the dotted straight line the function goes down (increases),
stabilization was disturbed (insufficiency of function). With
proportional system, its function increases (goes down) until vertical
dotted straight line proportionally to the external influence (normal
function). Beyond the dotted straight line the function does not vary
(it entered the saturation phase, transited to a plateau condition –
insufficient function). The measuring element in stabilization system
continually measures the result of action of the system and communicates
it to the control block which compares it to the preset result. In case
of discrepancy of the result of action with the task this block makes
decision on those or other actions to be taken and forces the executive
elements to operate so that this divergence has disappeared. External
influence may vary within various ranges, but the result of action
should remain stable and be equal to the preset result. The system
spends its resources to do it. If the resources are exhausted,
stabilization system ceases to stabilize the result of action and
starting from this point the onset of its insufficiency occurs. One of
stabilization examples is stellar rotation speed in vacuum. If the
radius of the star reduces, its rotational speed will increase and
centrifugal forces will amplify, thus scaling up its radius and slowing
down its rotational speed. If the radius of the star scales up, the
entire process will go in a reverse order. A figure skater regulates the
speed of rotational pirouettes he/she performs on the skating-rink based
on the same principle. Proportional system should also use both “Х” and
“Y” receptors. One of them measures the incoming influence, while
another one measures the result of action of the system. The command
(the task as to what the proportion between external influence and the
result of action should be) is input to the entry point of the control
block. It is for this reason that such systems are called proportional.
External influence may change within the varying range. But the control
block should adjust the performance of the executive elements so that
the “prescribed” (preset by the directive) proportion between external
influence and the result of action is maintained. Examples of
proportional systems are, for example, amplifiers of electric signals,
mechanical levers, sea currents (the more the water in the ocean is
warmed up, the more intensive is the flow in the Gulf Stream),
atmospheric phenomena, etc. So, the examples of stabilization and
proportional systems are found in any medium, but not only in biological
systems.

Active and passive systems. Passive systems are those which do not
exspend energy for their actions. Active systems are those which do
exspend energy for their actions. However, as it was repeatedly
underlined, any action of any system requires expenditure of energy. Any
action, even the most insignificant, is impossible without expenditure
of energy, because, as it has already been mentioned, any action is
always the interaction between systems or its elements. Any interaction
represents communication between the systems or their elements which
requires expenditure of energy for the creation thereof. Therefore any
action requires energy consumption. Hence, all systems, including
passive, consume energy. The difference between active and passive
systems is only in the source of energy. How does the passive system
operate then? If the system is in the state of equilibrium with the
environment and no influence is exerted upon it the system should not
perform any actions. Once it does not perform any actions, it does not
consume energy. It is passive until the moment it starts to operate and
only then it will start to consume energy. The balanced state of a
pencil is stipulated by the balanced pushing (pressure) of springs onto
a pencil. The springs are not simply incidental groups of elements (a
set of atoms and molecules), but they are passive systems with NF loops
and executive elements at molecular level (intermolecular forces in
steel springs) which seek to balance forces of intermolecular
connections/bonds which is manifested in the form of tension load of the
springs. Since in case of the absence of external influence no actions
are performed by the system, there is no energy consumption either, and
the system passively waits for the onset of external influence. Both
types of systems have one and the same goal: to keep a pencil in
vertical position. In passive systems this function is carried out by
springs (passive SFU, A and B) and air columns encapsulated/encased in
rubber cans (passive SFU, D). The SFU store (use) energy during external
influence (pushing a pencil with a finger squeezes the springs). In
active system (C) the same function is achieved for at the expense of
airflows which always collapse. These airflows create motor fans (active
SFU) which spend energy earlier reserved, for example, in accumulators.
Once these airflows are encapsulated/encased in rubber cylinders they
will not collapse any more and will exist irrespective of fans, while
carrying out the same function. But now it represents a passive system
(D). Now external influence occurs and the pencil has diverged aside.
The springs would immediately seek to return a pencil to the former
position, i.e. the system starts to operate. Where does it take energy
for the actions from? This energy was brought by the external influence
in the form of kinetic energy of pushing by a finger which has
compressed (stretched) the springs and they have reserved this energy in
the form of potential energy of compression (stretching). As soon as
external influence (pushing by a finger) has ceased, potential energy of
the compressed springs turns to kinetic energy of straightening thereof
and it returns a pencil back in the vertical balanced position. External
influence enhances internal energy of the system which is used for the
performance of the system. The influence causes surplus of internal
energy of the system which results in the reciprocal action of the
system. In the absence of influence no surplus of the system’s internal
energy is available which results in the absence of action. External
influence brings in the energy in the system which is used to produce
reaction to this influence. Functions of springs may be performed by
airflows created by fans located on a pencil. In order to “build”
airflows surplus of energy of the “fans – pencil” system is used which
is also brought in from the outside, but stored for use at the right
time (for example, gasoline in the tank or electricity in accumulator).
Such system would be active because it will use its internal energy,
rather than that of external influence. The difference between airflows
and springs consists in that the airflows consist of incidental groups
of molecules of air (not systems) moving in one direction. Amongst these
elements there are executive elements (SFU, air molecules), but there is
no control block which could construct a springs-type system out of
them, i.e. provide the existence of airflows as stable, separate and
independent bodies (systems). These airflows are continually created by
fan propellers and as they have no control block of their own they
always collapse by themselves. Suppose that we construct some kind of a
system which will ensure prevention of the airflows from collapse, let’s
say, encase them in rubber cylinders, they then may exist independently
of fans. But in this case the system of stabilization of the pencil’s
vertical position will shift from the active category to the passive.
Hence, both active and passive systems consume energy. However, the
passive ones consume the external energy brought in by external
influence, while the active ones would use their own internal energy.
One may argue that internal energy, say, of myocyte is still the
external energy brought in to a cell from the outside, e.g. in the form
of glucose. It is true, and moreover, any object contains internal
energy which at some stage was external. And we probably may even know
the source of this energy, which is the energy of the Big Bang. Some
kind of energy was spent once and somewhere for the creation of an atom,
and this energy may be extracted therefrom somehow or other. Such
brought-in internal energy is present in any object of our World and it
is impossible to find any other object in it which would contain
exclusively its own internal energy which was not brought in by anything
or ever from the outside. Energy exchange occurs every time the systems
interact. But passive systems do not spend their internal energy in the
process of their performance because they “are not able” of doing it,
they only use the energy of the external influence, whereas active
systems can spend their internal energy. The passive system is the
thorax which performs passive exhalation and many other systems of
living organism.

Evolution of systems. Complex control block. For the most efficient
achievement of the goal the system always should carry out its action in
the optimum way and produce the result of action in the right place and
time. The system’s control block solves both problems: where and when it
is necessary to actuate. In order to be able to operate at the right
place it should have a notion of space and the corresponding sensors
delivering information on the situation in the given space. In turn, the
time of delivery of the result of action with simple systems includes
two periods: the time spent for decision-making (from the moment of
onset of external influence till the moment of SFU activation) and the
time spent for the SFU actuation (from the moment of the beginning of
SFU activation till the moment the result of action is achieved). The
time spent for the decision-making depends on duration of cycles of the
system’s performance which issue was discussed above. The time spent for
the SFU actuation depends on the SFU properties such as, for example,
the speed of biochemical reactions in live cells or the speed of
reduction of sarcomere in muscular cells which to a considerable degree
depends on the speed of power consumption by these SFU and the speed of
restoration of energy potential after these SFU have been actuated.
These speeds are basically the characteristics inherent in SFU, but are
also determined by service systems which serve these SFU. They may also
be controlled by control block. Metabolic, hormonal, prostaglandin and
vegetative neural regulation in living organism is intended just for
this purpose, i.e. to change to some extent the speeds of biochemical
reactions in tissue cells and conditions of delivery of energy resources
by means of regulation of (service) respiratory and blood circulation
systems. But the notion of “at the right time” means not only the time
of actuation in response to the external influence. In many cases there
is a need for the actuation to start before external influence is
exerted. However, the system with simple control block starts to perform
only after the onset of external influence. It is a very significant
(catastrophic) drawback for living systems, because if the organism is
being influenced upon, it may mean that it is already being eaten. It
would be better if the system started to perform before the onset of
this external influence. If the external situation is threatening by the
onset of dangerous influence, the optimal actions of the system may
protect it from such influence. For this purpose it is necessary to know
the condition of external situation and to be able to see, estimate and
know what actions need to be undertaken in certain cases. In other
words, it is necessary to exercise control in order to forestall real
result of action prior to external influence. In order to perform these
actions it should contain special elements which can do it and which it
does not have. Simple control block can exercise control only on the
basis of mismatch (divergence/discrepancy) of real result of action with
the preset one, because the system with simple control block cannot
“know” anything about external situation until the moment this situation
starts to influence upon the system. The knowledge of external situation
is inaccessible to simple control block. Therefore, simple control block
always starts to perform with delay. It may be sometimes too late to
control. If the system (the living organism) does not know the external
situation, it may not be able to make projection as to what the
situation is and catch the victim or forestall encounter with a
predator. Thus, simple control block cannot make decisions on the time
and place of actuation. For this purpose control block needs a special
analyzer which can determine and analyze external situation and
depending on various external or internal conditions elaborate the
decision on its actions. This analyzer should have a notion of time and
space in which certain situation is deployed, as well as corresponding
informants (sensors with communication lines between them and this
special analyzer) which provide information on the external situation.
The analyzer-informant has nothing of this kind. When the hunter shoots
at a flying duck, it shoots not directly at the bird, but he shoots with
anticipation as he knows that before the bullet reaches a duck it (the
duck) will move forward. The hunter, being a system intended for
shooting a duck, should see the entire situation at a distance, estimate
it correctly, make the projection as to whether it makes sense to shoot,
and he should act, i.e. shoot at a duck, only on the basis of such
analysis. He cannot wait until the duck touches him (until his “X” is
actuated) so that he then can shoot at it. In order to do so he should
first single out a duck as the object he needs from other unnecessary
objects, then measure a distance to a duck, even if it would be “by
eye”. He does it by means of special (visual) analyzer which is neither
“X” nor “Y” sensor, but is an additional “C” sensor (additional special
remote receptors with afferent paths). Such receptors can be any
receptors which are able of receiving information at a distance (haemo-,
termo-, photoreceptors, etc). The hunter’s visual analyzer includes
photosensitive rods and cone cells in the eye (photoreceptors), optic
nerves and various cerebral structures. He should be able to distinguish
all surrounding subjects, classify them and single out a duck against
the background of these subjects and locate a duck (situational
evaluation). In addition, by means of reciprocal innervation he should
position his body in such a way that the gun is directed precisely to
the place in front of the duck (forestalling/ anticipation) to achieve
the goal, i.e. to hit the duck. He does all this by means of his
additional analyzer which is the analyzer-classifier. Simple control
block of systems with NF does not contain such additional
analyzer-classifier. That is why it is called “simple”. It has only
analyzer-informant which feels external influence by means of “X” sensor
only when this influence has already begun; it measures the result of
action by means of NF (“Y” sensor) only when this result is already
evident and analyzes the information received after the result of action
is already produced, because it takes time for the NF to activate. In
addition, the analyzer-informant contains only “database” in which the
table of due values of controllable parameters (data) which need to be
compared to the data of measurements of external influence and results
of action “is written down” in explicit or implicit form. It elaborates
decisions on the basis of these comparisons. Its algorithm of control is
based only on the comparison of the given measurements carried out by
“X” and “Y” with the “database”. If the mismatch is equal to “M” it is
necessary to perform, for example, less action, whereas if it is equal
to “N”, then more action should be done. Simple control block cannot
change the decision as to the alteration of the level of controllable
parameter, time of actuation and the NF intensity, since it does not
have appropriate information. To perform these actions it should contain
special elements which can provide it with such information. What does
it need for this purpose? In order to make a decision the given block
should “know” the situation around the system which can cause certain
external influence. For this purpose it should first of all “see” it,
i.e. have sensors which can receive information at a distance and
without direct contact (remote “C” informant). In addition, it should
contain a special analyzer-classifier which can classify external
environment and single out from it not all the objects and situations,
but those only which may affect the implementation of its goals.
Besides, it should have notions of space and time. The play of fish and
even dolphin shoals in the vicinity of floating combatant ship cannot
affect its movement to target destination. But the “game” of the enemy
submarine in its vicinity may substantially affect the fulfillment of
its task. The combatant ship should be able to “see” all its
surroundings and, based on the external situation, single out from all
possible situations only those that may create such external influences
which can prevent it from the implementation of its objective. For this
purpose it should “know” possible situational scenarios which may affect
the achievement of the goal of the given system. To this effect it
should have “knowledge base” containing the description of all those
situations which can affect the implementation of the objective. If its
“knowledge base” does not have the description of certain objects or
situations it cannot distinguish (classify) an object or a situation and
can not make correct decision. The “knowledge base” should store
information not on the parameters of external influence which are stored
in the “database”, but on the situations around (beyond) the system
which may lead to specific external influence. The “knowledge base” may
be introduced in the control block at the moment of its “birth” or later
together with the command, at that it is being introduced in the given
block by the systems external in relation to the given system. If its
“knowledge base” does not contain the description of the given
situation, it can not distinguish and classify it. The “knowledge base”
contains the description of various situations and the significance of
these situations for the system. Knowing the importance of real
situation for the achievement of the goal the system can make projection
and take decision on its actions depending on the projection made. In
addition to the “knowledge base” it should have “decision base”– a set
of ready/stored/ decisions that are made by the control block depending
on the situation and the projection, (authorized decisions,
instructions) in which appropriate decisions are stored that need to be
made in respective situations. If it does not have ready decisions
regarding external situation it cannot perform its objective. Having
identified a situation and elaborated the decision, it gives a command
to the analyzer-informant which activates a stimulator in an appropriate
way. Thus, the control block is being complexificated on account of
inclusion in its structure of the “C” informant and the
analyzer-classifier containing the “knowledge base” and the “base of
decisions”. That is why such control blocks are called “complex”. The
more complex the decision-making block is, the more precise decision may
be chosen. Consequently, complex control block includes both the
analyzer-informant which has “database and the analyzer-classifier which
has the “knowledge base” and the “decision base”. Not any living cell
has analyzer – classifier. Animate/organic/ nature is classified under
two major groups: flora and fauna. Plants, as well as many other living
forms of animate nature, such as corals and bacteria, do not possess
remote sensors, although in some cases it may seem that plants,
nevertheless, do have such sensors. For example, sunflowers turn their
heads towards the sun as if phototaxis is inherent in them. But they
actually turn their heads not towards the light, but towards the side
wherefrom their bodies get more heated, and heat comes from the side
wherefrom the light comes. Heat is felt locally by a sunflower’s body.
It does not have special infra-red sensors. Photosynthesis process is
not a process of phototaxis. Hence, plants are systems with simple
control block. In spite of the fact that there are plants with a very
complex structure that are even capable to feed on subjects of fauna,
their control block is still simple and reacts only to direct contact.
For example, a sundew feeds on insects; it can entice them, paste them
to its external stomach and even contract its valves. It’s a predator
and in this sense it is akin to a wolf, a shark or a jellyfish. It can
do variety of actions like an animal, but it can only do it after the
insect alights on it. A sundew cannot chase its victims because it does
not see them (remote sensors are not available). Whatever alights on it,
even a small stone, it will do all necessary actions and try to digest
it because it does not have analyzer-classifier. This is why a sundew is
a plant, but not an animal. Animate cells, including unicellular forms,
even such as amoeba or infusoria types, are systems with complex control
blocks since they possess at least one of spatial analyzers –
chemotaxis. It is the presence of remote sensors that differs a cell of
an animal from any objects of flora, in which such sensors controls are
not present. Therefore the control block is a determinant of what kind
of nature the given living object belongs to. The jellyfish is not an
alga, but an animal because it has chemotaxis. Remote analyzer gives an
idea about the space in which it has to move. That is why plants stay
put, while animals move in space. Simple control block including only
the analyzer-informant is a determinant of the world of minerals and
plants. We will see below where the difference between the mineral and
vegetative worlds/natures lies. Complex control block including the
analyzer-classifier is a fauna determinant anyway. An amoeba is the same
kind of hunter as a wolf, a shark or a man. It feeds on infusorians. To
catch an infusorian it should know where the latter is and should be
able to move. It cannot see the victim at a distance, but it can feel it
by its chemical sense organs and seek to catch it as it has chemotaxis,
possibly the first of the remote sensor mechanisms. But in addition to
chemotaxis the amoeba should also have a notion (even primitive) of
space in which it exists and in which it should move in a coordinated
and task-oriented manner to catch an infusorian. In addition, it should
be able to single out an infusorian from other objects which it can
encounter on its way. Its analyzer-classifier is much simpler than, for
example, that of a wolf or a shark because it does not have organs of
sight and hearing and neural structures at all, but it can classify
external situation. It has complex control block comprising the “C”
informant, and that is why an amoeba is not a plant, but an animal.
Since control blocks may be of any degree of complexity, reflexes may be
of any degree of complexity, too, from elementary axon reflexes to the
reflexes including the cerebral cortex performance (instincts and
conditioned reflexes). The number of reflexes of living organism is
enormous and there exist specific reflexes for each system of the
organism. Moreover, the organism is not only a complex system in itself,
but due to its complexity it has a possibility to build additional,
temporary/transient/ systems necessary at the given point of time for
some specific concrete occasion. For example, lamentation system is a
temporary system which the organism builds for a short time interval.
The lamentation system’s control block is the example of complex control
block. The purpose of lamentation is to show one’s suffering and be
pitied. This system includes, in the capacity of composite executive
elements, other systems (subsystems) that are located sufficiently far
from each other both in space and in terms of functions (lacrimal
glands, respiratory muscles, alveoli and pulmonary bronchial tubes,
vocal chords, mimic muscles, etc.). At first the external situation is
identified and in case of need lamentation reflex (complex reflex, an
instinct) is actuated under the certain program, which includes control
of lifting up one’s voice up to a certain timbre (control over the
respiratory muscles and vocal chords), sobbing (a series of intermittent
sighs), lacrimation /excretion of tears/, specific facial expression,
etc. All these remote elements are consolidated by the complex control
block in a uniform system, i.e. lamentation system, with very concrete
and specific purpose to show one’s sufferings to the other system. The
lamentation reflex can be realized at all levels of nervous system,
starting from the higher central cerebral structures, including
vegetative neural system, subcortex and up to cerebral cortex. But we
are examining only child’s weeping which is realized in neural
structures not higher than subcortex level (instinctive crying). After
the purpose has been achieved (sufferings have been explicitly
demonstrated, and whether or not the child was pitied will be found out
later) the reflex is brought to a stop, this complex control block
disappears and the system disintegrates into the components which now
continue functioning as part of other systems of organism. Lamentation
system disappears (it is scattered). Whence the control block (at
subcortex level) knows that it is necessary to cry now, but it is not
necessary to cry at any other moment? For this purpose it identifies a
situation (singles it out and classifies). The analyzer-classifier is
engaged in it. Its “knowledge base” is laid down in subcortex from birth
(the instincts). Simple control block cannot perform such actions. All
actions of the systems controlled by elementary and simple control
blocks would be automatic. Biological analogues of elementary control
block are the axon reflexes working under the “all-or-none” law; those
of simple control blocks are unconditional (innate, instinctive)
reflexes when certain automatic, but graduated reaction occurs in
response to certain external influence. Simple control block would be
adapting the system’s actions better than the elementary one because it
takes account of not only external influence, but the result of action
of the system which has occurred in response to this external influence
as well. But it cannot identify a situation. Complex control block can
perform such actions. It reacts not to external influence, but to
certain external situation which can exert certain external influence.
Biological analogues of complex control block are complex reflexes or
instincts. During pre-natal development the “knowledge” of possible
situations “is laid down” into the brain of a fetus (the “knowledge
base”). The volume of this knowledge is immense. A chicken can run
immediately after it hardly hatches from egg. A crocodile, a shark or a
snake become predators right after birth, i.e. they know and are able of
doing everything that is required for this purpose. It speaks of the
fact that they have sufficient inborn “knowledge base” and “base of
decisions” for this purpose. In such cases we say that animal has
instincts. Thus, the system with complex control block is the object
which can react to certain external situation in which this influence
may be exerted. But it can react only to fixed (finite) number of
external situations which description is contained in its “knowledge
base” and it has a finite number of decisions on these situations which
description is contained in its “base of decisions”. In order to
identify external situation it has the “C” informant and the
analyzer-classifier. In other respects it is similar to the system with
simple control block. It can also react to certain external influence
and its reaction is stipulated by type and number of its SFU. The result
of action of the system is also graduated. The number of gradations is
defined by the number of executive SFU in the system. It also has the
analyzer-informant with the “database”, DPC (the “X” informant) and NF
(the “Y” informant), which control the system through the stimulator
(efferent paths). There are no analogues with complex control block in
inorganic /abiocoen, inanimate/ nature. Biological analogues of systems
with complex control block are all animals, from separate cells to
animals with highly developed nervous system including cerebrum and
remote sense organs, such as sight, hearing, sense of smell, but in
which it is impossible to develop reflexes to new situations, for
example, in insects. The analogues of the “C” informant are all “remote”
receptors: eyesight (or its photosensitive analogues in inferior
animals), hearing and sense of smell. The analogues of
analyzer-classifier are, for example, visual, acoustical, gustatory and
olfactory analyzers located in the subcortex. Visual, acoustical,
gustatory and olfactory analyzers located in the cerebral cortex are
anyway referred to analyzers-correlators.

Self-training control block. No brain is able to hold enormous
“knowledge bases” on all possible conditions of the entire world around.
Therefore, one of the reasons why each species of animals occupies
corresponding biosphere niche is the necessity to limit the volume of
“knowledge base”. Antelope knows what the seal does not, and vice versa.
In each separate ecological niche the quantity of possible situations is
much less, than in all ecological niches all together. Therefore,
relatively small volume of necessary knowledge is required in separate
ecological niches. However, if one tries to somehow input /in the brain/
all the information currently available on all the situations which have
already been occurring in the world, it would not help either, because
the world alters continually and many situations have never ever arose.
The “knowledge base” basically may not have information on what has not
yet happened in the world. Naturally, the “base of decisions” cannot
contain all the possible options of decisions either. “Genetic
knowledge” contains only what the ancestors of animals have experienced.
They materially cannot have knowledge of what is going to happen. When
new situation arises, the system cannot identify, classify it and make
decision on it. Even if this situation will occur repeatedly, if the
system is unable of self-training it will every time fail to correctly
identify a situation because such situations are not contained in its
“knowledge base”. The ant runs along the fence, going up and down, and
cannot guess that it is possible to easily bypass the fence. Millions
years ago, when its genetically input “knowledge base” was formed the
fences were non-existent. If one tries to sink a thread on the web the
spider will leave this web and will weave a new one because it is not
familiar with such situation and it does not know and cannot learn that
it is possible to make a hole in a web so that the thread does not
interfere. All this is due to the fact that insects as a class of
animals are not capable of learning anything. They may be perfect
builders amazing us with their sophisticated and fine webs, nests and
other creations of their work. But they can only build based on their
innate knowledge. They do have “knowledge base” (instincts), but they do
not have cerebral structures (elements of control block) capable of
supplementing their own “knowledge base” with new existential
situations. They do not have reflexes on new stimuli/exciters/. To be
able to identify and classify new situations the control block should be
able to enter the descriptions of these situations in its “knowledge
base”. But at first it should be able to identify that it is a
completely new situation, for example, by comparing it to what already
exists in its “knowledge base”. Then it should identify the importance
(the value worth) of this particular situation for the achievement of
its goal. If there is no any correlation between the new situation and
the fulfillment of the goal of the system, there is no sense in
remembering this situation, otherwise the brain “will be crammed with
trash”. By singling out and classifying external situations (identifying
them) and finding interrelation (correlation) between these situations,
by decisions made and the achievement of the goal of the system the
control block learns to develop appropriate decisions. Thus, the
self-training decision-making block continually supplements its
“knowledge base” and “base of decisions”. But under the conservation law
nothing occurs by itself. In order for the control block to be able to
perform the above actions it should have appropriate elements. The major
element of the kind is the analyzer-correlator. It is the basis whereon
reflex on new stimulus/exciter or a new situation may emerge. Its task
is to detect a new situation, identify that it is new, determine the
degree of correlation between this situation and its own goal. If there
is no correlation between this new situation and implementation of the
goal by the system, there is no sense in remembering and loading its
limited “database” memory. If the degree of correlation is high it is
necessary to enter this situation in the “knowledge base” and develop a
decision on the choice of own actions for the achievement of its own
goal and thereafter to define whether there is correlation between the
decision made and the achievement of the goal. If there is no
correlation between the decision made and the fulfillment of the goal by
the system it is necessary to arrive at other solution and again
determine the correlation between the decision made and the achievement
of the goal. And it should be repeated in that way until sufficiently
high correlation between the decision made and the achievement of goal
is obtained. Only afterwards the correct computed decision should be
entered into the “base of decisions”. This is the essence of
self-training. Only the analyzer-correlator enables self-training
process. As a matter of fact, the system’s self-training means the
emergence of reflexes to new stimuli/exciters or situations.
Consequently, these are only possible when the control block contains
analyzer-correlator. Biological analogue of the analyzer-correlator is
the cerebral cortex. The presence of cortex determines the possibility
of emergence of reflexes to new situations. Cerebral cortex is only
present in animals which represent sufficiently high level of
development. Non-biological analogues of systems with such self-training
control block are unknown to us. Computer self-training systems are
built by man and the process of self-training at the end of the day
always involves human cerebral cortex. There exist various so-called
“intellectual” systems, but full-fledged intelligence is only inherent
in human being. Let us specify that there are no self-training systems,
but there are their self-training control blocks, because executive
elements cannot be trained in anything. There may be systems with simple
executive elements, but with control blocks of varying complexity. In
order for the control block to be a self-training structure it should
contain three types of analyzers: the analyzer-informant with
“database”; the analyzer-classifier with the “knowledge base” and “base
of decisions” (which is able of classifying external situation on the
basis of the information from the “C” informant); the
analyzer-correlator (able of identifying the interrelation – correlation
between various external situations and the results of actions of the
given system and transferring the knowledge obtained and decisions to
the analyzer-classifier to enter them in the “knowledge base” and the
“base of decisions”). Thus, the system with self-training control block
is an object which can learn to distinguish new external influences and
situations in which such influence may be exerted. For this purpose it
has the analyzer-correlator. In other respects it is similar to the
systems with complex control block. It can respond to specific external
influence and external situation and its reaction would be stipulated by
type and number of its SFU. The result of action of the system is also
graduated. The number of gradations is determined by the number of
executive SFU in the system. It also has analyzer-qualifier with
“knowledge base” and “base of decisions” and the analyzer-informant with
“database”, DPC (the “X” informant) and NF (the “Y” informant), which
operate the system through the stimulator (efferent paths). In
inorganic/inanimate nature there are no analogues of systems with
self-training control blocks. Biological analogues of systems with
complex control block are all animals with sufficiently developed
nervous system in which it is possible to develop reflexes to new
situations (should not be confused with conditioned reflexes). The
analogue of analyzer-correlator is only the cerebral cortex.

Signaling systems. The appearance in the control block of the
analyzer-correlator enabled the possibility to enhance its personal
experience by self-training and continually update its “knowledge base”
and “base of decisions”. But it cannot transfer its experience to other
systems. Personal experience is limited howsoever an individual would
try to expand it. In any case collective experience is much broader than
that of an individual. In order for one individual to be able to
transfer his/her experience to other individual separate device is
needed enabling “downloading” the information from one “knowledge base”
to another. For example, the antelope knows that the cheetah is very
dangerous because it feeds on antelopes and wishes to transfer this
knowledge to its calf. How can it be done? For example, the antelope can
simulate a situation playing a performance in which all characters are
real objects, i.e. it should expose itself to cheetah so that the calf
could see it to gain its own experience by the example of its mum. The
calf will see the situation and new reflex to new situation will be
developed and the calf will be on its guard against the cheetahs. Of
course, it is an absurd way as it does not solve the problem of
survival. Anyway, only one out of the two antelopes will survive. So,
what can be done in principle? How one self-training system can transfer
its individual experience to other self-training system? It is necessary
to simulate a situation by making a show in which all characters are
abstract objects and replace real objects with others, which are
conferred conventional connection/link between them and the real objects
(abstracting of objects). Such abstract objects are prearranged signals.
The systems “agree” (stipulate a condition) that if such-and-such signal
occurs, it will speak of something agreed upon. It is the development of
conditioned reflex that represents replacement of real influence for
abstract influence. It is a so-called first signaling system which is
based on conditioned reflexes. The appearance of cheetah causes
producing a panic sound by an antelope. Consequently such sound is
associated with the appearance of cheetah and it becomes an abstract
substitute of cheetah itself, i.e. prearranged signal. Any motional
signal may be an abstract substitute of danger, i.e. raising or dropping
of tail, special jumps, producing special sounds, mimicry, etc. These
motional signals affect the systems in the herd and based on this signal
they may know about a danger nearby. In other words, there was a
replacement of real external influence by some abstract thing associated
with this object. Abstracting of real action by its symbol (vocal,
motional, etc) took place. For such abstracting the control block needs
to have an additional device – the analyzer-abstractor which should
contain the “base of abstraction” (“base of prearranged signals”). The
“base of abstraction” contains a set of descriptions of certain signals
which are perceived as conditional situations and correspond to other
certain situations. A prearranged signal is the appearance of some
object or movement (situational signal) which usually does not appear in
common routine situation. The occurrence of prearranged signal does not
in itself affect in any way the achievement of the goals by the systems.
For example, raising and fluffing out a tail does not influence in any
way neither food intake, nor running, etc. But the occurrence of a
signal is connected with the occurrence of such situation which can
affect the achievement of goals by the systems. Given the ability to
abstract from concrete situations, then not even seeing a cheetah, but
having seen the lifted tails, may be conducive to guessing that a
cheetah is nearby. Abstracting of real external influence by vocal or
motional symbol is performed by the first signaling system. It
supplements the analyzer-correlator and operates similarly to it, i.e.
is self-training. Unlike the “knowledge base” the “base of abstraction”
of a newly born system is empty. It is being filled out during the
system’s lifetime on account of possibility of self-training, and the
newly obtained knowledge is then downloaded in the “knowledge base”.
Sometimes behavior of animals seems to be indicative of their
possibility to transfer the information from one to another even before
the occurrence of the respective situation. For example, some lions go
to an ambush, others start driving the antelopes, so they kind of
foresee the situation. But they only know about ambush possibilities
based on their own experience. They do not have other means of transfer
of such information to their younger generation except for demonstrating
this situation to them. A new way for the development of systems (or
rather their control blocks) is being opened at this point, the way of
socialization – associations of animals in groups for the enhancement of
their own experience because prearranged signals are only intended for
an information transfer from one system (subject) to another. There are
probably several levels of such analyzer-abstractor and the degree of
abstraction which may be attained by this or other subject depends on
the number of these levels. One may abstract external influences,
external situations, real objects and even process of self-training
proper. But in any case one should be able to abstract and understand
abstract symbols. This is what analyzer-abstractor does. Abstracting of
real external influence, object or situation by means of situational
prearranged signal (a pose, a sound, a movement, some kind of action)
may be performed by the first signaling system. Abstracting of real
external influence, an object or a situation by means of sign
/emblematic/ prearranged signal (symbol) can only be performed by second
signaling system. Control block having the second signaling system is an
intellectual control block. Intelligence depends on the presence and the
degree of development (number of levels) of analyzer-abstractor. In
animals the second signaling system is very poorly developed or
undeveloped at all. If the horse dashes aside from a whip, it is not
even the first signaling system that works in this case, but rather a
reflex on the new situation which the horse has learnt when it first
encountered a whip. If the horse is coarsely shouted at even without
showing a whip to it, it will draw necessary conclusions. That’s the
point at which the first signaling system takes effect. But if the horse
is shown an inscription which reads that it now will be beaten, the
animal will not react to in any way because it cannot and will never be
able to read since it does not have second signaling system. There are
animals which apparently are capable of speaking and understanding
words, written symbols and even making elementary arithmetic operations.
But the second signaling system is very poorly developed in them and is
literally “in embryo” condition. When the trainer demonstrates the dog’s
counting up to five, he bluffs in a way as in fact the dog picks up some
motional signals from him, i.e. the second rather than the first
signaling system takes effect. The second signaling system is developed
to the utmost extent only in human beings. In human beings it is
developed to the extent that it makes it possible to transfer all
necessary information on our further actions to us in the nearest or
even quite a distant future only by means of sign symbols. We can read a
book containing just mere squiggles only, however such a full-blown and
colorful pictures are open before us that we forget about everything on
earth. Your dog for sure is surprised that its master looks for hours at
a strange subject (the book) and does not move, run or make any sounds.
And even if you try to explain to it that it is a book the dog will not
understand it anyway, because it has not yet “matured”, it does not have
second signaling system. Thus, the system with self-training control
block containing the first signaling system is an object which can
abstract external influences and situations by means of abstract
situational prearranged signal. For this purpose it has an
analyzer-abstractor of the first order. But it can inform of the
presence of such action or situation only at the moment of their
occurrence. It may transfer its experience to other systems only with
the help of the situational prearranged signal which possibilities are
limited. Such block has the “knowledge base” and “base of abstraction”
which it accumulates in its brain within the lifespan. In the
communities of systems with first signaling system accumulation of
personal knowledge is possible, whereas accumulation of social knowledge
is impossible because this knowledge is accumulated only in the control
block (cerebrum) which possibilities are limited. The system which has
self-training control block containing the second signaling system is an
object which can abstract external influences and situations by means of
abstract sign /symbolic/ prearranged signal. For this purpose it has an
analyzer-abstractor of Z-order. It can transfer its experience to other
systems by transfer of information to them in the form of conventional
signs. Such blocks accumulate “knowledge base” outside its cerebrum in
the form of script thanks to the developed “base of abstraction”. It
gives an opportunity to absolve from dependence of accumulation of
knowledge on the lifespan of an individual subject. In communities of
systems with the second signaling system accumulation of social
knowledge is possible and it strengthens the accumulation of individual
knowledge. In other respects the control block with signaling systems is
similar to the self-training control block examined above. It can react
to definite external influence and learn to react to new external
influence and an external situation, and its reaction is determined by
type and number of its SFU. The result of action of the system is also
graduated. The number of gradations is determined by the number of
executive SFU in the system. It also has the analyzer-correlator, the
analyzer-classifier with “knowledge base” and “base of decisions”, the
analyzer-informant with the “database”, DPC (with the “Х” informant) and
NF (the “Y” informant) which through a stimulator (efferent paths)
operate the system. In an inanimate/inorganic nature there are no
analogues of systems with control block having signaling systems.
Biological analogues of systems with control block containing the first
signaling system are all animals with sufficiently developed nervous
system in which conditioned reflexes may be developed. As a rule such
animals do already have social relations (flocks, herds and other social
groups), as signals are transferred from one animal to another.
Biological analogue of systems with control block containing the second
signaling system is only the human being.

Self-organizing systems. Bogdanov has shown that there exist two modes
of formation of systems. According to the first one the system arises at
least from two objects of any nature by means of the third entity –
connections (synthesis, generation). According to the second one the
system is formed at the expense of disintegration (destruction,
retrogression/degeneration) of the more complex system that previously
existed [6]. Hence, the system may be constructed (arranged) from new
elements or restructured (reorganized) at the expense of inclusion of
additional elements in its structure or by exclusion from its structure
of unnecessary elements. Apparently, there is also a third mode of
reorganization of systems – replacement of old or worn out parts for the
new ones (structural regeneration), and the fourth mode – changing of
connections/bonds between internal elements of the system (functional
regeneration). Generation (the first mode of reorganization) is a
process of positive entropy (from simple to complex, complexification of
systems). New system is formed for the account of expanding the
structure of its elements. This process occurs for the account of
emergence of additional connections between the elements and
consequently requires energy and inflow of substances (new elements).
The degeneration (the second mode of reorganization) is a process of
negative entropy (from complex to simple, simplification of systems).
New system is formed for the account of reduction of compositional
structure of its elements. This process releases energy and elements
from the structure. Both modes are used for the creation of new systems
with the new goals. In the first case complexification of systems takes
place, while in the second one their simplification or destruction
occurs. Structural regeneration (the third mode of reorganization) is
used for the conservation and restoration of the systems’ structure. It
is used in the form of metabolism, but at that, the system and its goals
remain unchanged. Energy and inflow of substances for the SFU
restoration is required for this process. Functional regeneration (the
fourth mode of reorganization) is used for the operation of systems as
such. The principle of the systems’ functioning resembles generation and
degeneration processes. In process of accretion of functions the system
includes the next in turn SFU ostensibly building a new, more powerful
system with larger number of elements (generation). During the reduction
of capacity of functions the system deactivates the next in turn SFU as
if it means to build a new system with fewer number of elements
(degeneration). But these are all reversible changes of the system
arising in response to the external influence which are effected for the
account of the change of the condition of its elements and the use of
DPC, NF and effectors. At that, the system’s structure kind of alters
depending on its goal. New active and passive (reserve) SFU appear in
it. This process requires energy and flow of substances for energy
recovery, but not necessarily requires a flow of substances for the
restoration of SFU. How does the organization (structuring) of system
occur? Who makes decision on the organization or reorganization of
systems? Who builds control block of the new or reorganized system? Who
gives the command, the task for the system? Why is the NF loop built for
meeting the given specific condition? Before we try to answer these
questions, we will note the following. First, there is a need in the
presence of someone or something “interested” in the new quality of the
result of action who (or which) will determine this condition (set the
goal) and construct the control block. Someone or something “interested”
may be the case coupled with natural selection, whereby by way of
extensive arbitrary search corresponding combinations of elements and
their interactions may emerge that are the most sustained/lasting in
the given conditions of environment. Thus, the environment/medium sets
condition and the incident builds the systems under these conditions. At
this point we do not consider the conditions in which generation or
degeneration occurs and which are associated with redundancy or lack of
energy (with positive or negative entropy). We only consider the need
and expediency of creation of systems. The more complicated the system
is, the more search options should be available and the more time it
takes (the law of large numbers). We will note, however, that the goal
is set to any systems from the outside, whether it is an incident, a
person, natural selection or something else. But we cannot ignore the
following very interesting consequence. Firstly, the survival rate is
the main and general goal of any living organism. And as far as the goal
is set from the outside, the survival rate is also something set to us
from the outside and is not something that stems from our internal
inspirations. In other words, the aim to survive is our internal
incentive, but someone or something from the outside has once imbedded
it in us. And prior to such imbedding it was not “ours”. Secondly, in
order to ensure the possibility of building systems with any kind of
control block, even the elementary one, the presence of such elements is
necessary which quality of results of actions could in principle provide
such a possibility. It follows from the conservation law and the law of
cause-and-effect limitations that nothing occurs by itself. These
elements should have entry points of external influence (necessarily),
command entry points (not necessarily for uncontrollable SFU) and exit
points of the result of action (necessarily). Exits and entries should
have possibility to interact between themselves. This possibility is
realized by means of combination of homo-reactivity and
hetero-reactivity of elements. Physical homo-reactivity is the ability
of an element to produce the same kind of result of action as is the
kind of external influence (pressure ? pressure, electricity ?
electricity, etc.). At the same time, characteristics of physical
parameters do not vary (10g ?10g, 5mV ? 5mV, etc.). Homo-reactive
elements are transmitters of actions. Physical hetero-reactivity is the
ability of an element, in response to external influence of one physical
nature, to yield the result of action of other physical nature (pressure
? electric pulse frequency, electric current ? axis shaft rotation,
etc.). Hetero-reactive elements are converters of actions. The elements
with physical hetero-reactivity are, for example, all receptors of
living organism (which transform the signals of measurable parameters
into nerve pulse trains), sensors of measuring devices, levers, shafts,
planes, etc. In other words such elements may be any material things of
the world around us that satisfy hetero-reactivity condition. Chemical
reactions also fall under the subcategory of physical reactions as
chemical reactions represent transfer of electrons from one group of
atoms to others. Chemistry is a special section of physics. Logic
hetero-reactivity is the ability of an element, in response to external
influence of one type physical nature, to yield the result of action of
the same physical nature (pressure ? pressure, electric current ?
electric current, etc.), but with other characteristics (10g ? 100g, 5mA
? 0.5mA, 1Hz ? 10Hz, 5 impulses ? 15 impulses, etc.). Amplifiers, code
converters, logic components of electronics are the examples of elements
with logic hetero-reactivity. Neurons do not possess physical
hetero-reactivity as they can perceive only potentials of action and
generate the potentials. But they have logic hetero-reactivity and they
can transform frequency and pulse count. They do not transform a
physical parameter as such, but its characteristics. Any system consists
of executive and operating elements. At the same time any control block
of any system itself consists of some kind of parts (elements), so it
also falls under the definition of systems. In other words, control
block and its parts are specific systems (subsystems) themselves with
their goals, and they have their own executive elements and local
control blocks operating these executive elements. Compulsory condition
for part of them is their ability to hetero-reactivity of one or other
sort. The effect of their control action consists only in their relative
positioning. Command is entered into the local control block (condition
of the task, the goal/objective) and the latter continually watches that
the result of action always satisfies the command. At that, the command
can be set from the outside by other system external in relation to the
given one, or the self-training block may “decide” independently to
change the parameters (but not the goal) set by the command. So, the
elements of control may be the same as the executive elements. The
difference is only in relative positioning. Director of an enterprise is
just the same kind of individual as any ordinary engineer. All elements
of the system, both executive and controlling, are structured according
to a certain scheme specific for each concrete case (for each specific
goal), but all of them must have the “exit” point/outlet/, whence the
result of action of the given element is produced, and two “entry
points” – for external influence and for entry of the command. If the
exit points of any elements are connected to the entry points for
external influences of other elements, such elements are executive. In
this case executive elements are converters of one kind of results of
action into the other, because the results of actions of donor systems
represent external influence for the recipient systems (executive
elements). They (external influences) ostensibly enter the system and
exit it being already transformed into the form of new results of
action. If exit points of elements are connected to command entry points
of other elements, such elements are controlling and represent a part of
control block. In such cases the result of action of some systems
represents the command for the executive elements, the instruction on
how to transform the results of action of donor systems into the results
of action of recipient systems. But the law of homogeneity of actions
and homogeneous interactivity (homo-reactivity) of the exit-entry
connection is invariably observed. If, for example, the result of action
of the donor element is pressure, the entry point of external influence
(for the command) of the recipient element should be able to react to
pressure, or otherwise the interaction between the elements would be
impossible.

Thirdly, in order to “hack” into the control of other systems the given
system should have physical or any other possibility to connect its own
exit point of result of action or own stimulator to the entry point of
the command of any other system. In this case this other system becomes
the subsystem subordinate to the given control block, i.e. the systems
should have physical possibility to combine exits of their stimulators
and/or results of action with the command entry points of other systems.
For this purpose they should be mobile. There are types of devices for
which the requirement of physical mobility is not necessary, but,
nevertheless, information from one system may flow into control blocks
of other devices. These are the so-called relay networks, for example,
computer operating networks, cerebral cortex, etc., in which virtual
mobility is possible, i.e. the possibility of switching of information
flows. In such networks the information can be “pumped over”/downloaded/
in those directions in which it is required. For example, human feet are
intended for walking, while hands – for handiwork. How is predestination
effected? In principle hands and feet are structured identically, with
the same autopodium, the same fingers (the same executive elements).
Nevertheless, it is practically impossible, for example, to brush the
hair with feet. Why? Because there are certain stereotypes of movements
in the cerebral cortex, without which hands are not hands and feet are
not feet. But we know cases when a person who lost both hands and
nevertheless, he perfectly coped with many household affairs with the
help of feet and took part in a circus show. How was it possible? Some
kind of remodeling/change/ occurred in his brain and he changed his
stereotypes. Cerebral structures which were previously controlling hands
have “downloaded” their “knowledge bases” into those cerebral structures
which operate the feet. Cerebral cortex was only able to do it thanks to
the presence of its property of relay circuits, i.e. the possibility to
turn information flows to the directions required for the given purpose.
Organization and reorganization of systems may be incidental and
target-oriented. In incidental organization or reorganization there is
no special control block which has the goal and decision on building of
a new system, even more so in such a detail that, for example,
such-and-such exit point of a stimulator needs to be connected to
such-and such command entry point. Fortuity is determined by
probability. That’s where the law of large numbers works, which reads:
“If theoretically something may happen, it will surely happen, provided
a very large number of occurrences”. The more the number of cases is,
the higher is the probability of appearance of any systems, successful
and unsuccessful, because fortuity creates the systems, the probability
sets their configuration and the external medium makes natural
selection. Therefore evolution lasts very long, sorting out multitude of
occurrences (development options). It is for this reason that various
combinations of connections of parts of systems occur. Therefore, both
nonviable monsters and the systems most adaptable to the given
conditions may be formed. Those weak are annihilated, while those strong
transfer their “knowledge bases” and “bases of decisions” to their
posterior generations in the form of genetically embedded properties and
instincts. It is not so important in the organization of systems which
control block (simple or complex) the coalescing (organizing) systems
have. What is only important is that the exit points of stimulators or
results of action of one kind of systems connect to the command entry
points of the others. Control blocks of coalescing systems may be of any
kind, from elementary to self-training. At that, even if the
self-training block (i.e. sufficiently developed) “would not want” to
connect its command entry point to the exit point of stimulator or the
result of action of other system, even the simplest one, it still won’t
be able of doing anything if it fails to safeguard its command entry
point. The virus “does not ask the permission” of a cell when it
“downloads” its genetic information in the cell’s DNA. The decision on
reorganization of the system (purpose) may come from the outside, from
the operating system sited higher on a hierarchy scale. It is passive
purposefulness, since the initiative comes from the outside. The
external system “tells” the given system: “As soon as you see
such-and-such system, affix it immediately to yourself”. The system can
undertake active actions for such an organization, but it is not yet
self-organizing as such, but an imposed (forced, prescriptive)
organization. But if it “occurs” to the system that “it would be quite
good if that green thing that stuck to me is included as a component in
my own structure, since the experience shows it can deliver glucose for
me from СО2 and light”, it would then mean self-organizing. Thus,
perhaps, once upon a time chlorophyll was included in the structure of
seaweed. Most likely, it did not happen purposefully, but rather
accidentally (accidental organization), as we cannot be sure that those
ancient seaweeds had a self-training control block, and the independent
“thought” may only occur in the system with such control block. This
example is only drawn to illustrate what we call a self-organizing
system. But the idea to take a stick in one’s hands to extend the hand
and get the fruit hanging high on the tree is only a prerogative of the
higher animals and the human being, which is a true example of
self-organization. Only the systems with self-training control block can
evaluate the external situation, properly assess the significance of all
the novelty surrounding the given system and draw conclusion on the
expediency of reorganization. It is an active purposefulness anyway,
since the initiative originated inside the given system and it “decided”
on its own and no one “imposed” it on the system. External medium
dictates conditions of existence of the systems and it can “force” the
system to make the decision on reorganization. But the decision on the
time and character of reorganization is taken by the system itself on
the basis of its own experience and possibilities. Only systems with
self-training control block can initiate active purposefulness, can be
deliberately the self-organizing systems. Thus, a man has invented work
tools, having thus strengthened the possibilities of its body. At that,
it should be noted that the decision on self-organizing does not
indicate at the freedom of choice of the goal of the system, but a
freedom of choice of its actions for the achievement of the goal set
from the outside. In order to implement its goal in a better way, for
example, to survive in such-and-such conditions, the system makes the
decision on reorganization so that to better adapt to external
conditions and enhance its survival chances.

Metabolism and types of self-organization. All the above was only
concerning the creation of new systems and their development. But any
systems are continually exposed to various external influences which
sooner or later destroy them. Our world is in continuous and
uninterrupted movement. The speeds of this movement may vary: somewhere
events occur once in millions years, while somewhere else millions times
a second. But most likely it is impossible to find a single place in the
Universe where no movement of any kind (thermal, electric,
gravitational, etc.) occurs. Hence, the process of negative entropy is
always present. Any systems are always being reorganized at the expense
of disintegration of more complex systems that have been existing
earlier, which grow old (degenerate). Destruction is a process of loss
by systems of their SFU. Systems of mineral nature (crystals, any other
amorphous, but inanimate bodies, planetary, stellar and galactic
systems) continuously undergo various external influences and are
scattered with varying speed due to the loss of their SFU. Mineral
nature grows old and changes, because the entropy law – from more
complex to more simple – works. In the mineral nature complexification
(generation) can only occur in case of excess of internal energy or its
continuous inflow from the outside. Thus, in a thermonuclear pile of
ordinary stars nuclei of complex atoms including atoms of iron were
formed. But the energy of such piles is not yet sufficient for the
formation of heavier nuclei. All other heavier nuclei were formed as a
result of explosions of supernovae and the release of super-power
energy. Therefore, figuratively speaking, our bodies are built of
stellar ashes. But as soon as energy of thermonuclear synthesis comes to
an end, the star starts to die out, passing through certain phases. We
do not know yet all phases of the development and dying of stars, but if
failing “to undertake some sort of measures” after a very long period of
time not only stars, but atoms as well, including their components
(protons, neutrons and electrons) will be shivered. Thus, the free
neutron “unprotected” by intranuclear system breaks up into a proton,
electron and neutrino within 12 minutes. Hence, the atomic and
intranuclear system is the system of stabilization of a neutron
protecting atom and its elements from disintegration. But even such
stable and seemingly eternal stellar formations such as “black holes”
“evaporate” in the course of time, expending their mass for
gravitational waves. In the absence of energy inflow the system would
just flake/scatter and lose its SFU. It follows explicitly from
thermodynamics laws. The so-called “thermal entropic death” is coming
forth. Destruction of systems under the influence of external
environment is the forced entropic reorganization (degeneration), rather
than self-organization. The objects of mineral nature possess only
passive destruction protection facilities and one of the major means of
protection is integration of elements in a system (generation).
Consequently, the emergence of systems and their evolution in mineral
nature represents means of protection of these elements from
destruction. One can not conquer alone. The system is always stronger
than singletons. Formation of connections/bonds between the elements and
the emergence of generation type systems in mineral nature is the
passive way of protection of elements against the destructive effect of
negative entropy. The weakest bodies are ionic and gas clouds, while the
strongest ones are crystals. However, all of them cannot resist external
influences indefinitely long, because they react only after their
occurrence, and they cannot resist entropy. Consequently, the presence
of passive means for the protection against destruction is insufficient.
Whatever solid and large the crystals might be, they would be scattered
/flaked in the lapse of time either. In order to keep the system from
destruction it is necessary to replenish destroyed parts continually.
Systems of vegetative, animal and human nature also undergo various
external influences and also are scattered (worn out) with varying
speed. And it happens for the same reason and the same law of negative
entropy, i.e. from more complex to more simple (degeneration) works. But
these systems differ from the systems of mineral nature that actively
try to resist destruction by continual renewal of their SFU structures.
This renewal occurs at the expense of continuous building of new SFU in
substitution of the destroyed ones. This process of renewal of destroyed
SFU also represents structural regeneration as such – a purposeful
metabolism. Therefore, metabolism of living organisms is an active way
of protection of systems from destructive effect of negative entropy
(from degeneration). In mineral nature metabolism may take place as
well, but it essentially differs from metabolism of any living systems.
Crystals grow from the oversaturated saline solution, the atmosphere
exchanges water and gases with the seas, automobile and other internal
combustion engines consume fuel and oxygen and discharge carbon dioxide.
But if a crystal is taken out from saline solution, it will just
collapse and will not undertake any measures on conservation of its
structure. When a camshaft in the automobile engine is worn out the car
does nothing to replace it. Instead, it is done by man. Any actions of
the system directed towards the replacement of destroyed and lost SFU
represent self-organization anyway, which in the living nature is called
structural self-reorganization or metabolism. In mineral nature
structural self-reorganization is nonexistent. Any living system,
regardless of its complexity, would undertake certain actions for the
conservation of its structure. At that, there are always two flows of
substances in living systems – flow of energy and
“structural”/constructive/ flow. The energy flow is intended to provide
energy for any actions of systems, including structural
self-reorganization, as it is necessary every time to build new
connections/bonds which require energy (regeneration). “Structural” flow
of substances is only used for structural regeneration, i.e. replacement
of worn out SFU for the new ones (in this case we do not examine the
system’s growth, i.e. generation). When we talk about
self-reorganization we mean “structural” flow of substances, although
such flow is impossible without energy. Myocardium in humans completely
renews (regenerates) its molecular structure approximately within a
month. It means that its myocardiocytes, or rather their elements
(myofibrillas, sarcomeres, organelles, membranes, etc.) are continually
being worn out and collapse, but are continually built again at the same
speed. Outwardly we can see one and the same myocardial cell, but
eventually its molecular composition is being completely renewed.
Throughout the human lifespan the type of organization varies. In the
early years of life organization occurs at the expense of inclusion of
new additional elements in the structure (generation, the organism grows
and develops), whereas starting from the mid-life period degeneration
predominantly takes place, i.e. destruction process (disintegration of
the previously existing more complex system). But these are now the
particulars associated with imperfection of real living systems. For any
system the overall objective is to exist in this World, and for this
purpose it should counteract destructive influences, for which purpose
it should have specific SFU which facilitate its operation and which
continuously collapse and need to be continuously renewed, i.e. build
anew, since regeneration is the essence of self-reorganization by means
of metabolism. Hence, the living nature differs from inanimate first of
all in that metabolism is intended for the conservation of its structure
(structural regeneration). In principle, any reaction of any systems is
directed towards conservation of the systems. Control block of systems
takes care of it using all its possibilities for this purpose: DPC, NF
and analyzers for the SFU operation. But in mineral nature there are
only passive ways of protection. And when the system of mineral nature
loses its SFU, it does not undertake any active measure to replace them.
It would try to resist the external influence, but no more than that. In
vegetative and animal nature and humans the systems cannot passively
resist the destructive effect of environment either, they also collapse,
but anyway they have active means of restoration of the destroyed parts,
they have the purposeful metabolism aimed at replacement of the lost SFU
(structural regeneration). It uses two mechanisms of the so-called
genetic regeneration: reproduction of systems (the parent will die, but
children will remain) and reproduction of elements of systems
(regeneration of elements of cells and tissue cells themselves). These
ways of conservation of systems are sufficiently effective. It is known
how complex it is to get rid of weeds in the field. There are sequoias
aged several thousand years that are found in nature. At the level of
separate individuals of a species this genetic system proves as the
system with simple control block, as simple automatic machine because
the DNA molecule does not have remote sensors, is has no
analyzer-correlator and it is impossible to develop conditioned reflexes
in it during the lifespan of one individual. But at the level of species
of living systems genetic mechanism proves anyway as a system with
complex control block because it “has a notion” of space and it has
collective memory in the form of conditioned reflexes and it is able of
self-training (adaptation of species). It is for this reason that
genetic accumulation of collective experience occurs, which then is
shown in the form of instincts at the level of separate individuals of a
species. This collective genetic mechanism watches that tomato looks
like tomato, a cockroach looks like a cockroach and chimpanzee looks
like a chimpanzee, and it watches that the behavior of the systems is
relevant. We do not know yet all the details of this mechanism, although
genomes of many living organisms, including human genomes, are
developed. We know that genes contain recorded genetic information on
how to structure this or another protein, but we do not know yet how,
for example, how the form of the nose constructed from this protein is
preset. The gene is known responsible for the generation of pigment that
tinctures the iris /orbital septum/ but we do not know how the form and
the size of this septum is coded. This mechanism is probably realized
only partially in the DNA itself, as a genome of an insect has much more
in common, let’s say, with a human genome, than the insect itself with
the human being. We do not know how the feelers of any insect of
such-and-such length are programmed and where it is recorded that it
should have eight pedicles or one horn on its head. And why from these
proteins programmed in one of the DNA genes structures in the form of
the feelers should be built in this particular place, while the
structures in the form of intestinal tubules should be built in another
place. Protein molecules are very complex and gigantic formations in
terms of molecular sizes with a very sophisticated three-dimensional
configuration. Probably, separate molecules of certain albumen types,
incidentally or non-incidentally, may approach each other so that to
form, like in a puzzle, the albuminous conglomerate only of a specific
shape. In that way it is possible to explain both the form and sizes of
albuminous structures. We can also assume that casually assembled
lame/poor forms have been rejected by evolution, while those successful
were purposefully fixed in genes. Consequently, the difference of forms
of organs constructed of identical proteins is explained by the
difference of the protein molecules structure? It may be true… But why
then keratin here is formed in the shape of elytra, and there – in the
form of horns or some kind of septa in the insect’s body? DNA only
programs building material – albumen/proteins, rather than the structure
(form), i.e. the organs built of these proteins, since DNA contains a
record of only how to structure the proteins (the “bricks” for building
a structure). But where is “the drawing of the entire building” and its
configuration recorded? There are no answers for the present. So, living
systems have the purposeful genetic structural regeneration which is
intended for continual renewal of elements of the system. Genetic
mechanism uses the “database” recorded in DNA and realized by means of
RNA. If it were not for the failures in this system, there would have
been no mutations and variability of species. However, the “faulty”
mechanism of mutations is too much subjected to contingencies and cannot
be target-oriented just because of contingency (incidental
self-organization). Reproductive mechanism of mutations allows making
selection by some features, and this is exactly a purposeful mutation
(purposeful self-organization). This mechanism can change its program
due to cross mating or at the moment of changing life phases
(larva?chrysalis?moth), although the possibilities of such change are
still very limited. A wolf will never beget a tiger and a trunk will
never grow in a wolf either, even if there would be a sudden need in it,
at least, for sure, not during the lifespan of one generation. But if me
myself, for example, need right now to “reconstruct” a hand to extend it
and to tear off a fruit from a tree, should I then wait for several
generations to pass for my hand to grow and extend? Can’t one get
transmuted without resorting to metabolism? It is possible if
“conscious” self-organization is added. All living beings, including
humans, have genetic system of contingency self-organization and in this
sense the human being is the same animal as any other animal. But
“conscious” and purposeful type of self-organization is only inherent in
human beings. Systems with preset (target-oriented) properties will
always be forming only in the event that organization or reorganization
of systems is purposeful. Only the control block “knows” about the goal
of the system and only it can make a decision, including on the system
reorganization. However, not each control block is suitable for
target-oriented reorganization. In order to decide that “that system”
needs to be attached to itself it is necessary to “see” this system,
know its property and define, even prior to beginning interaction,
whether these properties suit for the achievement of its own purpose.
And for this purpose it is necessary to be able to “see” and assess the
situation around the given system. All self-training systems are able of
making such an analysis. Therefore, many higher animals can reorganize
their body by enhancing its possibilities with additional executive
elements. They use tools of work (stones, sticks, etc.) for hunting
food. But these animals, perhaps, act at the level of instincts, i.e. at
the level of genetic self-organization, because even insects can use
work tools. True “conscious” self-organization at the given stage of
evolution is only present in human being because only he/she has
analyzers-abstractors of respective degree of complexity. Only the human
being could develop instruments of labor up to the level of modern
technologies because it has second signaling system which helped to
accumulate the experience of the previous generations by fixing it in
the abstract form, in the form of the script. And only the human being
using this experience has realized that there exists metabolism in a
living organism and that it is possible to influence an organism so that
to reorganize, if the need arises (to cure sick organism). Structural
regeneration is intended for conservation of the systems’ structure.
However, metabolism is not a full warranty from the destruction of
systems either. Plants cannot foresee the forthcoming destruction
because they do not possess the notion of space and they do not see the
situation around them, because they have simple control block. Fire will
creep up and burn a plant, the animal will approach and eat it, while
the plant will quietly waiting for its lot because it does not see the
surrounding situation, does not know the forecast and it does not have
corresponding decisions regarding specific situations. That is why the
systems emerged with more complex control blocks (animals and humans)
which can anticipate a situation and protect themselves from
destruction. Animals know about space and see the situation around,
because they have more complex control blocks. They can compete very
effectively with mineral and vegetative media. But competition between
the animal species has placed them in new circumstances. Now it is not
enough to have only complex control block and to see the surrounding
situation. In order to survive it is not enough only to be able of
scampering or be strong physically, it is necessary to better orient
itself in space and better assess the situation and be able to make
conclusions of own failures in case of survival. For this purpose it is
necessary to develop control blocks. The more complex the control block,
the higher is the degree of safety. And now it is not physical strength
which is a criterion of advantage, but cognitive ability, i.e. the more
complex the control block is (the brain with all its hierarchy of neural
structures), the better. Knowledge is virtue. At that, the purposes of
metabolism in animals and humans are the same as in flora, i.e.
reproduction of systems and reproduction of elements of systems. Hence,
in process of evolution advancement to ensure higher degree of safety of
systems, the possibilities of regeneration in the form of metabolism
were supplemented by intellectual possibilities of control blocks.
Regardless of what kind of nature the system belongs to (mineral,
vegetative, animal or human) one of its main purposes is always to
preserve itself and its structure. But in mineral nature there are only
passive ways of conservation, whereas in the organic nature active ways
of conservation do exist: self-organization at the expense of purposeful
metabolism. Therefore, struggle for food has always been the foundation
of existence. But metabolism only is not sufficient. Therefore, in
animals new active ways of protection are added: assessment of external
situation and protection from the destructive external influences
(complex reflexes, behavioral reactions). However, complex reflexes are
not enough either, as it is necessary also to learn new situations and
be able of making new decisions (reflexes to new stimuli/exciters). But
these appeared to be insufficient as well because of limitation of
personal experience. Therefore, personal experience was supplemented by
collective experience for the account of the first signaling system
(conditioned reflexes: the first signaling system, complex behavioral
reactions). And as far as the lifespan of each system is limited, in
order to transfer experience to the subsequent generations second
signaling system emerged which allows to save personal experience of
each system in the form of the script regardless of the system’s
lifespan. Consequently in order to better preserve itself, it is
necessary for the system to change and complicate continually the
structure (evolution and development of species) and, apparently to be
on the safe side, it’s nevertheless better to be more complex rather
than simpler (evolution race). Thus, a system may have: incidental
organization; generation (incidental physical coincidence of exit points
of stimulator or result of action of one systems with the command entry
points of control block or entry points of external influence of other
systems; may be present in systems with any control blocks, including
elementary); degeneration (destruction, structural simplification, loss
of SFU under the influence of environment – other systems, may be the
systems with any control blocks, including elementary); purposeful
organization; forced generation (purposeful physical combination of exit
points of stimulator or result of action of one systems with the command
entry points of control block or entry points of external influence of
other systems; may be in systems with any control blocks, including
elementary); forced degeneration (destruction, structural
simplification, loss of SFU of the system due to the purposeful effect
of other systems; may be in systems with any control blocks, including
elementary); self-organization; functional regeneration (operation of
the system proper, actuation or de-actuation of functions of own SFU,
depending on situational needs, without change of the structure; may be
in systems with any control blocks, including elementary); genetic
structural regeneration in the form of metabolism and reproduction of
individuals directed towards preservation of its structure (may be in
systems with control blocks, starting from simple ones); genetic
structural regeneration in the form of instinctive/subconscious/
structural reorganization aimed at strengthening the possibilities of an
organism by using other systems, that are not an immediate part of the
given system (subjects) (uses “genetic” memory and may be present in
systems with control blocks, starting from simple ones); conscious
structural regeneration directed to strengthening of possibilities of an
organism by use of other systems, not being an immediate part of the
given system (subjects) (various technologies; it is aimed at
strengthening the possibilities of an organism, may be present in
systems with control blocks, starting from complex ones with the second
signaling system). As we can see, there is a succession present in the
given classification of organization of systems, as it includes
everything that exists in our World, starting from objects of mineral
nature and including human activities in the form of industrial
technologies.

Evolution of our World. We always say that the objects (systems) exist
in our World /Unietse/and they operate in it. Therefore it is necessary
to give a definition of the concept “our World”. We call “our World” the
greatest and universal system in which based on the law of hierarchy all
objects exist as its subsystems which can be part of it without coming
into conflict with the laws of conservation and cause-and-effect
limitations. Such objects are target-oriented associations of systemic
functional units (SFU, elements) – the groups of elements interacting
with specific goal/purpose (systems, or rather subsystems of our World).
These include both the objects which existed before and are non-existent
now and those that exist now and will appear in the future as a result
of evolution. Absolutely all objects of our World have one or another
purpose. We do not know these purposes and we can only guess them, but
they are present in all the systems without exception. The purpose
determines the laws of existence and architecture (“anatomy”) of
objects, limits interaction between them or between their elements and
stipulates the hierarchy of both sub-goals and subsystems for the
achievement of these sub-goals. But this architecture is continually
found insufficient (limited) because it is determined by the law of
cause-and-effect limitations. It forces the systems to continuously seek
the way to overcome these limitations, develops them and determines
direction of evolution of the systems. That is why the systems develop
towards their complexification and enhancement of their possibilities
(evolve). If there would be no limitations, there would be no sense in
evolution because ultimately the goal of evolution always consists in
overcoming the limitations. All objects of our World have at least two
primary goals: to be/exist in this World (to preserve themselves) to
fulfill the goal and to have maximum possibilities to perform the
actions for the achievement of the goal. However, any object of our
World is limited in its possibilities to varying extent due to the law
of cause-and-effect limitations and moreover, since the objects are
continually exposed to various external influences destroying them, the
systems have to continually protect themselves from such destruction.
Therefore, the systems at first “have invented” passive and then active
ways of protection against such destructive influence. The process of
“invention” of these ways of protection and the enhancement of their
possibilities is what evolution of objects of our World means exactly,
at that it implies not only the evolution of living beings, but
evolution of everything that exists in the world. Consolidation of
objects in groups strengthens them and ensures the possibility for them
to co-operate against destruction in a target-oriented manner. It is for
the reason of “survival” of elements that the systems came into being,
and complexification of elements just magnifies their possibilities. The
simplest systems are those having only simple control block. Such
objects include all objects of mineral nature, as well as plants. The
possibilities of elementary particles are too small, and the lifespan of
many of them is too short. The lifetime and possibility of an electron,
proton or neutron are tenfold. Grouping of elements not only increases
their lifetime, but also increases their possibilities. What can be done
by electron (proton, neutron) cannot be done by elementary particles
constituting them. What can be done by atoms can not be done separately
by protons, neutrons and electrons. Grouping of atoms in molecules has
enabled the development of more complex systems, up to human being,
construction of which would have been impossible using elementary
particles. However, although in process of further consolidation of
atoms and molecules in conglomerates (mineral objects: gas clouds,
liquid and solid bodies) the possibilities of these objects increase,
but their lifetime starts to decrease sharply because the law of
negative entropy works. Destruction is the loss by the object of its
SFU. There are only two ways to prevent from destruction: increase in
durability of connections/bonds between the SFU, restoration of the lost
SFU, prevention of the SFU losses. The first one is passive, while the
other two are active ways of protection. The increase in durability of
connections/bonds between the SFU (the first way) is the passive way of
protection against destruction. Mineral bodies have only these passive
means of protection from the destructive effect of the external medium.
The weakest of them are gaseous objects, while the strongest are
crystalline. But even the strongest crystal may be destroyed. Metabolism
is aimed at the restoration of the lost SFU (the second way) and is the
active way of protection of systems from destruction. It is carried out
at the expense of capture of necessary elements from the external
medium. There is no metabolism in mineral objects, but it is present in
all living objects, including plants. Hence, our World can be divided
conditionally into two sub-worlds: inanimate/inorganic and animate
nature. The criterion for such division is metabolism – the purposeful
process of restoration of the lost SFU. But for such process the system
should contain corresponding elements (metabolism organs) which are not
present in the objects of mineral inorganic nature, but do exist in
plants. Prevention of SFU losses (the third way) is also an active way
of systems’ protection from their destruction. Systems may be prevented
from destruction for the account of their behavioral reactions depending
on the external situation. If the situation is threatening the system
needs to escape from the given situation. But for this purpose it is
necessary to be aware about this situation, to be able to see it, as
well as to have organs of movement which are nonexistent in the systems
of mineral and vegetative nature. For this purpose it is necessary to
have at least complex control block. Hence, in the animate nature it is
possible to single out two more sub-worlds/natures: flora and fauna. The
criterion for such division is the complexity of the control block and
its ability (the availability of possibility) to show behavioral
reactions. The more complex the control block, the higher is the
development of animal as a system. But at that, note should be taken of
the fact that the development of systems from plants to animals was
basically solving only one problem – to be/exist in this World. The
purport of existence of plants and the majority (if not of all) of
animals, except for humans, is only in the metabolism. If the system is
hungry it operates, if is satiated it stays idle. Yes, with complication
of the control block simultaneous increase in the possibilities of
systems occurred too, but it still pursued the goals of metabolism. More
adapted animal feeds better. If the system plays and lives jolly
(emotional tint of behavioral reactions), such reactions as a rule are
still directed towards self-training of systems for better hunting for
other systems. Therefore such reactions are basically inherent in young
animals. More adult individuals do not play any more. Note should be
also taken of that division of animals into predators and herbivorous
animals is quite conditional, since it is not eating meat that is a
distinctive feature of a predator and plants may also be carnivorous
(for example, sundew and the like). Absolutely all animals, and not only
them, but plants as well, are predators, since they represent the
systems which feed on other systems. Even among the objects of mineral
nature mutual relations of a victim-predator type may be found. Some
systems (plants and herbivores) feed on systems with simple control
blocks (mineral objects and plants) because it is easier thing to do.
However, other systems (carnivorous) feed or try to feed on systems with
complex control blocks (other animals), although it is much more complex
to do so. That is why the donkey is more stupid than a tiger. The human
being differs from other objects of animate nature first of all in that
it is not metabolism which is the main purport of his/her life, but
cognition. Yes, the higher the level of knowledge, the better the
nutrition. But the process of cognition in itself prevails over all
other processes aimed at metabolism. And even the metabolism itself is
raised to the rank of art (the cookery). It is also possible to single
out the human nature in that way as well, since only a human being out
of all objects of our World has second signaling system (the
intellectual control block) and aspiration towards cognition. Hence, the
purpose of our World was evolution which has stipulated the development
of systems in the direction towards complexification of their control
blocks up to a human being. And the purpose of this evolution was to
develop systems to such a degree that they have learnt to cognize the
World. We can look back and see the confirmation of it throughout the
entire history of development of our World in general and biosphere in
particular. We do not know what was before the Big Bang, and we do not
even know to which extent such statement is qualified. However, after it
only the emergence and complexification of systems in the Universe was
taking place, at that it occurred only at the expense of
complexification of their control blocks, because their primary SFU
(elementary particles) practically have not changed since then neither
qualitatively, nor quantitatively. And we, the people, are the
consequence and the proof of this development either. The human being is
the most complex system, the top of evolution which has occurred till
nowadays. Experience of this evolution shows that major distinctive
feature throughout the entire process of advanced development was only
the development of control blocks of systems. We do not know the
purposes of the majority of systems of our World, although we can
fabricate a multitude of speculations on many issues of this subject.
For example, nuclei of atoms of chemical elements that are heavier than
iron in those quantities which exist now in our Universe, could only and
only appear as the result of explosions of supernovas. Hence, is the
purpose of stars with evolution of a supernova type is the production of
nuclei of atoms harder than iron? It may be true, although no one would
avouch for it for the present. But we can surely state that a human
being in the shape it exists today and is known to us would not have
been existent without the elements having atomic weight heavier that
iron, because the structure of its organism requires the presence of
such elements. So, there are sufficient grounds for the assumption that
stars of a supernova type are necessary for the development of the
humans. It sounds strange and extraordinary, but still it’s the fact.
But we know for sure and without speculations the purposes of some of
the World’s systems, in particular, the purposes of many systems of
organism. We know one of the main objectives of any living organism – to
survive in the environment, and we know the hierarchy of sub-goals into
which this purpose is broken down. We see how living systems develop on
the way of evolution, we see the differences of systems standing at
different levels of evolutionary process and we can explain the
advantage of some systems over the others. In other words, the
possibility is opened to us to construct classification of all systems
of our World, including that of living systems. Today there is no
uniform classification of all objects of our World, but there are only
separate classifications of various groups of these objects, including
classifications of astronomical, geological, biological and other
groups. At that, nowadays the underlying principle of the majority, if
not of all of these classifications, including classification of both
the entire animate nature and the diseases, is the organic-morphological
analysis. But probably it is necessary to substitute it, as well as
classification of diseases, for the classification based on systemic
analysis – the analysis of the goals/purposes. And the basic principle
of the new classification should be not external distinctions, such as
the number of feet or cones on the teeth, but two basic differences:
differences by types of control blocks and types of executive elements.
Moreover, it is necessary to include all objects of our World in this
classification – animate and inanimate, because our World is replete
only with systems which differ from each other only in the degree of
development of their control blocks and in the ways of protection
against destruction by the external media. The world is uniform, because
it is a system in itself. Therefore, it is necessary to create common
and single classification of all systems of our World. And systems are
any objects, including animate/organic and inanimate/inorganic. Then it
will be possible to distinguish four worlds/natures (sub-natures) of
objects in our World: the world of minerals/mineral nature/, vegetative,
animal worlds/natures/ and the world of humans/the human nature/. The
population of each world differs from each other, as it was repeatedly
underlined, only in control blocks and metabolism. The objects of
mineral and vegetative nature have simple control blocks. But the
objects of mineral nature have only passive ways of protection against
negative entropy (destruction). And all living subjects, including
plants, have active ways of protection against the same negative
entropy, i.e. active substitution of the destroyed SFU at the expense of
metabolism. Animals, unlike plants, in addition to metabolism, have more
complex control blocks which enable behavioral reactions and thus allow
them to control in a varying degree surrounding situation. And the
humans have the most complex control block which contains the second
signaling system and consequently it is capable of cognizing the whole
World, including themselves, but not just what happens/exists nearby.
And within each type of nature classification we should also proceed
further to include the criteria of complexity of control blocks and then
the criteria of presence and the degree of development of executive
elements, including the number of feet or cones on the teeth. In this
case classification will be the one of cause-and-effect type and
logical. For example, vegetative nature/the flora/ includes not only
plants, but all the Earth’s population which possesses only simple
control block and metabolism. And those are not only plants and not only
metazoan. Procaryotes and eukaryotes, bacteria, phytoplankton, sea
anemones, corals, polyps, fungi, trees, herbs, mosses and lichens and
many others possessing and those not possessing chlorophyll are all
flora. They simply grow in space and they have no idea of it because
they “do not see” it. However, some plants, for example, trees or herbs,
unlike corals, fungi or polyps, contain chlorophyll (specific executive
element). Such classification of systems has one incontestable
advantage: it aligns everything that populates our World – the systems.
The whole World around us is classified by a single scale, where the
unit of measure is only the complexity of control block and executive
elements used by it. In that way it would be easier for us to understand
what life is. May it be so that inanimate nature does not exist at all?
Perhaps, “animate” differs from “inanimate” only in that it “has
comprehended” its own exposure to destruction under the influence of
environment and first has learnt self-restorability and then it learnt
how to protect itself from destructions? Then Pierre Teyjar De Chardin
is right asserting that evolution is a process of arousal of
consciousness. Currently existing classifications do not provide the
answer to this question. New classification of systems based on the
systemic target-oriented analysis will make it possible to understand,
where the “ceiling” of development of systems of each of the worlds is
and which of its subjects are still at the beginning of the evolutionary
scale and which of them have already climbed up its top. But this
classification is based on the recognition of the first-priority role of
the goal/purpose on the whole and purposefulness of nature in
particular, which idea is disputable for the present and is not accepted
by all. Therefore, queer position was characteristic for the XX century:
the position of struggle with nature, position which is still shared by
a great many. This position is fundamentally erroneous, because the
nature is not our enemy, but the “parent”, the tutor and friend. It
“produced” us and “nurtured” us, having provided a cradle, the Earth for
us, and it has been creating greenhouse conditions throughout many
millions years, where fluctuations of temperature were no more than
100?C and the pressure about 1 atmosphere, with plenty of place,
sufficient moisture and energy, although Space is characterized by range
of temperatures in many millions degrees and of pressure in millions
atmospheres. It has brought us up and made us strong, using evolution
and the law of competition: “the strongest survives”. It is not our task
“to take from it”, nor to struggle with it, but to understand and
collaborate with it, because it is not our enemy, but the teacher and
partner. It “knows” itself what we need and gives it to us, otherwise we
would not have existed. This is not an ode to the nature, but the
statement of fact of its purposefulness. Some may object that such
combination of natural conditions which has led to the origination of
human being is just a mere fortuity which has arisen under the law of
large numbers only because the World is very large and all kind of
options are possible in it. However, that many incidental occurrences
are kind of suspicious. The nature continually “puts stealthily” various
problems before us, but every time the level of these problems for some
reason completely corresponds to the level of development of an animal
or a human being. For some reason a man “has discovered” a nuclear bomb
at the moment when he could already apprehend the power of this
discovery. Nature does not give dangerous toys to greenhorns. If there
were no problems at all, there would be no stimulus to development and
as of today the Earth would have been populated by the elementary
systems, if it were populated at all. However, if the problems sharply
exceed the limit of possibilities of systems, the latter would have
collapsed and the Earth would have not been populated at all, if it
would be existent in abstracto. And in any case there would have been no
development on the whole. But we do exist and it is the fact which has
to be taken into account and which requires explanation. And the
explanation only consists in the purposefulness of Nature.

Systemic analysis is a process of receiving answer to the question “Why
is the overall goal of the system fulfilled (not fulfilled)?” The notion
of “systemic analysis” includes other two notions: “system” and
“analysis”. The notion of “system” is inseparably linked with the notion
of the “goal/purpose of the system”. The notion “analysis” means
examination by parts and arranging systematically (classification).
Hence, the “systemic analysis” is the analysis of the goal/purpose of
the system by its sub-goals (classification or hierarchy of the
goals/purposes) and the analysis of the system by its subsystems
(classification or hierarchy of systems) with the view of clarifying
which subsystems and why can (can not) fulfill the goals (sub-goals) set
forth before them. Any systems perform based on the principle “it is
necessary and sufficient” which is an optimum control principle. The
notion “it is necessary” determines the quality of the purpose, while
the notion “is suficient” determines its quantity. If qualitative and
quantitative parameters of the purpose of the given system can be
satisfied, then the latter is sufficient. If the system cannot satisfy
some of these parameters of the goal, it is insufficient. Why the given
system cannot fulfill the given purpose? This question is answered by
systemic analysis. Systemic analysis can show that such-and-such object
“consists of… for…”, i.e. for what purpose the given object is made,
of what elements it consists of and what role is played by each element
for the achievement of this goal/purpose. The organic-morphological
analysis, unlike systemic analysis, can show that such-and-such object
“consists of… “, i.e. can only show of which elements the given object
consists. Systemic analysis is not made arbitrarily, but is based on
certain rules. The key conditions of systemic analysis are the account
of complexity and hierarchy of goals/purposes and systems.

Complexity of systems. It is necessary to specify the notion of
complexity of system. We have seen from the above that complexification
of systems occurred basically for the account of complexification of
control block. At that, complexity of executive elements could have been
the most primitive despite the fact that control block at that could
have been very complex. The system could contain only one type SFU and
even only one SFU, i.e. to be monofunctional. But at the same time it
could carry out its functions very precisely, with the account of
external situation and even with the account of possibility of
occurrence of new situations, if it had sufficiently complex control
block. When the analysis of the complexity of system is made from the
standpoint of cybernetics, the communication, informo-dynamics, etc.
theories the subject discussed is the complexity of control block,
rather than the complexity of the system. Note should be taken of that
regardless of the degree of the system complexity two flows of activity
are performed therein: information flow and a flow of target-oriented
actions of the system. Information flow passes through the control
block, whereas the flow of target-oriented actions passes through
executive elements. Nevertheless, the notion of complexity may also
concern the flows of target-oriented actions of systems. There exist
mono- and multifunctional systems. There are no multi-purpose systems,
but only mono-purpose systems, although the concept of “multi-purpose
system” is being used. For example, they say that this fighter-bomber is
multi-purpose because it can bomb and shoot down other aircrafts. But
this aircraft still has only one general purpose: to destroy the enemy’s
objects. This fighter-bomber just has more possibilities than a simple
fighter or simple bomber. Hence, the notion of complexity concerns only
the number and quality of actions of the system, which are determined by
a number of levels of its hierarchy (see below), but not the number of
its elements. Dinosaurs were much larger than mammals (had larger number
of elements), but have been arranged much simpler. The simplest system
is SFU (Systemic Functional Unit). It fulfills its functions very
crudely/inaccurately as the law that works is the “all-or-none” one and
the system’s actions are the most primitive. Any SFU is the
simplest/elementary defective system and its inferiority is shown in
that such system can provide only certain quality of result of action,
but cannot provide its optimum quantity. Various SFU may differ by the
results of their actions (polytypic SFU), but they may not differ either
(homotypic SFU). However, all of them work under the “all-or-none” law.
In other words, the result of its action has no gradation or is zero
(non-active phase), or maximum (active phase). SFU either reacts to
external influence at maximum (result of action is maximum – “all”), or
waits for external influence (the result of action is zero – “none”) and
there is no gradation of the result of action. Each result of SFU action
is a quantum (indivisible portion) of action. Monofunctional systems
possess only one kind of result of action which is determined by their
SFU type. They may contain any quantity of SFU, from one to maximum, but
in any case these should be homotypic SFU. Their difference from the
elementary system is only in the quantity of the result of action
(quantitative difference). The monofunctional system may anyway perform
its functions more accurately as its actions have steps of gradation of
functions. The accuracy of performance of function depends on the value
of action of single SFU, the NF intensity and the type of its control
block, while the capacity depends on the number of SFU. The “smaller”
the SFU, the higher the degree of possible accuracy is. The larger the
number of SFU, the higher the capacity is. So, if the structure of the
system’s executive elements (SFU structure) is homotypic, it is then
multifunctional and simple system. But at that, its control block, for
example, may be complex. In this case the system is simple with complex
control block. The multifunctional system is a system which contains
more than one type of monofunctional systems. It possesses many kinds of
result of action and may perform several various functions (many
functions). Any complex system may be broken down into several simple
systems which we have already discussed above. The difference of
multifunctional system from the monofunctional one is that the latter
consists of itself and includes homotypic SFU, while complex system
consists of several monofunctional systems with different SFU types. And
at that, these several simple systems are controlled by one common
control block of any degree of complexity. The difference between
monofunctional and multifunctional systems is in the quantity and
quality of SFU. In order to avoid confusion of the complexity of systems
with the complexity of their control block, it is easier to assume that
there are monofunctional (simple) and multifunctional (complex) systems.
In this case the concept of complexity of system would only apply to
control block. In monofunctional system control block operates a set of
own SFU regardless of the degree of its complexity. In multifunctional
system control block of any degree of complexity operates several
monofunctional subsystems, each of which has its SFU with their control
blocks. It is complexity of control block that stipulates the complexity
of the system, and not only the type of system, but the appurtenance of
the given object to the category of systems. The presence of an
appropriate control block conditions the presence of a system, whereas
the absence of (any) control block conditions the absence of a system.
Systems may have control blocks of a level not lower than simple. The
full-fledged system can not have the simplest/elementary control block,
whereas the SFU can.

So, the system is an object of certain degree of complexity which may
tailor its functions to the load (to external influence). If its
structure contains more than one SFU, the result of its action has the
number of gradations equal to the number of its SFU or (identically) the
number of quanta of action. The number of the system’s functions is
determined by the number of polytypic monofunctional systems comprising
the given system. In former times development of life was progressing
towards the enlargement of animal body which provided some kind of
guarantee in biological competition (quantitative competition during the
epoch of dinosaurs). But the benefits has proven doubtful, the
advantages turned out to be less than disadvantages, that is why
monsters have died out. This is horizontal development of systems. If
they differ in quality it is tantamount to the emergence of new
multifunctional systems. Such construction of new systems is the
development of systems along the vertical axis. The example of it is
complexification of living organisms in process of evolution, from
elementary unicellular to metazoan and the human being. What can be done
by man can not be done by a reptile. However, what can be done by
reptile can not be done by an infusorian (insect, jellyfish, amoeba,
etc.). Complexification of living organisms occurred only for one
cardinal purpose: to survive in whatever conditions (competition of
species). Since conditions of existence are multifarious, the living
organism as a system should be multifunctional. The character of a new
system is determined by the structure of executive elements and control
block features. If there is a need to extend the amplitude or the
capacity of system’s performance the structure of executive elements
should be uniform. To increase the amplitude of the system’s performance
all SFU are aligned in a sequential series, while to increase the
capacity – in a parallel series depending on the required quantity of
the result of action (amplitude or capacity at the given concrete
moment). Polytypic SFU have different purposes and consequently they
have different functions. The differences of SFU stipulate their
specialization, whereby each of them has special function inherent in it
only. If the structure of any system comprises polytypic SFU, such
system would be differentiated, having elements with different
specialization. In systems with uniform SFU all elements have identical
specialization. Therefore, there is no differentiation in such system.
So, the concept of specialization characterizes a separate element,
whereas the concept of differentiation characterizes the group of
elements. The number of SFU in real systems is always finite and
therefore the possibilities of real systems are finite and limited, too.
Resources of any system depend on the number of SFU comprising its
structure in the capacity of executive elements. The pistol may produce
as many shots as is the number of cartridges available in it, and no
more than that. The less the number of SFU is available in the system,
the smaller the range of changes of external influence can lead to the
exhaustion of its resources and the worse is its resistance to the
external influence. By integrating various SFU in more and more complex
systems it is possible to construct the systems with any preset
properties (quality of the result of action) and capacities (amount of
quanta of the result of action). At that, the elements of systems are
the systems themselves, of a lower order though (subsystems) for these
systems. And the given system itself may also be an element for the
system of higher order. This is where the essence of hierarchy of
systems lies.

Hierarchy of goals/purposes and systems. The more complex the system,
the wider the variety of external influences to which it reacts. But the
system should always produce only specific (unique, univocal) reaction
to certain influence (or certain combination of external influences) or
specific series of reactions (unique/univocal series of reactions). In
other words, the system always reacts only to one certain external
influence and always produces only one specific reaction. But we always
see “multi”-reactive systems. For example, we react to light, sound,
etc. At the same time we can stand, run, lay, eat, shout, etc., i.e. we
react to many external influences and we do many various actions. There
is no contradiction here, as both the purposes and reactions may be
simple and complex. The final overall objective of the system represents
the logic sum of sub-goals/sub-purposes of its subsystems. The
goal/purpose is built of sub-goals/sub-purposes. For example, the living
organism has only one, but very complex purpose – to survive, by all
means, and for this purpose it should feed. And for this purpose it is
necessary to deliver nutriment for histic cells from the external
medium. And for this purpose it is necessary first to get it. And for
this purpose it is necessary to be able to run quickly (to fly, bite,
grab, snap, etc.). Thereafter it is necessary to crush it, otherwise it
won’t be possible to swallow it (chewing). Then it is necessary to
“crush” long albumen molecules (gastric digestion). Then it is necessary
to “crush” the scraps of the albumen molecules even to the smaller
particles (digestion in duodenum). Then it is necessary to bring in the
digested food to blood affluent to intestine (parietal digestion). Then
it is necessary… And such “is necessary” may be quite many. But each
of these “is necessary” is determined by a sub-goal at each level of
hierarchy of purposes. And for every such sub-goal there exists certain
subsystem at the respective level of hierarchy of subsystems. At that,
each of them performs its own function. And in that way a lot of
functions are accumulated in a system. However, all this hierarchy of
functions is necessary for one unique cardinal purpose: to survive in
this world. Any object represents a system and consists of elements,
while each element is intended for the fulfillment of respective
sub-goals (subtasks). The system has an overall specific goal and any of
its elements represents a system in itself (subsystem of the given
system), which has its own goal (sub-goal) and own result of action.
When we say “overall specific goal” we mean not the goals/purposes of
elements of the system, but the general/overall/ purpose which is
reached by means of their interactions. The system has a goal/purpose
which is not present in each of its element separately. But the overall
goal of the system is split into sub-goals and these sub-goals are the
purposes of its elements anyway. There are no systems in the form of
indivisible object and any system consists of the group of elements. And
each element, in turn, is a system (subsystem) in itself with its own
purpose, being a sub-goal of the overall goal/general purpose/. To
achieve the goal the system performs series of various actions and each
of them is the result of action of its elements. The logic sum of all
results of actions of the system’s subsystems is final function – the
result of action of the given system. Thus, one cardinal purpose
determines the system, while the sub-goal determines the subsystem. And
so on and so forth deep into a hierarchy scale. The goal/purpose is
split into sub-goals/sub-purposes and the hierarchy of purposes
(logically connected chain of due actions) is built. To perform this
purpose the system is built which consists of subsystems, each of which
has to fulfill their respective sub-goals and capable to yield necessary
respective result of action. That is how the hierarchy of subsystems is
structured. The number of subsystems in the system is equal to he number
of subtasks (subgoals) into which the overall goal is broken down. For
example, the system is sited at a zero level of hierarchy, and all its
subsystems are sited at a minus one, minus two, etc. levels,
accordingly. The order of numeration of coordinates is relative. It
means that the given system may enter the other, larger system, in the
capacity of its subsystem. Then the larger system will be equalized to
zero level, whereas the given system will be its subsystem and sited at
a minus one level. The hierarchy scale of systems is built on the basis
of hierarchy of goals/purposes. Target-specific actions of systems are
performed by its executive elements, but to manage their target-oriented
interaction the interaction of control block of the system with control
blocks of its subsystems is needed. Therefore, the hierarchy scale of
systems is, as a matter of fact, a hierarchic scale of control blocks of
systems. This scale is designed based on a pyramid principle: one boss
on top (the control block of the entire system), a number of its
concrete subordinates below (control blocks of the system’s subsystems),
their concrete subordinates under each of them (control blocks of the
lower level subsystems), etc. At each level of hierarchy there exist own
control blocks regulating the functions of respective subsystems.
Hierarchical relations between control blocks of various levels are
built on the basis of subordination of lower ranking blocks to those of
higher level. In other words, the high level control block gives the
order to the control blocks of lower level. Only 4 levels of hierarchy,
from 0 to 3rd, are presented. The count is relative, whereby the level
of the given system is assumed to be zero. The counting out may be
continued both in the direction of higher and lower (negative)
figures/values. The notions of “order” and “level” are identical. The
notions of “system” and “subsystem” are identical, too. For example,
instead of expression “a subsystem of minus second-order” one may say “a
system of minus second-level”. And although a zero level is assumed the
level of the system itself, the latter may be a part of other higher
order system in the capacity of its subsystem. Then the number of its
level can already become negative (relative numeration of level).
Elements of each hierarchic level of systems are the parts of system,
its subsystems, the systems of lower order. Therefore, the notions
“part”, “executive element”, “subsystem”, “system” and in some cases
even “element” are identical and relative. The choice of term is
dictated only by convenience of accentuating the place of the given
element in the hierarchy of system. The notion of hierarchic scale (or
pyramid principle) is a very powerful tool and it embodies principal
advantage of systemic analysis. Systemic analysis is impossible without
this concept. Both our entire surrounding world and any living organism
consist of infinite number of various elements which are relating to
each other in varying ways. It is impossible to analyze all enormous
volume of information characterizing infinite number of various
elements. The concept of hierarchy of systems sharply restricts the
number of elements subjected to the analysis. In the absence of it we
should take into account all levels of the world around us, starting
from elementary particles and up to global systems, such as an organism,
a biosphere, a planet and so on. For global evaluation of any system it
is sufficient to analyze three levels only: the global level of the
system itself (its place in the hierarchy of higher systems); the level
of its executive elements (their place in the hierarchy of the system
itself); the level of its control elements (elements of control block of
the system itself). To evaluate the system’s function it is necessary to
determine the conformity of the result of action of the given system
with its purpose – due result of action (global level of function of the
system), the number of its subsystems and the conformity of their
results of action with their purposes – due results of their action
(local functional levels of executive elements) and evaluate the
function of elements of control. In the long run the maximum level of
function of system is determined by the logic sum of results of actions
of all subsystems comprising its structure and optimality of control
block performance. Abiding by the following chain of reasoning: “the
presence of the goal/purpose for implementation of any specific
condition, the presence of qualitative or quantitative novelty of the
result of action, the presence of a control (block) loop” it is possible
to single out elements of any concrete system, show its hierarchy and
divide cross systems in which the same elements perform various
functions. Systems work under the logical law which main principle is
the fulfillment of condition “… if…, then….”. In this condition “if
..” is the argument (purpose), while “then…” is the function (the
result of action). This condition stipulates determinism in nature and
hierarchy scale. Any law, natural or social, requires implementation of
some condition and the basis of any condition is this logical connective
“… if…, then…” At that, this logical connective concerns only two
contiguous subsystems on a hierarchic scale. The argument “… if” is
always specified by the system which is on a higher step, whereas the
function “then…” is always performed by the system (subsystem) sited
immediately underneath, at a lower step of a hierarchic scale. Actions
of elements per se and interaction between the elements may be based on
the laws of physics or chemistry (laws of electrodynamics,
thermodynamics, mathematics, social or quantum laws, etc.). But the
operation of control block is based only on the logical laws. And as far
as control block determines the character of function of systems, it is
arguable that systems work under the logic laws. Sometimes in human
communities the “bosses” would imagine they may govern/control/ at any
levels, but such type of management is the most inefficient one. The
best type of management is when the director (the control block of
multifunctional system) controls/manages/ only the chiefs of departments
(control blocks of monofunctional systems), sets forth feasible tasks
before them and demands the implementation thereof. At that, the number
of its “assistant chiefs” should not exceed 7±2 (Muller’s number). If
some department does not implement its objectives, it means that either
the departmental management (control block of a subsystem) is no good
because has (a) failed to thoroughly devise and distribute the tasks
between the subordinates (the SFU), or (b) has inadequately selected
average executives (SFU), or (c) impracticable goal has been set forth
before the department (before system), or (d) the director himself
(control block of the system) is no class for the management. In such
cases the system’s reorganization is necessary. But if the system is
well elaborated and performs normally there is no sense for the director
to “pry” into the department’s routine affairs. A chief of department is
available for this purpose. The decision of the system reorganization is
only taken when the system for some reason cannot fulfill the objective
(system crisis). In the absence of crisis there is no sense in
reorganization. For the purpose of reorganization the system changes the
structure of its executive and control elements both at the expense of
actuation (de-actuation) of additional subsystems and alteration of
exit-entry combinations of these elements. In such cases skipping of
some steps of hierarchy may occur and the principle “vassal of my vassal
is not my vassal” violated. This is where the essential point of the
system reorganization lies. At the same time, part of elements can be
thrown out from the system as superfluous (that’s how at one time we
lost, for example, cauda and branchiae), while other part may be
included in the system’s structure or shifted on the hierarchy scale.
But all that may only happen in process of the system reorganization
proper. When the process of reorganization comes to an end and the
reorganized system is able of performing the goal set forth before it
(i.e. starts to function normally), the control law of “vassal of my
vassal is not my vassal” is restored.

Consequences ensuing from axioms.

Independence of purpose. The purpose/goal does not depend on the object
(system) as it is determined not by the given object or its needs, but
by the need of other object in something (is dictated by the external
medium or other system). But the notion of “system” in relation to the
given object depends on the purpose, i.e. on the adequacy of
possibilities of the given object to execute the goal set. The goal is
set from the outside and the object is tailored to comply with it, but
not other way round. Only in this case the object presents a system.
Note should be taken again of the singularity of the first consequence:
the system’s purpose/goal is determined by a need for something for some
other object (external medium or other system). Common sense suggests
that supposedly survivability is the need of the given organism (the
given system). But it follows from the first consequence that the need
to survive proceeds not from the given organism, but is set to it by
another system external with respect to it, for example, the nature, and
the organism tries to fulfill this objective.

Specialization of the system’s functions. In response to certain
(specific) external influence the system always produces certain
(specific) result of action. Specialization means purposefulness. Any
system is specialized (purposeful) and follows from the axiom. There are
no systems in abstracto, there are systems that are concrete. Therefore,
any system has its specific purpose/goal. Executive elements (executive
SFU) of some systems may be homotypic (identical, non-differentiated
from each other). If executive elements differ from each other (are
multitype), the given system consists of differentiated elements.

System integrity. The system exerts itself as a unitary and integral
object. It follows from the unity of purpose which is inherent only in
the system as a whole, but not in its separate elements in particular.
The purpose consolidates the system’s elements in a comprehensive whole.

Limited discrecity of system. Nothing is indivisible and any system may
be divided into parts. At the same time, any system consists of finite
number of elements (parts): executive elements (subsystems, elements,
SFU) and management elements (control block).

Hierarchy of system. The elements of a system relate to each other in
varying ways and the place of each of them is the place on the
hierarchic scale of the system. Hierarchy of systems is stipulated by
hierarchy of purposes. Any system has a purpose. And to achieve this
purpose it is necessary to achieve a number of smaller sub-goals for
which the large system contains a number of subsystems of various degree
of complexity, from minimum (SFU) up to maximum possible complexity.
Hierarchy is the difference between the purposes of the system and the
purposes of its elements (subsystems) which are the sub-goals in respect
to it. At that, the systems of higher order set the goals before the
systems of lower order. So, the purpose of the highest order is
subdivided into a number of sub-goals (the purposes of lower order). The
hierarchy of purposes determines the hierarchy of systems. To achieve
each of the sub-goals specific element is required (it follows from the
conservation law). Management/control in a hierarchic scale is performed
in accordance with the law “the vassal of my vassal is not my vassal”.
In other words, direct control is only possible at the level “system –
own subsystem”, and the control by super system of the subsystem of its
system is impossible. The tsar, should he wish to behead a criminal,
would not do it himself, but would give a command to his subordinate
executioner.

System function. The result of the system’s performance is its function.
To achieve the purpose the system should perform purposefully certain
actions the result of which would be the system’s function. The purpose
is the argument for the system (imperative), while the result of action
of the system is its function. The system’s functions are determined by
a set of executive elements, their relative positioning and control
block. The notions of “system” and “function” are inseparable.
Nonfunctional systems are non-existent. “Functional system” is a
tautology, because all systems are functional. However, there may be
systems which are non-operational at the moment (in a standby mode).
Following certain external influence upon the system it will necessarily
yield certain specific result of action (it will function). In the
absence of the external influence the system produces no actions (does
not function). When taking into account the purpose, the argument is not
the external influence, but the purpose. One should distinguish internal
functions of the system (sub-function) belonging to its elements (to
subsystems, SFU) and the external functions belonging to the entire
system as a whole. The system’s external function of emergent property
is the result of its own action produced by the system. Internal
functions of the system are the results of action of its elements.

Effectiveness of systems. Correspondence of the result of action to the
goal set characterizes the effectiveness of systems. Effectiveness of
systems is directly linked with their function. The system’s function in
terms of effectiveness may be sufficient, it may by hyperfunction,
decelerating and completely (absolutely) insufficient function. The
system performs some actions and it leads to the production of the
result of its action which should meet the purpose for which the given
system is created. Effectiveness of systems is based on their
specialization. “The boots should be sown by shoemaker”. Doing the
opposite does not always result in real systems’ actions that meet the
target/preset results (partial effectiveness or its absence). The result
of action of the system (its function) should completely correspond
qualitatively and quantitatively to the preset purpose. It may mismatch,
be incidental or even antagonistic (counter-purposeful); at that, real
systems may produce all these kinds of results of action simultaneously.
Only in ideal systems the result may completely meet the preset purpose
(complete effectiveness). But systems with 100% performance factor are
unknown to us. Integral result (integral function) is the sum of
separate collateral/incidental and useful results of action. It is this
sum that determines the appurtenance of the given object to the notion
of “system” with regard to the given purpose. If the sum is positive,
then with respect to the preset purpose the given object is a system of
one or other efficiency. If the sum is equal to zero, the object is not
a system with respect to the given purpose (neutral object). If the sum
is negative, the given object is an anti-system (the system with minus
sign preventing from the achievement of the goal/purpose). It applies
both to systems and their elements. The higher the performance factor,
the more effective the system is. Discrepancy of the result of action of
the given system with the due value depends on unconformity of
quantitative and qualitative resources of the system, for example, owing
to breakage (destruction) or improper and/or insufficient development of
its executive elements (SFU) and/or control. Therefore, any object is an
element of a system only in the event that its actions (function) meet
the achievement of the preset goal/purpose. Otherwise it is not an
element of the given system. Effectiveness of systems is completely
determined by limitation of actions of the systems.

Limitation of system’s actions. Any system is characterized by
qualitative and quantitative resources. The notion of resources includes
the notion of functional reserve: what actions and how many of such
actions the system may perform. Qualitative resources are determined by
type of executive elements (SFU type), while quantitative resources by
their quantity. And since real systems have certain and finite (limited)
number of elements, it implies that real systems have limited
qualitative and quantitative resources. “Qualitative resources” means
“which actions” (or “what”) the given system is able to perform (to
press, push, transfer, retain, supply, secrete, stand in somebody’s
light, etc.). “Quantitative resources” means “how many units of measure”
(liters, mm Hg, habitation units, etc.) of such actions the given system
is able to perform.

Discrecity (“quantal capacity”) of the system’s functions. The system’s
actions are always discrete (quantized) as any of its SFU work under the
“all-or-none” law. There exists no smooth change of the system’s
function, but there always exists phased (quantized) transition from one
level of function to another, since executive elements actuate or
deactivate regular SFU depending on the requirements of system.
Transition of systems from one level of functions to another is always
effected by way of a leap. We do not always observe this
gradation/graduality because of the fact that the amplitude of the
result of action of individual SFU can be very small, but still it is
always there. The amplitude of these steps of transition from one level
to another determines the maximum accuracy of the result of action of
systems and is stipulated by the amplitude of the result of action of
individual SFU (quantum of action). Probably, elementary particles are
the most minimal SFU in our World and consequently indivisible into
smaller parts subjected to laws of physics of our World.

Communicativeness of systems. Conjugate systems interact with each
other. Such communication implicates the link/connection between the
systems, i.e. their communicativeness. We discern open and closed
systems. However, there are no completely isolated (closed) systems in
our world which are not affected by some kind of external influence and
which are nowise influencing any other systems. One may find at least
two systems which are nowise interacting with each other (do not react)
among themselves, but one can always find the third system (and probably
the group of intermediate systems will be required) which will interact
with (react to) the first two, i.e. be a link between them. If any
system does not react at all to any influences exerted by any other
systems and its own results of action are absolutely neutral with
respect to other systems, and it is impossible to find the third system
or a group of systems with which this system could interact (react to),
it means that the given system does not exist in our World. Interaction
between systems may be strong or weak, but it should be present,
otherwise the systems do not exist for each other. Interaction is
performed for the account of chains of actions: “… external influence
?> result of action…” By closing the end of such chain to its
beginning we will get a closed (self-contained) system. The result of
action after its “birth” does not depend on the system which has “gave
birth” to it. Therefore, it may become external influence for the system
itself. Then it will be a cyclically operating system, a generator with
positive feedback. But the generator, too, requires for its performance
the energy coming from the outside. Consequently, it is to some extent
opened either. That is why the absolutely closed systems are
non-existent. Each system has a certain number of internal and external
links/connections (between the elements and between the systems,
accordingly), through which the system may interact with other external
systems. Closeness (openness) of a system is determined by the ratio of
the number of internal and external links/connections. The larger the
ratio, the greater the degree of closeness of a system is. Space objects
of a “black holes” type are assumed to be referring to closed systems
because even photons cannot break off from them. But they react with
other space bodies through gravitation which means that they “are
opened” through the gravitation channel through which they “evaporate”
(disappear).

Controllability of systems. Any system contains elements (systems) of
control which supervise the correspondence between the result of action
of the system and the goal set. These control elements form the control
block. Management of system is carried out through commands given to its
control block, whereas the control over its executive elements is
exercised through sending commands to their control blocks. Any reflex
is the manifestation of the work of the control block. And as far as
control block is the integral accessory of any systems, any systems have
their own reflexes. Executive elements should fulfill the goal exactly
to the extent preset by the command, neither more nor less than that
(neither minimum nor maximum, but optimum) based on a principle “it is
necessary and sufficient”. Control elements watch the fulfillment of the
purpose and if the result exceeds the preset one, the control block
would force the executive elements to reduce the system’s function,
whereas if it is lower than the preset result it will force to increase
the system’s function. The purpose is dictated by conditions external
with respect to the system. The command is entered into the system
through the special entry channel. All consequences represent
continuation of axioms, are stipulated by purposefulness of systems,
constructed under laws of hierarchy and limited by the conservation law.
The list of consequences could be continued, but those listed above are
quite sufficient for the evaluation of any system. Such evaluation
applies to both the properties of the system and its interaction with
other systems. Evaluation of the first consequence can be expressed in
percentage, i.e. what is the percentage of fulfillment (failure of
fulfillment) of the goal/purpose. The goal may be any due value. Other
consequences may also be characterized either qualitatively or
quantitatively, which actually represents the system evaluation, i.e.
its diagnostics, systemic analysis. The system is characterized by: the
purpose/goal (determines designation of the system); hierarchy
(determines interrelations between all the elements of the system
without an exception); executive elements (SFU performing actions);
control block (watches the correctness of performance of actions for the
achievement of the goal). Any object, not only material, is also a
system, provided it satisfies the above listed axioms and their
consequences. Groups of mathematical equations, logic elements, social
structures, relations between people, intellectual/spiritual values, may
also represent systems in which same principles of functioning of
systems work under the same logical laws. All of them have a purpose,
their own SFU and control blocks which watch the implementation of the
goal/purpose. If the object has a purpose it is a system. And for the
achievement of this purpose it should have corresponding executive
elements and control block with corresponding analyzers, DPC and NF
(which follows from the conservation law and the law of cause-and-effect
limitations). Systemic analysis examines the systems and their elements
in a coordinated fashion. The result of such analysis is the evaluation
of correspondence of results of actions of the systems with their
purposes and revealing the causes of the discrepancy for the account of
determination of cause-and-effect relations between the elements of
systems. The major advantage of systemic analysis is that only such an
analysis allows establishing the causes of insufficiency of systems. The
purpose/goal determines both the elementary structure of systems and
interaction of its elements which is operated by the control block. The
interaction of executive elements (SFU) only is not conducive to
yielding stable result of action meeting the purpose preset for the
system. Addition to a system of the control block adjusted to the preset
purpose enables producing stable (constantly repeated) result of action
of the system meeting the preset goal. The norm is such condition of a
system which allows it to function and develop normally in the medium of
existence which is natural for the given type of systems and to yield
reactions of such qualitative and quantitative properties which allow
the system to protect its SFU from destruction. The notion of “norm” is
relative with respect to average state of the system in the given
conditions. In case if conditions alter, the system’s condition should
change, too. Reaction is the action of the system aimed at producing the
result of action necessary for its survival in response to external
influence, i.e. the system’s function. Reaction is always specific.
Reaction may be: normal (normal reactivity), insufficient
(hypo-reactivity), excessive (hyper-reactivity), distorted (unexpected
reaction occurs instead of the expected one). Normal reactivity (normal
reaction) means that functional reserves of systems correspond to the
force of external influence and the operating possibilities of control
block allow to adjust (control) SFU so that the result of action
precisely corresponds to the force of external influence.
Hypo-reactivity of the system (pathological reaction) arises in cases
when functional reserves of the given system of living organism are
insufficient for the given force of external influence. Hypo-reactivity
is always a pathological reaction. Hyper-reactivity of the system
(normal or pathological reaction) is the one where the result of action
of the system exceeds the target. Distorted reaction is a reaction of
the system which mismatches its purpose. Pathology is the lack of
correspondence of the systems’ resources to usual norms. Pathology
includes other two important notions: pathological condition (defect)
and pathological process (including vicious circle). Restoration is
active influence on the system with a view to: liquidate or reduce
excessive external influences destroying the Systemic Functional Units;
liquidate or reduce destructive effects of vicious circle if it has
arisen; strengthen the function of the affected (defective) subsystem,
provided it does not lead to the activation of vicious circle;
strengthen the function of systems conjugated with the defective one,
provided it does not lead to strengthening the destructive effect of the
vicious circle associated with the affected system or the development of
vicious circles in other conjugated systems (does not lead to
strengthening of the “domino principle”); replace the destroyed SFU with
the operational ones. Any owner of the car knows that if something is
broken in his/her car (as a result of excessive external influence) and
the defect turns up, the transportation possibilities of its car sharply
recede. If failing immediately repairing the car, the breakages would
accrue catastrophically (vicious circle) because the domino principle
will be activated. And to “cure” the car it is necessary to protect it
from excessive external influences and to liquidate the defects.

Mark A. Gaides Hospitality named after Khaim Shiba, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Crisis. According to Lewis Bornhaim, crisis is a situation where the
totality of circumstances which were earlier quite acceptable, all of a
sudden, due to the emergence of some new factor, becomes absolutely
unacceptable, at that it’s almost inessential, whether the new factor is
political, economic or scientific: death of a national hero, price
fluctuations, new technological discovery; any circumstance may serve
impetus for further events (“the butterfly effect”: the butterfly’s wing
at the right place and time may cause a hurricane). A well-known
scientist Alfred Pokran devoted a special work to crises (“Culture,
crises and changes”) and arrived at interesting conclusions. First, he
notes that any crisis arises long before it factually comes on the
scene. For example, Einstein has published fundamentals of relativity
theory in 1905-1915, i.e. forty years before his works have ultimately
led to the beginning of a new epoch and emergence of crisis. Pokran also
notes that every crisis implies the involvement of a great number of
individuals and characters, all of them being unique: “It is difficult
to imagine Alexander the Great in front of Rubicon or Eisenhower in the
field of Waterloo; it is just as difficult to imagine Darwin writing a
letter to Roosevelt about potential dangers associated with nuclear
bomb. Crisis is the sum of blunders, confusions and intuitive flashes of
inspiration, a totality of observed and unobserved factors (which in
systemic analysis is called a “bifurcation point”), an unstable
condition of a system that may result in a number of outcomes: recovery
of stable level, transition to other steady equilibrium state
characterized by new energy-and-informational level, or leap to a higher
unstable level. At a bifurcation point a nonlinear system becomes very
sensitive to small influences or fluctuations: indefinitely small
influences may cause indefinitely wide variation of the condition of the
system and its dynamics. Originality of any crisis hides its striking
similarity with other crises. The unique feature of one and all /most
and least/ crises is the possibility of prevision thereof in retrospect
and irreversibility of solutions; characteristic frequencies of control
processes sharply increase (a time trouble condition, shortage of time).

Power. Power is any possibility, whatever it is based on, to realize
one’s own will in the given social relations, even notwithstanding
counteraction. The power is also characterized as steady ability of
achievement of the goals set with the support of other people. The
concept of power is “sociologically amorphous”, i.e. the exercise of
power does not imply the presence of any special human qualities
(strength, intellect, beauty, etc.) or any special circumstances
(confrontation, conflict, etc.). Any possible qualities and
circumstances can serve for realization of will. These may include
direct violence or threats, prestige or charm, any peculiarities of
situation or institutional status, etc. An individual having a lot of
money, holding senior position or being simply more charming person, the
one who is able to use better than others the circumstances that turned
up – that person, as a rule, would be the one having more power. For
characterization of dictatorial/imperious capacity the concept of
supremacy/domination is also used. Domination/supremacy implies the
probability that the command of certain content will induce obedience in
those to whom it is addressed. Domination/supremacy is a stronger notion
than power. Domination is legitimate and institutionalized power, i.e.
it is such a power which invokes the will to subordinate and fulfill the
orders and instructions and which, at that, exists in a sustainable
format accepted both by those dominating and dependent. With regard to
the latter it is conventional to talk about domination structures. Such
legitimate and institutionalized power is the state power. It is very
important to distinguish the power from domination. For example, the
person who is taken a hostage is under the authority of gunmen, but one
can not say that they dominate over him/her. They force the hostage to
obey by direct physical violence. But he/she does not want to obey and
does not agree to recognize their right to dominate over him/her.

Elite. Elite is a group of individuals standing high in the ranks of
power or prestige, which, thanks to their socially significant qualities
(origin, wealth, some achievements), hold the highest positions in
various spheres or sectors of public life. The influence of these people
is so great that they affect not only the processes inside the spheres
or sectors to which they belong, but also the social life as a whole.
There are three basic classes of elite: authoritative/power-holding,
valuе-associated and functional. Authoritative/power-holding elites are
more or less closed groups having specific qualities, and “imperious”
privileges. These are the “ruling classes” – political, military or
bureaucratic. Value-associated elites are creative groups exerting
special influence on the setup of minds and opinions of the broad mass.
They are philosophers, scientific-research expert community,
intelligentsia in the widest sense of this word. Functional elites are
influential groups which in the course of competition stand out from the
crowd in different spheres or sectors of society and undertake important
functions in the society. These are rather open groups, accession to
which requires the presence of certain achievements, for example holding
managerial positions.

Group. Collective administrative actions differ from those individual in
a variety of parameters. Thus, the group is more productive in
generation of the most efficient and well-grounded ideas, comprehensive
evaluation of one or other decisions or their projects, achievement of
individual and team objectives. The basic drawback of the team
decision-making is that it is more inclined to undertake higher risk.
This phenomenon is explained in different ways: conformist pressure
which manifests itself in that some team members do not dare express
their opinions that vary from those stated before, especially the
opinions of team leaders and the majority of team members, and criticize
them; a feeling of reappraisal, overestimation of their possibilities
which develops during intensive group communication (overrated feeling
of “us” that weakens the perception of risk); mutual “contagion of
courage”. This effect arises in group communications; in case of
widespread notion (usually erroneous) that in group decisions
responsibility rests with many people and the share of personal
responsibility is rather insignificant (group failures are usually less
evident/appreciable and are not perceived as sharply as individual’s
failures); influence of leaders, especially formal heads whose vision of
their main functions consists in indispensable inculcation of optimism
and confidence in the achievement of the purpose. The symptoms of the
“group thinking” and group pressure as a whole are: illusion of
invulnerability of the group. Group members are inclined to
overestimation of correctness of their actions and quite often perceive
risky decisions optimistically; unbounded belief in moral righteousness
of group actions. Group members are convinced of moral irreproachability
of their collective behavior and uselessness of critical evaluations by
independent observers (“the collective is always right”); screening of
disagreeable or unwanted information. Data out of keeping with the group
opinions are not taken into consideration and cautions are not taken
into account either. Resulting from it is ignoring off necessary
changes; negative stereotypification of the outsiders. The purposes,
opinions and achievements of associations external in relation to the
given group tendentiously treated as weak, hostile, suspicious, etc.
Quite often “narrow departmental interests /localistic tendencies/” and
“clannishness” and self-censorship arise thereupon. Separate group
members because of fears of disturbance of the group harmony abstain
from expression of alternative points of view and their own interests;
illusion of constant unanimity. Because of self-censorship and
perception of silence as a sign of consent external consensus is
achieved very quickly without comprehensive discussion and approval when
making decisions on the problems. In this situation internal
dissatisfaction is being accumulated which may further lead to conflict
which may arise because of formal insignificant ground; social (group)
pressure on those who disagree. The requirement of conformist behavior,
as a rule, leads to intolerance with respect to critical, disloyal (from
the view point of the group) statements and actions and to “gag” the
bearers thereof; restriction or reduction of possibilities of the
outsiders’ participation in the formation of collective opinion and
decision-making. Separate group members seek not to give the chance of
participation in the group affairs to the people who do not belong to
it, as they apprehend that it (including the information coming from
them) will break the unity of the group.

Rational-universal method of decision-making implies an unambiguous
definition of the substance of a problem and ways of its solution. Its
basic advantage consists in that when realized it allows complete and
radical solving the problem or a preset task. Branch method implies
taking partial decisions directed towards the improvement of situation,
rather than complete solution of a problem (for example, under
conditions of insufficient clarity of a problem, ways and means of its
solution, in the absence of full information on the situation, given the
lack of possibility to foresee all the consequences of the radical
solution, under the pressure of the influential forces inducing to
compromises, the possibility of rise of sharp conflicts with unclear
outcome, etc.). Mixed (mixed-scanning) method implies rational analysis
of the problem and singling out of its main, key component which is
attached a paramount importance and to which rational-universal method
is applied. Other elements of the problem are solved gradually by making
acceptable partial decisions that allows to focus efforts and resources
on the key areas and at the same time have complete control over other
elements of the situation, thus providing its stability.

Selection/choice mechanism. The optimal selection mechanism may be
considered the consensus-based system in which each participant of
decision-making votes not for one, but for all options (preferably more
than two) and ranges the list of options in the order of his/her own
preferences. Thus, if four possible options are offered the participant
of decision-making (the voter) defines a place of each of them. The
first place is given 4 points, the second, third and forth are given 3,
2 and 1 points, respectively. After voting the points given too each
option (the candidacy/nominee) are summed up and selected option is
determined based on the quantity thereof. If sums of scores for any
options are found equal, repeated voting is held only for these options.

Networks. Network is determined as spatial, constantly changing
dynamical system consisting of elements identical in terms of some
parameters: actors (figures), activity and resources (key for this type
of a network), connected among themselves by communication flows. The
network structure is the description of boundaries of interrelations
between the elements and position of elements in the network. The
actors, activity and resources are connected with each other across the
entire structure of network. The actors develop and maintain relations
with each other. Various kinds of activity are also connected among
themselves by relations, which may be called a network. Resources are
consolidated among themselves by the same structure of network, and
moreover, all the three networks are closely interconnected and
represent a global network. Actors, activity and resources form the
system in which heterogeneous (diverse) needs coalesce with
heterogeneous offers. In that way they are functionally connected with
each other. Even in case of destruction of considerable part of network,
the functions of the latter as a system will not be harmed, as they will
pass to other cells of the network (partially their resources as well).
In an ideal network there is no uniform control (coordinating) centre,
there is only “floating” centre (centers) functioning at each specific
moment and its functions may be usually performed by any cell of the
network.

So, we have examined separate aspects of stimulation of scientific
thinking. All the studied materials require the development of skills
for their practical application. See in addition: Alvin Toffler “Shock
of the Future”, “Metamorphoses of Power”, “The Third Wave”. Francis
Fukuyama. Our Posthuman Future. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
2002. 272 pp.), “The End of History and the Last Human”. (Samuel
Huntington). “Think tanks” Paul Dickson, 1971.

Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter

Похожие документы
Обсуждение

Оставить комментарий

avatar
  Подписаться  
Уведомление о
Заказать реферат
UkrReferat.com. Всі права захищені. 2000-2019