A Systematic Framework for Exploring Worldviews and Its Generalization as a Multi-Purpose Inquiry Framework

Abstract

Systems science methodologies do not have a consistent way of working with worldviews, even though determining stakeholder perspectives is central to systems thinking. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive "Worldview Inquiry Framework" that can be used across methodologies to govern the process of eliciting, documenting, and comparing the worldviews of stakeholders. We discuss the systemicity of worldviews and explain how this can help practitioners to find the roots of stakeholders' disagreements about value judgements. We then generalize the structure of the Worldview Inquiry Framework to produce a "General Inquiry Framework" that can be used to govern an inquiry process in other contexts. We show that the presented Worldview Inquiry Framework is a special case of this General Inquiry Framework and show how the General Inquiry Framework can be tailored for other contexts such as problem solving, product design, and fundamental research.

Systemic Semantics: A Systems Approach to Building Ontologies and Concept Maps

“…Another part might be derived from the philosophy of worldviews, providing general categories denoted by terms such as meaning, value, purpose, agency, freedom, knowledge, belief, etc. [14]. We can now see that another part might be derived from the philosophy of systemology, providing general categories denoted by terms such as system, hierarchy, emergence, wholeness, holon, complexity, integration, feedback, meta-stability, design pattern, etc.…”

“…A paper discussing this is included in this special issue of Systems [14]. The isomorphism is captured in a systematic and systemic "General Inquiry Framework" that provides categories for organising knowledge in multiple specialised contexts, such as when designing a product, solving a problem, investigating a phenomenon, or documenting a worldview.…”

“…The knowledge isomorphy suggests that any systematic pool of knowledge can be organised according to this structure, including, of course, the information in an ontology. An example of this is given in [14], where a concept map for worldview categories is given in its Figure 1. We would suggest that the General Inquiry Framework, treated as a systemic isomorphy, provides a useful tool for ontology development, particularly for developing ontologies for areas of study where there is uncertainty about what categories are needed, for example in nascent domains such as systemology, or frontier domains such as consciousness studies.…”

“…We would suggest that the General Inquiry Framework, treated as a systemic isomorphy, provides a useful tool for ontology development, particularly for developing ontologies for areas of study where there is uncertainty about what categories are needed, for example in nascent domains such as systemology, or frontier domains such as consciousness studies. The list of possible knowledge categories, as illustrated in more detail in [14], can provide useful suggestions for gaps in the knowledge base or opportunities for investigation in research. In the next section, we will illustrate the application of this isomorphy for the case of Systemology.…”

“…In this paper we show how systems thinking can itself be applied to the process of ontology development, usefully extending the extensive formal methods that are already in existence. Amongst the examples we develop is a proposed structure for a concept map for Systemology, developing the General Inquiry Framework structure we introduced in a companion paper in this journal issue [14].…”