Thinking in systems: Problems of organization at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and the Society for General Systems Research, 1950–7

This article analyzes the approach to systems theory promoted by Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Kenneth Boulding during their time at the Ford Foundation’s Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) in 1954–5 and in the pages of the 1956 General Systems Yearbook . At the Ford Foundation’s Center, social scientists engaged in interdisciplinary research on ‘problems of organization’ that encouraged them to develop theoretical tools that scaled between organisms, institutions, and social organizations. Bertalanffy and Boulding were able to gain financial support from the Center for their ‘general system(s) theory’ that promised to solve these ‘problems of organization’ while unifying the social sciences in the service of the Foundation’s philanthropic mission. Systems thinkers at the Center founded the Society for General Systems Research, an important professional organization for systems theory in the coming decades. In the Society’s General Systems Yearbook , Bertalanffy and Boulding debated the meaning and underlying politics of thinking in systems in language shaped by their time at CASBS. By attending to this instantiation of systems thinking in its institutional and social context, this article attempts to tell a history of system without accepting the universalizing aspirations of its historical subject.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
History of the Human Sciences
Published
2025-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09526951251328124
Primary Topic
Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Thinking in systems: Problems of organization at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and the Society for General Systems Research, 1950–7

L. Thomas O'Neil
History of the Human Sciences
Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
article

Thinking in systems: Problems of organization at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and the Society for General Systems Research, 1950–7

L. Thomas O'Neil
article en

Abstract

This article analyzes the approach to systems theory promoted by Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Kenneth Boulding during their time at the Ford Foundation’s Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) in 1954–5 and in the pages of the 1956 General Systems Yearbook . At the Ford Foundation’s Center, social scientists engaged in interdisciplinary research on ‘problems of organization’ that encouraged them to develop theoretical tools that scaled between organisms, institutions, and social organizations. Bertalanffy and Boulding were able to gain financial support from the Center for their ‘general system(s) theory’ that promised to solve these ‘problems of organization’ while unifying the social sciences in the service of the Foundation’s philanthropic mission. Systems thinkers at the Center founded the Society for General Systems Research, an important professional organization for systems theory in the coming decades. In the Society’s General Systems Yearbook , Bertalanffy and Boulding debated the meaning and underlying politics of thinking in systems in language shaped by their time at CASBS. By attending to this instantiation of systems thinking in its institutional and social context, this article attempts to tell a history of system without accepting the universalizing aspirations of its historical subject.

History of the Human SciencesVol. 38(3-4)
Yale University (US)
American Philosophical Society, Whitney and Betty MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.