Systems, Boundaries, and Belonging: From General Systems Theory to an Ontology of Organized Existence

This article examines the relationship between systems theory and the Philosophy of Belonging and argues that, although the two approaches share a rejection of atomistic reductionism and an emphasis on organization, relations, boundaries, and differentiation, they operate at different explanatory levels. Beginning with Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s General System Theory, Kenneth E. Boulding’s hierarchy of systemic complexity, and Niklas Luhmann’s theory of self-referential social systems, the article asks whether systems theory provides an ontology of organized existence or instead presupposes the organization that such an ontology must explain. The Philosophy of Belonging addresses this question through the proposition Being is Belonging. Systems are interpreted as particular configurations of belonging rather than as ontologically primitive entities. The article develops this distinction through the concepts of imperfect belonging, synchrony and diachrony, emergence, observer-independent and reflexively constituted belonging, and the stratification of reality into material, biological, and institutional-human forms of organized existence. Particular attention is given to the distinction between systemic complexity and ontological stratification. Increasing complexity is understood as the emergence of new forms and functions requiring additional explanatory categories, without implying superiority, teleology, or greater evolutionary fitness. The article also distinguishes emergence within a stratum from emergence between strata and argues that the institutional-human stratum introduces reflexivity as an additional organizational capacity through which forms of belonging can become objects of representation, criticism, and deliberate transformation. The article concludes that systems theory provides indispensable models for understanding organized relations, while the Philosophy of Belonging addresses the more general ontological question of what makes organized existence possible. Systems theory asks how organized wholes operate; the Philosophy of Belonging asks what it means for anything organized to exist.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22233042
Primary Topic
Critical Realism in Sociology
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
preprint

Systems, Boundaries, and Belonging: From General Systems Theory to an Ontology of Organized Existence

Carlos Federico Obregon Diaz
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Critical Realism in Sociology
preprint

Systems, Boundaries, and Belonging: From General Systems Theory to an Ontology of Organized Existence

Carlos Federico Obregon Diaz
preprint en

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between systems theory and the Philosophy of Belonging and argues that, although the two approaches share a rejection of atomistic reductionism and an emphasis on organization, relations, boundaries, and differentiation, they operate at different explanatory levels. Beginning with Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s General System Theory, Kenneth E. Boulding’s hierarchy of systemic complexity, and Niklas Luhmann’s theory of self-referential social systems, the article asks whether systems theory provides an ontology of organized existence or instead presupposes the organization that such an ontology must explain. The Philosophy of Belonging addresses this question through the proposition Being is Belonging. Systems are interpreted as particular configurations of belonging rather than as ontologically primitive entities. The article develops this distinction through the concepts of imperfect belonging, synchrony and diachrony, emergence, observer-independent and reflexively constituted belonging, and the stratification of reality into material, biological, and institutional-human forms of organized existence. Particular attention is given to the distinction between systemic complexity and ontological stratification. Increasing complexity is understood as the emergence of new forms and functions requiring additional explanatory categories, without implying superiority, teleology, or greater evolutionary fitness. The article also distinguishes emergence within a stratum from emergence between strata and argues that the institutional-human stratum introduces reflexivity as an additional organizational capacity through which forms of belonging can become objects of representation, criticism, and deliberate transformation. The article concludes that systems theory provides indispensable models for understanding organized relations, while the Philosophy of Belonging addresses the more general ontological question of what makes organized existence possible. Systems theory asks how organized wholes operate; the Philosophy of Belonging asks what it means for anything organized to exist.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Reduced inequalities
Critical Realism in Sociology
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.

Systems, Boundaries, and Belonging: From General Systems Theory to an Ontology of Organized Existence — Carlos Federico Obregon Diaz · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS