On Limitations in Mathematics III

"Most scientific theories, however, are ephemeral. Exceptions will likely be found that invalidate a theory in one or more of its tenets. These can then stimulate a new round of research leading either to a more comprehensive theory or perhaps to a more restrictive (i.e., more precisely defined) theory. Nothing is ever completely finished in science; the search for better theories is endless. The interpretation of a scientific experiment should not be extended beyond the limits of the available data. In the building of theories, however, scientists propose general principles by extrapolation beyond available data. When former theories have been shown to be inadequate, scientists should be prepared to relinquish the old and embrace the new in their never-ending search for better solutions. It is unscientific, therefore, to claim to have 'proof of the truth' when all that scientific methodology can provide is evidence in support of a theory." (William D Stansfield, "The Science of Evolution", 1977)

"Needless to say that once the universal approach exists we can go from one field to another and use the results of one field to promote another field. However, we should never forget limitations of 'universal approaches'. It is hiqhly dangerous to apply such an approach, if it has worked in a certain domain, to other domains as a dogma. Using any universal approach you must again and again check whether the prepositions made are fulfilled by the objects to which these approaches are applied. Going to more and more abstractions where we must heavily rely on mathematics which, after all, is the Queen of science." (Hermann Haken, 1979)

"Probability does pervade the universe, and in this sense, the old chestnut about baseball imitating life really has validity. The statistics of streaks and slumps, properly understood, do teach an important lesson about epistemology, and life in general. The history of a species, or any natural phenomenon, that requires unbroken continuity in a world of trouble, works like a batting streak. All are games of a gambler playing with a limited stake against a house with infinite resources. The gambler must eventually go bust. His aim can only be to stick around as long as possible, to have some fun while he's at it, and, if he happens to be a moral agent as well, to worry about staying the course with honor!" (Stephen J Gould, 1991)

"To look at the development of physics since Newton is to observe a struggle to define the limits of science. Part of this process has been the intrusion of scientific methods and ideas into domains that have traditionally been the province of metaphysics or religion. In this conflict, Hawking’s phrase ‘to know the Mind of God’ is just one example of a border infringement. But by playing the God card, Hawking has cleverly fanned the flames of his own publicity, appealing directly to the popular allure of the scientist-as-priest."  (Peter Coles, "Hawking and the Mind of God", 2000)

"Why was progress in computing technology so fast compared with the lack of progress in space travel? The reason is very simple: computing technology is only now approaching scientific limits such as quantum uncertainty and the speed of light, while space technology has already run into its limits that derive from the basic principles of physics and chemistry." (Mordechai Ben-Ari, "Just a Theory: Exploring the Nature of Science", 2005)

"In mathematics, it’s the limitations of a reasoned argument with the tools you have available, and with magic it’s to use your tools and sleight of hand to bring about a certain effect without the audience knowing what you’re doing. [...] When you’re inventing a trick, it’s always possible to have an elephant walk on stage, and while the elephant is in front of you, sneak something under your coat, but that’s not a good trick. Similarly with mathematical proof, it is always possible to bring out the big guns, but then you lose elegance, or your conclusions aren’t very different from your hypotheses, and it’s not a very interesting theorem." (Persi Diaconis, 2008)

"[…] the usefulness of mathematics is by no means limited to finite objects or to those that can be represented with a computer. Mathematical concepts depending on the idea of infinity, like real numbers and differential calculus, are useful models for certain aspects of physical reality." (Alfred S Posamentier & Bernd Thaller, "Numbers: Their tales, types, and treasures", 2015) 

"The trig functions’ input consists of the sizes of angles inside right triangles. Their output consists of the ratios of the lengths of the triangles’ sides. Thus, they act as if they contained phone-directory-like groups of paired entries, one of which is an angle, and the other is a ratio of triangle-side lengths associated with the angle. That makes them very useful for figuring out the dimensions of triangles based on limited information." (David Stipp, "A Most Elegant Equation: Euler's Formula and the Beauty of Mathematics", 2017)

On Limitations in Mathematics I

"Things [...] are some of them continuous [...] which are properly and peculiarly called 'magnitudes'; others are discontinuous, in a side-by-side arrangement, and, as it were, in heaps, which are called 'multitudes,' a flock, for instance, a people, a heap, a chorus, and the like. Wisdom, then, must be considered to be the knowledge of these two forms. Since, however, all multitude and magnitude are by their own nature of necessity infinite - for multitude starts from a definite root and never ceases increasing; and magnitude, when division beginning with a limited whole is carried on, cannot bring the dividing process to an end [...] and since sciences are always sciences of limited things, and never of infinites, it is accordingly evident that a science dealing with magnitude [...] or with multitude [...] could never be formulated. […] A science, however, would arise to deal with something separated from each of them, with quantity, set off from multitude, and size, set off from magnitude." (Nicomachus, cca. 100 AD) 

"Even as the finite encloses an infinite series And in the unlimited limits appear, So the soul of immensity dwells in minutia And in narrowest limits no limit in here. What joy to discern the minute in infinity! The vast to perceive in the small, what divinity!"  (Jacques Bernoulli, "Ars Conjectandi", 1713)

"The great truths with which it [mathematics] deals, are clothed with austere grandeur, far above all purposes of immediate convenience or profit. It is in them that our limited understandings approach nearest to the conception of that   absolute and infinite, towards which in most other things they aspire in vain. In the pure mathematics we contemplate absolute truths, which existed in the divine mind before the morning stars sang together, and which will continue to exist there, when the last of their radiant host shall have fallen from heaven." (Edward Everett, "Orations and Speeches" Vol. 8, 1870)

"It is difficult to understand why statisticians commonly limit their inquiries to Averages, and do not revel in more comprehensive views. Their souls seem as dull to the charm of variety as that of the native of one of our flat English counties, whose retrospect of Switzerland was that, if its mountains could be thrown into its lakes, two nuisances would be got rid of at once. An Average is but a solitary fact, whereas if a single other fact be added to it, an entire Normal Scheme, which nearly corresponds to the observed one, starts potentially into existence." (Sir Francis Galton, "Natural Inheritance", 1889)

"Scientific facts are of little value in themselves. Their significance is their bearing upon other facts, enabling us to generalize and so to discover principles, just as the accurate measurement of the position of a star may be without value in itself, but in relation to other similar measurement of other stars may become the means of discovering their proper motions. We refine our instruments; we render more trustworthy our means of observation we extend our range of experimental inquiry, and thus lay the foundation for the future work, with the full knowledge that, although our researches can not extend beyond certain limits, the field itself is, even within those limits, inexhaustible." (Elihu Thompson, "The Field of Experimental Research", 1901)

"In the study of Nature conjecture must be entirely put aside, and vague hypothesis carefully guarded against. The study of Nature begins with facts, ascends to laws, and raises itself, as far as the limits of man’s intellect will permit, to the knowledge of causes, by the threefold means of observation, experiment and logical deduction." (Jean Baptiste-Andre Dumas)

"The mathematician is entirely free, within the limits of his imagination, to construct what worlds he pleases. What he is to imagine is a matter for his own caprice; he is not thereby discovering the fundamental principles of the universe nor becoming acquainted with the ideas of God." (John W N Sullivan)

On Limitations in Mathematics II

"The true mathematician is always a great deal of an artist, an architect, yes, of a poet. Beyond the real world, though perceptibly connected with it, mathematicians have created an ideal world which they attempt to develop into the most perfect of all worlds, and which is being explored in every direction. None has the faintest conception of this world except him who knows it; only presumptuous ignorance can assert that the mathematician moves in a narrow circle. The truth which he seeks is, to be sure, broadly considered, neither more nor less than consistency; but does not his mastership show, indeed, in this very limitation? To solve questions of this kind he passes unenviously over others." (Alfred Pringsheim, Jaresberichte der Deutschen Mathematiker Vereinigung Vol 13, 1904)

"No one can predict how far we shall be enabled by means of our limited intelligence to penetrate into the mysteries of a universe immeasurably vast and wonderful; nevertheless, each step in advance is certain to bring new blessings to humanity and new inspiration to greater endeavor." (Theodore W Richards, "The Fundamental Properties of the Elements", [Faraday lecture] 1911)

"Mathematics alone make us feel the limits of our intelligence. For we can always suppose in the case of an experiment that it is inexplicable because we don’t happen to have all the data. In mathematics we have all the data […] and yet we don’t understand. We always come back to the contemplation of our human wretchedness. What force is in relation to our will, the impenetrable opacity of mathematics is in relation to our intelligence." (Simone Weil, "The Notebooks of Simone Weil" Vol. 2, 1935)

"It is to be hoped that in the future more and more theoretical physicists will command a deep knowledge of mathematical principles; and also that mathematicians will no longer limit themselves so exclusively to the aesthetic development of mathematical abstractions." (George D Birkhoff, "Mathematical Nature of Physical Theories" American Scientific Vol. 31 (4), 1943)

"The ultimate origin of the difficulty lies in the fact (or philosophical principle) that we are compelled to use the words of common language when we wish to describe a phenomenon, not by logical or mathematical analysis, but by a picture appealing to the imagination. Common language has grown by everyday experience and can never surpass these limits. Classical physics has restricted itself to the use of concepts of this kind; by analysing visible motions it has developed two ways of representing them by elementary processes; moving particles and waves. There is no other way of giving a pictorial description of motions - we have to apply it even in the region of atomic processes, where classical physics breaks down." (Max Born, "Atomic Physics", 1957)

"We are terribly clever people, we moderns: we bend Nature to our will in countless ways. We move mountains, we make caves, fly at speeds no other organism can achieve and tap the power of the atom. We are terribly clever. The essentially religious feeling of subserviency to a power greater than ourselves comes hard to us clever people. But by our intelligence we are now beginning to make out the limits of our cleverness, the impotence principles that say what can and cannot be. In an operational sense, we are experiencing a return to a religious orientation toward the world." (Garrett Hardin, "Nature and Man’s Fate", 1959)

"The future offers very little hope for those who expect that our new mechanical slaves will offer us a world in which we may rest from thinking. Help us they may, but at the cost of supreme demands upon our honesty and intelligence. The world of the future will be an ever more demanding struggle against the limitations of our intelligence, not a comfortable hammock in which we can lay down to be waited upon by our robot slaves." (Norbert Wiener, "God and Golem, Inc.: A Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics Impinges on Religion", 1964)

"Our epoch is the epoch of increasing consciousness; in this field Mathematics has done its bit. It has made us conscious of the limits of its own capabilities." (Rózsa Péter, "Playing with Infinity: Mathematical Explorations and Excursions", 1976)

Mental Models LXIII (Limitations VIII)

"Beliefs are generalizations about the past projected onto the present and future to shape it in the image of the past. [...] When we generalize from incomplete or unrepresentative experience, we form mental models that make the wrong predictions, but because beliefs act as self-fulfilling prophecies it is hard to find out, because we are less open to counter examples." (Joseph O’Connor, "Leading With NLP: Essential Leadership Skills for Influencing and Managing People", 1998)

"People’s mental models are apt to be deficient in a number of ways, perhaps including contradictory, erroneous, and unnecessary concepts. As designers, it is our duty to develop systems and instructional materials that aid users to develop more coherent, useable mental models. As teachers, it is our duty to develop conceptual models that will aid the learner to develop adequate and appropriate mental models. And as scientists who are interested in studying people’s mental models, we must develop appropriate experimental methods and discard our hopes of finding neat, elegant mental models, but instead learn to understand the messy, sloppy, incomplete, and indistinct structures that people actually have." (Donald A Norman, "Some Observations on Mental Models" [in "Mental Models", Ed(s). Dedre Gentner & Albert L Stevens], 1983)

"To begin with, we must understand that any mindset consists of mental models, or concepts, that influence our interpretation of situations and predispose us to certain responses. These models, which are replete with beliefs and assumptions, thus strongly determine the way we understand the world and act in it. The irony is, they become so ingrained in us, as tendencies and predispositions, that we seldom pay attention to them." (Stephen G Haines, "The Manager's Pocket Guide to Strategic and Business Planning", 1998)

"Short-term memory can hold 7 ± 2 chunks of information at once. This puts a rather sharp limit on the effective size and complexity of a causal map. Presenting a complex causal map all at once makes it hard to see the loops, understand which are important, or understand how they generate the dynamics. Resist the temptation to put all the loops you and your clients have identified into a single comprehensive diagram." (John D Sterman, "Business Dynamics Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World", 2000)

"Our mental maps are often not terribly accurate, based as they are on our own selective experience, our knowledge and ignorance, and the information and misinformation we gain from others; nevertheless, these are the maps we depend on every day." (Peter Turchi, "Maps of the Imagination: The writer as cartographer", 2004)

"The most serious problem in applied ethics, or at least in business ethics, is not that we frame experiences; it is not that these mental models are incomplete, sometimes biased, and surely parochial. The larger problem is that most of us either individually or as managers do not realize that we are framing, disregarding data, ignoring counterevidence, or not taking into account other points of view." (Patricia H Werhane "A Place for Philosophers in Applied Ethics and the Role of Moral Reasoning in Moral Imagination", Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (3), 2007)

"Although good ethical decision-making requires us carefully to take into account as much relevant information as is available to us, we have good reason to think that we commonly fall well short of this standard – either by overlooking relevant facts completely or by underestimating their significance. The mental models we employ can contribute to this problem. As we have explained, mental models frame our experiences in ways that both aid and hinder our perceptions. They enable us to focus selectively on ethically relevant matters. By their very nature, they provide incomplete perspectives, resulting in bounded awareness and bounded ethicality. Insofar as our mental modeling practices result in unwarranted partiality, or even ethical blindness, the desired reflective process is distorted. This distortion is aggravated by the fact that our mental models can have this distorting effect without our consciously realizing it. Thus, although we cannot do without mental models, they leave us all vulnerable to blindness and, insofar as we are unaware of this, self-deception." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience", 2013)

"Mental models serve to conceptualize, focus and shape our experiences, but in so doing, they sometimes cause us to ignore data and occlude critical reflection that might be relevant or, indeed, necessary to practical decision-making. [...] distorting mental models are the foundation

or underpinning of many of the impediments to effective ethical decision-making." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience",  2013)

"We identify and analyze distorting mental models that constitute experience in a manner that occludes the moral dimension of situations from view, thereby thwarting the first step of ethical decision-making. Examples include an unexamined moral self-image, viewing oneself as merely a bystander, and an exaggerated conception of self-sufficiency. These mental models, we argue, generate blind spots to ethics, in the sense that they limit our ability to see facts that are right before our eyes – sometimes quite literally, as in the many examples of managers and employees who see unethical behavior take place in front of them, but do not recognize it as such." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience",  2013)

On Limits II (Systems)

"Clearly, if the state of the system is coupled to parameters of an environment and the state of the environment is made to modify parameters of the system, a learning process will occur. Such an arrangement will be called a Finite Learning Machine, since it has a definite capacity. It is, of course, an active learning mechanism which trades with its surroundings. Indeed it is the limit case of a self-organizing system which will appear in the network if the currency supply is generalized." (Gordon Pask, "The Natural History of Networks", 1960)

"Taking no action to solve these problems is equivalent of taking strong action. Every day of continued exponential growth brings the world system closer to the ultimate limits of that growth. A decision to do nothing is a decision to increase the risk of collapse." (Donella Meadows et al, "The Limits to Growth", 1972)

"Every day of continued exponential growth brings the world system closer to the ultimate limits of that growth." (Mihajlo D Mesarovic, "Mankind at the Turning Point", 1974)

"In a loosely coupled system there is more room available for self-determination by the actors. If it is argued that a sense of efficacy is crucial for human beings. when a sense of efficacy might be greater in a loosely coupled system with autonomous units than it would be in a tightly coupled system where discretion is limited." (Karl E Weick, "Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems", 1976)

"Prediction of the future is possible only in systems that have stable parameters like celestial mechanics. The only reason why prediction is so successful in celestial mechanics is that the evolution of the solar system has ground to a halt in what is essentially a dynamic equilibrium with stable parameters. Evolutionary systems, however, by their very nature have unstable parameters. They are disequilibrium systems and in such systems our power of prediction, though not zero, is very limited because of the unpredictability of the parameters themselves. If, of course, it were possible to predict the change in the parameters, then there would be other parameters which were unchanged, but the search for ultimately stable parameters in evolutionary systems is futile, for they probably do not exist… Social systems have Heisenberg principles all over the place, for we cannot predict the future without changing it." (Kenneth E Boulding, Evolutionary Economics, 1981)

"The phenomenon of self-organization is not limited to living matter but occurs also in certain chemical systems […] [Ilya] Prigogine has called these systems 'dissipative structures' to express the fact that they maintain and develop structure by breaking down other structures in the process of metabolism, thus creating entropy­ disorder - which is subsequently dissipated in the form of degraded waste products. Dissipative chemical structures display the dynamics of self-organization in its simplest form, exhibiting most of the phenomena characteristic of life self-renewal, adaptation, evolution, and even primitive forms of 'mental' processes." (Fritjof Capra, "The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Turning Culture", 1982)

"Cellular automata are discrete dynamical systems with simple construction but complex self-organizing behaviour. Evidence is presented that all one-dimensional cellular automata fall into four distinct universality classes. Characterizations of the structures generated in these classes are discussed. Three classes exhibit behaviour analogous to limit points, limit cycles and chaotic attractors. The fourth class is probably capable of universal computation, so that properties of its infinite time behaviour are undecidable." (Stephen Wolfram, "Nonlinear Phenomena, Universality and complexity in cellular automata", Physica 10D, 1984)

"Computational reducibility may well be the exception rather than the rule: Most physical questions may be answerable only through irreducible amounts of computation. Those that concern idealized limits of infinite time, volume, or numerical precision can require arbitrarily long computations, and so be formally undecidable." (Stephen Wolfram, Undecidability and intractability in theoretical physics", Physical Review Letters 54 (8), 1985)

"Regarding stability, the state trajectories of a system tend to equilibrium. In the simplest case they converge to one point (or different points from different initial states), more commonly to one (or several, according to initial state) fixed point or limit cycle(s) or even torus(es) of characteristic equilibrial behaviour. All this is, in a rigorous sense, contingent upon describing a potential, as a special summation of the multitude of forces acting upon the state in question, and finding the fixed points, cycles, etc., to be minima of the potential function. It is often more convenient to use the equivalent jargon of 'attractors' so that the state of a system is 'attracted' to an equilibrial behaviour. In any case, once in equilibrial conditions, the system returns to its limit, equilibrial behaviour after small, arbitrary, and random perturbations." (Gordon Pask, "Different Kinds of Cybernetics", 1992)

"Systems, acting dynamically, produce (and incidentally, reproduce) their own boundaries, as structures which are complementary (necessarily so) to their motion and dynamics. They are liable, for all that, to instabilities chaos, as commonly interpreted of chaotic form, where nowadays, is remote from the random. Chaos is a peculiar situation in which the trajectories of a system, taken in the traditional sense, fail to converge as they approach their limit cycles or 'attractors' or 'equilibria'. Instead, they diverge, due to an increase, of indefinite magnitude, in amplification or gain." (Gordon Pask, "Different Kinds of Cybernetics", 1992)

"In spite of the insurmountable computational limits, we continue to pursue the many problems that possess the characteristics of organized complexity. These problems are too important for our well being to give up on them. The main challenge in pursuing these problems narrows down fundamentally to one question: how to deal with systems and associated problems whose complexities are beyond our information processing limits? That is, how can we deal with these problems if no computational power alone is sufficient?"  (George Klir, "Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic", 1995)

"The dimensionality and nonlinearity requirements of chaos do not guarantee its appearance. At best, these conditions allow it to occur, and even then under limited conditions relating to particular parameter values. But this does not imply that chaos is rare in the real world. Indeed, discoveries are being made constantly of either the clearly identifiable or arguably persuasive appearance of chaos. Most of these discoveries are being made with regard to physical systems, but the lack of similar discoveries involving human behavior is almost certainly due to the still developing nature of nonlinear analyses in the social sciences rather than the absence of chaos in the human setting."  (Courtney Brown, "Chaos and Catastrophe Theories", 1995)

"Limiting factors in population dynamics play the role in ecology that friction does in physics. They stop exponential growth, not unlike the way in which friction stops uniform motion. Whether or not ecology is more like physics in a viscous liquid, when the growth-rate-based traditional view is sufficient, is an open question. We argue that this limit is an oversimplification, that populations do exhibit inertial properties that are noticeable. Note that the inclusion of inertia is a generalization - it does not exclude the regular rate-based, first-order theories. They may still be widely applicable under a strong immediate density dependence, acting like friction in physics." (Lev Ginzburg & Mark Colyvan, "Ecological Orbits: How Planets Move and Populations Grow", 2004)

"A population that grows logistically, initially increases exponentially; then the growth lows down and eventually approaches an upper bound or limit. The most well-known form of the model is the logistic differential equation." (Linda J S Allen, "An Introduction to Mathematical Biology", 2007)

"The methodology of feedback design is borrowed from cybernetics (control theory). It is based upon methods of controlled system model’s building, methods of system states and parameters estimation (identification), and methods of feedback synthesis. The models of controlled system used in cybernetics differ from conventional models of physics and mechanics in that they have explicitly specified inputs and outputs. Unlike conventional physics results, often formulated as conservation laws, the results of cybernetical physics are formulated in the form of transformation laws, establishing the possibilities and limits of changing properties of a physical system by means of control." (Alexander L Fradkov, "Cybernetical Physics: From Control of Chaos to Quantum Control", 2007)

"A characteristic of such chaotic dynamics is an extreme sensitivity to initial conditions (exponential separation of neighboring trajectories), which puts severe limitations on any forecast of the future fate of a particular trajectory. This sensitivity is known as the ‘butterfly effect’: the state of the system at time t can be entirely different even if the initial conditions are only slightly changed, i.e., by a butterfly flapping its wings." (Hans J Korsch et al, "Chaos: A Program Collection for the PC", 2008)

"A quantity growing exponentially toward a limit reaches that limit in a surprisingly short time." (Donella Meadows, "Thinking in systems: A Primer", 2008)

"A typical complex system consists of a vast number of identical copies of several generic processes, which are operating and interacting only locally or with a limited number of not necessary close neighbours. There is no global leader or controller associated to such systems and the resulting behaviour is usually very complex." (Jirí Kroc & Peter M A Sloot, "Complex Systems Modeling by Cellular Automata", Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2009)

"Strange attractors, unlike regular ones, are geometrically very complicated, as revealed by the evolution of a small phase-space volume. For instance, if the attractor is a limit cycle, a small two-dimensional volume does not change too much its shape: in a direction it maintains its size, while in the other it shrinks till becoming a 'very thin strand' with an almost constant length. In chaotic systems, instead, the dynamics continuously stretches and folds an initial small volume transforming it into a thinner and thinner 'ribbon' with an exponentially increasing length." (Massimo Cencini et al, "Chaos: From Simple Models to Complex Systems", 2010)

"We are beginning to see the entire universe as a holographically interlinked network of energy and information, organically whole and self-referential at all scales of its existence. We, and all things in the universe, are non-locally connected with each other and with all other things in ways that are unfettered by the hitherto known limitations of space and time." (Ervin László, "Cosmos: A Co-creator's Guide to the Whole-World", 2010)

"It should also be noted that the novel information generated by interactions in complex systems limits their predictability. Without randomness, complexity implies a particular non-determinism characterized by computational irreducibility. In other words, complex phenomena cannot be known a priori." (Carlos Gershenson, "Complexity", 2011)

"Complexity scientists concluded that there are just too many factors - both concordant and contrarian - to understand. And with so many potential gaps in information, almost nobody can see the whole picture. Complex systems have severe limits, not only to predictability but also to measurability. Some complexity theorists argue that modelling, while useful for thinking and for studying the complexities of the world, is a particularly poor tool for predicting what will happen." (Lawrence K Samuels, "Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action", 2013)

"A limit cycle is an isolated closed trajectory. Isolated means that neighboring trajectories are not closed; they spiral either toward or away from the limit cycle. If all neighboring trajectories approach the limit cycle, we say the limit cycle is stable or attracting. Otherwise the limit cycle is unstable, or in exceptional cases, half-stable. Stable limit cycles are very important scientifically - they model systems that exhibit self-sustained oscillations. In other words, these systems oscillate even in the absence of external periodic forcing." (Steven H Strogatz, "Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Engineering", 2015)

Mental Models LIV (Limitations VII)

"In specific cases, we think by applying mental rules, which are similar to rules in computer programs. In most of the cases, however, we reason by constructing, inspecting, and manipulating mental models. These models and the processes that manipulate them are the basis of our competence to reason. In general, it is believed that humans have the competence to perform such inferences error-free. Errors do occur, however, because reasoning performance is limited by capacities of the cognitive system, misunderstanding of the premises, ambiguity of problems, and motivational factors. Moreover, background knowledge can significantly influence our reasoning performance. This influence can either be facilitation or an impedance of the reasoning process." (Carsten Held et al, "Mental Models and the Mind", 2006)

"Mental models abide by the principle of parsimony: They represent only possibilities compatible with the premises, and they represent clauses in the premises only when they hold in a possibility. Fully explicit models represent clauses when they do not hold too. The advantage of mental models over fully explicit models is that they contain less information, and so they are easier to work with. But they can lead reasoners astray. The occurrence of these systematic and compelling fallacies is shocking. The model theory predicts them, and they are a 'litmus' test for mental models, because no other current theory predicts them. They have so far resisted explanation by theories of reasoning based on formal rules of inference, because these theories rely on valid rules." (Philip N Johnson-Laird, Mental Models, Sentential Reasoning, and Illusory Inferences, [in "Mental Models and the Mind"], 2006)

"People don’t need to know all the details of how a complex mechanism actually works in order to use it, so they create a cognitive shorthand for explaining it, one that is powerful enough to cover their interactions with it, but that doesn’t necessarily reflect its actual inner mechanics. […] In the digital world, however, the differences between a user’s mental model and the implementation model are often quite distinct. The discrepancy between implementation and mental models is particularly stark in the case of software applications, where the complexity of implementation can make it nearly impossible for the user to see the mechanistic connections between his actions and the program’s reactions." (Alan Cooper et al,  "About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design", 2007)

"The closer the represented model comes to the user’s mental model, the easier he will find the program to use and to understand. Generally, offering a represented model that follows the implementation model too closely significantly reduces the user’s ability to learn and use the program, assuming (as is almost always the case) that the user’s mental model of his tasks differs from the implementation model of the software." (Alan Cooper et al,  "About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design", 2007)

"Gaining awareness about how the system is built up and how it works can also help us to avoid solutions that only treat the symptoms of an underlying problem without curing the problem itself. System thinking is powerful because it helps us to see our own mental models and how these models color our perception of the world. In many cases, it is difficult for us to alter our mental models. There are always some beliefs or viewpoints that we are not willing to change, no matter what evidence is presented against it. This causes a certain resistance to new concepts. Problems can occur, however, when a rigid mental model stands in the way of a solution that might solve a problem. In such situations, adherence to mental models can be dangerous to the health of the organization." (Akhilesh Bajaj & Stanisław Wrycza, "Systems Analysis and Design for Advanced Modeling Methods: Best Practices", 2009)

"We all use mental models every day. Our minds do not contain real economic or social systems. Instead, they contain representations - models - of reality. We use these models in all aspects of decision-making. Being explicitly aware of our mental models can help us in understanding why we make the decisions we do and how we can improve our decision-making processes. If everyone’s mental models are brought to light in the context of an organization, we can begin to see where, how, and why the models diverge. This is the first step in building a shared understanding within an organization. As long as mental models remain hidden, they constitute an obstacle to building shared understanding." (Akhilesh Bajaj & Stanisław Wrycza, "Systems Analysis and Design for Advanced Modeling Methods: Best Practices", 2009)

"Each person has a different mental model and, therefore, potentially a different interpretation of the Facts. The danger comes when we start to assume that our interpretation of the Facts is the only interpretation and we believe that what we see and think is the Truth, and that there is only one Truth." (Robina Chatham & Brian Sutton, "Changing the IT Leader’s Mindset", 2010)

Our mental model governs what we see, how we think about things and how we act, but is this just an individual phenomenon, or can whole communities and professions share a common mental model, a shared view of reality? […] What is beyond doubt is that all professions have their own vocabularies, lexicons, tools and techniques. These models, techniques and ways of analysing things are not value-free; they represent a way of seeing the world. When we select and use them we are subconsciously buying into that way of thinking and, inevitably, we are also reinforcing our own mental model of cause and effect. We tend to expend significant effort in understanding the inner workings of a new tool or practice, but we give scant attention to the thought paradigm that underpins it. (Robina Chatham & Brian Sutton, "Changing the IT Leader’s Mindset", 2010)

"Our past (mental model) governs what we perceive (See) and how we make sense of it (Assess). This, in turn, prescribes our range of possible actions (Do), which leads to results (Get). We are therefore trapped into repeating well-understood, but possibly ineffective, patterns of behaviour and can Get sub-optimal results. The cycle is both self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing – we tend to apply the same assessment techniques to review what we get, thus further reinforcing our mental model and further limiting our ability to perceive the unusual or the remarkable." (Robina Chatham & Brian Sutton, "Changing the IT Leader’s Mindset", 2010)

"[…] our strong mental models tend to make us blind to certain possibilities, and therefore we unknowingly engage in biased listening. Whenever we interpret information, we subconsciously access three filters based upon how we feel about the content, the information source and situation (or context) in which we receive the information." (Robina Chatham & Brian Sutton, "Changing the IT Leader’s Mindset", 2010)

Mental Models XLVII (Limitations VI)

"Every presentation of philosophy, whether oral or written, is to be taken and can only be taken in the sense of a means. Every system is only an expression or image of reason, and hence only an object of reason, an object which reason - a living power that procreates itself in new thinking beings - distinguishes from itself and posits as an object of criticism. Every system that is not recognized and appropriated as just a means, limits and warps the mind for it sets up the indirect and formal thought in the place of the direct, original and material thought." (Ludwig A Feuerbach, "Towards a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy", 1839) 

"[…] we can only study Nature through our senses - that is […] we can only study the model of Nature that our senses enable our minds to construct; we cannot decide whether that model, consistent though it be, represents truly the real structure of Nature; whether, indeed, there be any Nature as an ultimate reality behind its phenomena." (William C Dampier, "The Recent Development of Physical Science", 1904)

"Most mistakes in philosophy and logic occur because the human mind is apt to take the symbol for the reality." (Albert Einstein, "Cosmic Religion: With Other Opinions and Aphorisms", 1931) 

"The model of the natural world we build in our minds by such a process will forever be inadequate, just a little cathedral in the mountains. Still it is better than no model at all." (Timothy Ferris, "The Red Limit: The Search for the Edge of the Universe", 1977)

"A person who thinks by images becomes less and less capable of thinking by reasoning, and vice versa. The intellectual process based on images is contradictory to the intellectual process of reasoning that is related to the word. There are two different ways of dealing with an object. They involve not only different approaches, but even more important, opposing mental attitudes. This is not a matter of complementary processes, such as analysis and synthesis or logic and dialectic. These processes lack any qualitative common denominator." (Jacques Ellul, "The Humiliation of the Word", 1981) 

"Whenever I have talked about mental models, audiences have readily grasped that a layout of concrete objects can be represented by an internal spatial array, that a syllogism can be represented by a model of individuals and identities between them, and that a physical process can be represented by a three-dimensional dynamic model. Many people, however, have been puzzled by the representation of abstract discourse; they cannot understand how terms denoting abstract entities, properties or relations can be similarly encoded, and therefore they argue that these terms can have only 'verbal' or propositional representations." (Philip Johnson-Laird,"Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference and Consciousness", 1983)

"Perhaps we all lose our sense of reality to the precise degree to which we are engrossed in our own work, and perhaps that is why we see in the increasing complexity of our mental constructs a means for greater understanding, even while intuitively we know that we shall never be able to fathom the imponderables that govern our course through life." (Winfried G Sebald, "The Rings of Saturn", 1995) 

"Faced with the overwhelming complexity of the real world, time pressure, and limited cognitive capabilities, we are forced to fall back on rote procedures, habits, rules of thumb, and simple mental models to make decisions. Though we sometimes strive to make the best decisions we can, bounded rationality means we often systematically fall short, limiting our ability to learn from experience." (John D Sterman, "Business Dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world", 2000)

"The robustness of the misperceptions of feedback and the poor performance they cause are due to two basic and related deficiencies in our mental model. First, our cognitive maps of the causal structure of systems are vastly simplified compared to the complexity of the systems themselves. Second, we are unable to infer correctly the dynamics of all but the simplest causal maps. Both are direct consequences of bounded rationality, that is, the many limitations of attention, memory, recall, information processing capability, and time that constrain human decision making." (John D Sterman, "Business Dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world", 2000)

"A general limitation of the human mind is its imperfect ability to reconstruct past states of knowledge, or beliefs that have changed. Once you adopt a new view of the world (or any part of it), you immediately lose much of your ability to recall what you used to believe before your mind changed." (Daniel Kahneman, "Thinking, Fast and Slow", 2011)

Mental Models XXVIII (Limitations V)

"Thought often leads us far beyond the imaginable without thereby depriving us of the basis for our conclusions. Even if, as it appears, thought without mental pictures is impossible for us men, still their connection with the object of thought can be wholly superficial, arbitrary, and conventional." (Gottlob Frege, "The Foundations of Arithmetic" , 1884)

“The classical tradition has been to consider the world to be an association of observable objects (particles, fluids, fields, etc.) moving according to definite laws of force, so that one could form a mental picture in space and time of the whole scheme. This led to a physics whose aim was to make assumptions about the mechanism and forces connecting these observable objects in the simplest possible way. It has become increasingly evident in recent times, however, that nature works on a different plan. Her fundamental laws do not govern the world as it appears in our mental picture in any very direct way, but instead they control a substratum of which we cannot form a mental picture without introducing irrelevancies.” (Paul A M Dirac, “The Principles of Quantum Mechanics”, 1930)

"Those who are content with a positivist conception of the aims of science will feel that he is in an entirely satisfactory position; he has discovered the pattern of events, and so can predict accurately; what more can he want? A mental picture would be an added luxury, but also a useless luxury. For if the picture did not bear any resemblance at all to the reality it would be valueless, and if it did it would be unintelligible […]" (James H Jeans," Physics and Philosophy" 3rd Ed., 1943)

"[…] many philosophers have found it difficult to accept the hypothesis that an object is just about what it appears to be, and so is like the mental picture it produces in our minds. For an object and a mental picture are of entirely different natures - a brick and the mental picture of a brick can at best no more resemble one another than an orchestra and a symphony. In any case, there is no compelling reason why phenomena - the mental visions that a mind constructs out of electric currents in a brain - should resemble the objects that produced these currents in the first instance." (James H Jeans," Physics and Philosophy" 3rd Ed., 1943)

"What a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual-conceptual experience has taught him to see." (Thomas Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", 1962)

"The major problem of the mental model approach lies in the fact that the external world is to be represented in a highly specific way. Representing indeterminacy in terms of mental models thus poses difficulties, casting some doubt on the contention that mental models can do without variables." (Gert Rickheit & Lorenz Sichelschmidt, "Mental Models: Some Answers, Some Questions, Some Suggestions", 1999)

"To think that the world can ever change without changes in our mental models is folly." (Joseph Jaworski, "Synchronicity: The Inner Path of Leadership", 2011)

“When we face a challenge, most of us rely on our tried-and-true skills and their underlying mental models to get us through. But these patterns themselves could be the source of the problem. Often they enabled some level of success or survival in a former environment. But they may not be successful in our present circumstance. Now we need a new way. We need to build alternative mental models that lead to more adaptive behaviors and results. The first step in this change is to understand our current models and related behaviors. Because mental models are so central to our way of life, changing even one of them can be difficult. Changing involves abandoning long-held ties to a comfortable pattern of thinking and behavior and then replacing it with a substitute mental model and new behavior. Changing a mental model involves changing a part of ourselves. As you might guess, this process can feel like the psychological equivalent of surgery. It can be uncomfortable, even painful.” (Marshall Goldsmith & Daniel White, "Coaching Leaders: Guiding People Who Guide Others", 2013)

“The social world that humans have made for themselves is so complex that the mind simplifies the world by using heuristics, customs, and habits, and by making models or assumptions about how things generally work (the ‘causal structure of the world’). And because people rely upon (and are invested in) these mental models, they usually prefer that they remain uncontested.” (Dr James Brennan, “Psychological  Adjustment to Illness and Injury”, West of England Medical Journal Vol. 117 (2), 2018)

Mental Models XV (Limitations IV)

"All experience attests the strength of the tendency to mistake mental abstractions, even negative ones, for substantive realities; and the Permanent Possibilities of sensation which experience guarantees arc so extremely unlike in many of their properties to actual sensations, that since we are capable of imagining something which transcends sensations, there is a great natural probability that we should suppose these to be it." (Hippolyte Taine, "On intelligence", 1871)

“Confronted with the mystery of the Universe, we are driven to ask if the model our minds have framed at all corresponds with the reality; if, indeed, there be any reality behind the image.” (Sir William C Dampier, “The Recent Development of Physical Science”, 1904)

"Exhaustive studies by many investigators have shown that the fundamental laws of nature do not control the phenomena directly. We must picture them as operating in a substratum of which we can form no mental picture unless we are willing to introduce a number of irrelevant and therefore unjustifiable suppositions." (James H Jeans," Physics and Philosophy" 3rd Ed., 1943)

“The pictures we draw of nature show similar limitations; these are the price we pay for limiting our pictures of nature to the kinds that can be understood by our minds. As we cannot draw one perfect picture, we make two imperfect pictures and turn to one or the other according as we want one property or another to be accurately delineated. Our observations tell us which is the right picture to use for each particular purpose […] . Yet some properties of nature are so far-reaching and general that neither picture can depict them properly of itself. In such cases we must appeal to both pictures, and these sometimes give us different and inconsistent information. Where, then, shall we find the truth?” (James H Jeans, “Physics and Philosophy” 3rd Ed., 1943)

"This whole illusion has its history in ways of thinking - in the images, models, myths, and language systems which we have used for thousands of years to make sense of the world. […] Idolatry is not the use of images, but confusing them with what they represent, and in this respect mental images and lofty abstractions can be more insidious than bronze idols." (Alan W. Watts," The Book on the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are", 1966)

"The model of the natural world we build in our minds by such a process will forever be inadequate, just a little cathedral in the mountains. Still it is better than no model at all." (Timothy Ferris, "The Red Limit: The Search for the Edge of the Universe", 1977)

“Accurate estimates depend at least as much upon the mental model used in forming the picture as upon the number of pieces of the puzzle that have been collected.” (Richards J. Heuer Jr, “Psychology of Intelligence Analysis”, 1999)

"Often our mental models serve a very useful and practical purpose by helping us to make very quick sense of our experiences and interactions. However, the danger for us is that our mental models do not always reflect the truth, i.e. the way things really are. Often they reflect what we believe to be true, and sometimes we get it wrong." (John Middleton, "Upgrade Your Brain: 52 brilliant ideas for everyday genius", 2006)

"To think one needs to use a mental model, but mental models are only an abstraction of reality and at best an oversimplification. Making them explicit is the only chance one has to learn and improve them." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity", 2011) 

Mental Models X: (Limitations III)

“The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees, in every object, only the traits which favor that theory.” (Thomas Jefferson, [letter to Charles Thompson] 1787)

"Man is always prey to his truths. Once he has admitted them, he cannot free himself from them." (Albert Camus, "The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays", 1942)

"Although we can never devise a pictorial representation which shall be both true to nature and intelligible to our minds, we may still be able to make partial aspects of the truth comprehensible through pictorial representations or parables. As the whole truth does not admit of intelligible representation, every such pictorial representation or parable must fail somewhere. The physicist of the last generation was continually making pictorial representations and parables, and also making the mistake of treating the half-truths of pictorial representations and parables as literal truths.” (James H Jeans, “Physics and Philosophy” 3rd Ed., 1943)

"Once we give serious consideration to the hypothesis of the unconscious, it follows that our view of the world can be but a provisional one; for if we effect so radical an alteration in the subject of perception and cognition as this dual focus implies, the result must be a world view very different from any known before." (Carl Gustav Jung, "The Structure And Dynamics Of The Psyche", 1960)

"Ideas that require people to reorganize their picture of the world provoke hostility." (James Gleick, "Chaos: Making a New Science" , 1987)

“Metaphysics in philosophy is, of course, supposed to characterize what is real - literally real. The irony is that such a conception of the real depends upon unconscious metaphors.” (George Lakoff,  “Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought”, 1999)

“Your mental models shape the way you see the world. They help you to quickly make sense of the noises that filter in from outside, but they can also limit your ability to see the true picture. [...] We eventually lose all awareness that these ‘models’ are in fact internal illusions. We accept them as external reality and act on them as if they were. If they are good models, in most circumstances they more than adequately permit the mind to handle external reality. But here a danger creeps in. When the world changes in important ways, we can find ourselves with a model that is completely irrelevant to the current situation. We find ourselves wearing our street clothes when we are thrown off the deck of a ship. What we need at that point is a wet suit and lifejacket.” (Colin Cook & Yoram R Wind, “The Power of Impossible Thinking: Transform the Business of Your Life and the Life of Your Business”, 2006)

“Our inner working models, therefore, function as interpretation schemes, on the basis of which we organize our experiences. But, such schemes also distort reality in the direction of our pattern of expectations. In short: such working models organize and screen our experiences. This means that such an inner working model organizes and colours our perception of things in such a way that it can be extremely stimulating but can also sometimes slow us down considerably.” (M H M de Wolf, “Freud and Mahler”, 2007)

“Thinking in models has enormous advantages for us as a species, in representing the unknowable world in a form in which we can locate ourselves and with which we can engage. But it also has disadvantages for us whether as natural scientists, psychoanalytic theorists, practising analysts, or simply as individuals. We can become in Wittgenstein’s phrase the fly in the ‘fly bottle’ of our own model, with its own language from which philosophy might have a part to play in rescuing us.”  (Ronald Britton, “Between Mind and Brain: Models of the mind and models in the mind”, 2015)

Mental Models VIII (Limitations II)

“This is the greatest degree of impoverishment; the [mental] image, deprived little by little of its own characteristics, is nothing more than a shadow. […] Being dependent on the state of the brain, the image undergoes change like all living substance, - it is subject to gains and losses, especially losses. But each of the foregoing three classes has its use for the inventor. They serve as material for different kinds of imagination - in their concrete form, for the mechanic and the artist; in their schematic form, for the scientist and for others.” (Théodule-Armand Ribot, “Essay on the Creative Imagination”, 1900)

“It is by abstraction that one can separate movements, knowledge, and affectivity. And the analysis is, here, so far from being a real dismemberment that it is given only as probable. One can never effectively reduce an [mental] image to its elements, for the reason that an image, like all other psychic syntheses, is something more and different from the sum of its elements. […] We will always go from image to image. Comprehension is a movement which is never-ending, it is the reaction of the mind to an image by another image, to this one by another image and so on, in principle to infinity. “(Jean-Paul Sartre, “The Imaginary: A phenomenological psychology of the imagination”, 1940)

“Speaking without metaphor we have to declare that we are here faced with one of these typical antinomies caused by the fact that we have not yet succeeded in elaborating a fairly understandable outlook on the world without retiring our own mind, the producer of the world picture, from it, so that mind has no place in it. The attempt to press it into it, after all, necessarily produces some absurdities.” (Erwin Schrödinger, „Mind and Matter: the Tarner Lectures”, 1956)

“Mental models are fuzzy, incomplete, and imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within a single individual, mental models change with time, even during the flow of a single conversation. The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion. As debate shifts, so do the mental models. Even when only a single topic is being discussed, each participant in a conversation employs a different mental model to interpret the subject. Fundamental assumptions differ but are never brought into the open. […] A mental model may be correct in structure and assumptions but, even so, the human mind - either individually or as a group consensus - is apt to draw the wrong implications for the future.” (Jay W Forrester, “Counterintuitive Behaviour of Social Systems”, Technology Review, 1971)

“At present, no complete account can be given - one may as well ask for an inventory of the entire products of the human imagination - and indeed such an account would be premature, since mental models are supposed to be in people's heads, and their exact constitution is an empirical question. Nevertheless, there are three immediate constraints on possible models. […] 1. The principle of computability: Mental models, and the machinery for constructing and interpreting them, are computable. […] 2. The principle of finitism: A mental model must be finite in size and cannot directly represent an infinite domain. […] 3. The principle of constructivism: A mental model is constructed from tokens arranged in a particular structure to represent a state of affairs.” (Philip Johnson-Laird, “Mental Models” 1983)

"Almost every aspect of our lives is shaped in some way by how we make sense of the world. Our thinking and our actions are affected by the mental models we hold. These models define our limits or open our opportunities. Despite their power and pervasiveness, these models are usually virtually invisible to us. We don't realize they are there at all.” (Robert Gunther et al, “The Power of Impossible Thinking: Transform the Business of Your Life and the Life of Your Business”, 2004)

“Humans have difficulty perceiving variables accurately […]. However, in general, they tend to have inaccurate perceptions of system states, including past, current, and future states. This is due, in part, to limited ‘mental models’ of the phenomena of interest in terms of both how things work and how to influence things. Consequently, people have difficulty determining the full implications of what is known, as well as considering future contingencies for potential systems states and the long-term value of addressing these contingencies. ” (William B. Rouse, “People and Organizations: Explorations of Human-Centered Design”, 2007)

“[…] we cannot accurately assess both what a mental model is and what it is becoming because the act of assessment affects the model.” (William B. Rouse, “People and Organizations: Explorations of Human-Centered Design”, 2007) [see Werner Heisenberg’s principle]

“Mental models are problematic because they typically operate unconsciously. This means that they influence behavior and structure thinking in ways that individuals do not recognize and therefore cannot easily articulate. This makes certain kinds of exploratory conversations difficult or impossible, and causes even reasonable propositions to be rejected out of hand.” (Kim Erwin, “Communicating The New: Methods to Shape and Accelerate Innovation”, 2013)

“A mental model is not necessarily founded on facts or complete understanding of reality. Let's be honest, most of our mental models are flawed in many ways, and that's perfectly normal. They work because they are fast and simple and not because they are a complete representation of the reality. […] The most important thing about a person's mental model is that it's simplified and very limited compared to what it models.” (Peter W Szabo, “User Experience Mapping”, 2017)

See also:
Mental Models VIII – More on their Limits
Mental Models I, II, III, V, VI, VII

Mental Models IV (Limitations I)

“However, and conversely, our models fall far short of representing the world fully. That is why we make mistakes and why we are regularly surprised. In our heads, we can keep track of only a few variables at one time. We often draw illogical conclusions from accurate assumptions, or logical conclusions from inaccurate assumptions. Most of us, for instance, are surprised by the amount of growth an exponential process can generate. Few of us can intuit how to damp oscillations in a complex system.” (Donella H Meadows, “Limits to Growth”, 1972)

"The problem with mental models lie not in whether they are right or wrong - by definition, all models are simplifications. The problem with mental models arise when they become implicit - when they exist below the level of our awareness. “[…] models, if unexamined, limit an organization's range of actions to what is familiar and comfortable. [...] Each person's mental model focuses on different parts of the system. Each emphasizes different cause-effect chains. This makes it virtually impossible for a shared picture of the system as a whole to emerge in normal conversation." (Peter Senge, “The Fifth Discipline”, 1990)

“Mental models are the images, assumptions, and stories which we carry in our minds of ourselves, other people, institutions, and every aspect of the world. Like a pane of glass framing and subtly distorting our vision, mental models determine what we see. Human beings cannot navigate through the complex environments of our world without cognitive ‘mental maps’; and all of these mental maps, by definition, are flawed in some way.” (Peter M Senge et al, “The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization”, 1994)

“What are the models? Well, the first rule is that you’ve got to have multiple models - because if you just have one or two that you’re using, the nature of human psychology is such that you’ll torture reality so that it fits your models, or at least you’ll think it does.” (Charles Munger, 1994)

"Our generational perspective contributes to the mental models we hold about ourselves, the world, and the way things ‘should’ be. These beliefs create blind spots that can become our undoing as we pursue our values and seek to accomplish our goals. Likewise, they can have a powerful effect on our culture.” (Deborah Gilburg, “Empowering Multigenerational Collaboration in the Workplace”, The Systems Thinker Vol. 18 No. 4, 2007)

“[…] our mental models fail to take into account the complications of the real world - at least those ways that one can see from a systems perspective. It is a warning list. Here is where hidden snags lie. You can’t navigate well in an interconnected, feedback-dominated world unless you take your eyes off short-term events and look for long-term behavior and structure; unless you are aware of false boundaries and bounded rationality; unless you take into account limiting factors, nonlinearities and delays. You are likely to mistreat, misdesign, or misread systems if you don’t respect their properties of resilience, self-organization, and hierarchy.” (Donella H Meadows, “Thinking in Systems: A Primer”, 2008)

“The discrepancy between our mental models and the real world may be a major problem of our times; especially in view of the difficulty of collecting, analyzing, and making sense of the unbelievable amount of data to which we have access today.” (Ugo Bardi, “The Limits to Growth Revisited”, 2011)