Articles & Research
A New Beginning — a Systems Approach
In the science of the behavior of living organisms there are two paradigms that can be defined as the “beginning” and the “new beginning.” Research within the first paradigm — theories of reflexes and the metaphors that correspond to them — is still kept going by the inertia of science, and our compatriot Ivan Petrovich Pavlov was one of its founders. We will be talking about the paradigms of reactivity and activity, but mostly about the “new beginning” — the systems approach and systems psychophysiology.
In psychophysiology, the core thesis of the systems approach is that any “function” (for instance, any behavioral act) is realized not by individual brain structures or neurons but by their systems. Pyotr Kuzmich Anokhin, the founder of the theory of functional systems (TFS), presented science with a revolutionary view of the application of the systems approach. A “system” is usually defined as a complex of interacting elements united by a certain structure, and the meaning of that structure is treated as the laws of the connections and functioning of the elements. But what is to be understood by the interaction of elements? After all, this is not new knowledge but the simplest axiom of any science. In the TFS, the relation of the elements was designated in a different way — and that changed the very understanding of the “system.”
Jumping ahead, let us note that a living system does not arise without a restriction of the degrees of freedom that put the organization of the elements in order. The multiple elements of a living system possess an enormous number of degrees of freedom — but how are they restricted? What determines the formation and realization of a system? Some may want to recall causes lying in the past and their consequences, but for now we will not speak of them. The answer is the system-forming factor, by which is meant the result of the system — a useful adaptive effect in the “organism — environment” relationship. The organization of processes within the system is determined by the future for the sake of which the system is formed. That is, behavior is determined not by the past (the stimulus) but by the future (the result) — this is very important, and it changes everything.
If this conclusion about the determinacy of behavior seems unambiguous to someone, there is no need to be upset — the Universe is woven from different types of determination. It turns out that between our current state and the result there exists a certain distance. Everything is movement! How much can we say in advance about the length of that distance, and about the whole structural complexity of the content that takes shape along the way toward the result? The answer to this question surely contains an idea of how one should go about education so as to be able “to swim in a storm.”
“All sociocultural problems must be solved through an understanding of the subjective worlds of individuals” — V.B. Shvyrkov
If we watch the realization of a system from the outside, the result is characterized by the following: a certain relationship of organism and external environment, the cessation of action once it has been achieved, and the possibility of carrying out the next behavioral act. As far back as the middle of the last century, some outstanding scientists understood that the study of “functions” alone, or of individual brain structures, is not enough for understanding the adaptive activity of the individual. Whoever has thought that everything happening on this planet is connected is, of course, right. What was required, and still is, is to study the organization of the integral relationships of the organism with the environment. Cognition is rooted in the environment, and cognitive activity unfolds in the context of the surrounding world. In this sense, functional MRI does not play the role of a universal oracle. What is it that the rabbit really experiences?
Remember interaction? Well then — not interaction, but CO-action. The individual components involved in the organization coordinate their activity and their degrees of freedom in order to obtain the result. Simply by CO-acting with one another. Anokhin's functional system is precisely a complex of such selectively involved components. The result, or goal, is the cause of our current activity. A paradox, truly. Although — you do understand that the solution already exists, and once it exists, the riddle ceases to be a riddle. And so a representation of the model of the future result was developed. This model carries a certain informational content and acts as a determinant. Enter the acceptor of the result of action. The acceptor contains forecasts of the various parameters of the future result. It should be noted that the laws of the formation and functioning of the acceptor were analyzed in many experiments. These were studies of behavior and various neurophysiological experiments.
The experimental method, traditions, causality, the causal explanation of behavior, reactivity. It all sounds authoritative, does it not? The main thing is not to suffer from inflated convictions. Because there is no adequate theory studying goal determination, a drift toward reactivity takes place the whole time. The hero of our topic, P.K. Anokhin, wrought a scientific miracle and offered classical causality something without violating it. We are speaking, of course, of the acceptor of the results of action. What is interesting is that in the TFS we can consider behavior as both goal-directed and causal.
How can one define the specificity of life? The goal organizes the parts into a whole, and in such a way that this organization acquires special properties. What are these special properties? A new category has to be introduced — anticipatory reflection. This is precisely the special property of life. Anticipatory reflection and life arose on our planet at the same time. We are constantly preparing for future changes in the environment, and this is the meaning of anticipatory reflection. It appeared only because there are recurring events in the world. Just think: if events never repeated themselves, life would never have arisen. Anticipation appeared together with life, which means that it exists at every level of its organization — having, incidentally, completely replaced reactivity, or “lagging reflection.”
“A reaction to external influence occurs not in living organisms alone, but also in the bodies of inanimate nature” — V.M. Bekhterev
Someone is running very late — these are reflexes, after all, and once again we have to wait. At a certain level of regularities, those that explain the behavior of a stone are sufficient to explain our behavior. Is it really that simple? It is never simple with living things — all the more so when we are speaking of higher nervous activity. Speaking about the behavior of living organisms, one often hears of teleological determination — that is, determination by goals. What are the main criteria? Activity — goal-directedness — reactivity. We have already learned a little about the TFS and can now speak of the important distinctions of its systems approach. Its conceptual scheme acquired an isomorphic system-forming factor — the result — and the understanding of the determination of behavior changed in the most radical way.
Which propositions of reflex theory does the TFS reject? First, the stimulus that determines the action; second, the completion of a behavioral act by a reflex action; and finally, the progressive course of excitation along the reflex arc. Let us go briefly through all three propositions. For a particular behavior to arise, a stimulus alone is not enough. When we learn something, we form a memory of it, and it is with this material that we begin to work on the new situation. Doing your homework — but is it something you need? Yet if you do it well, you may even make friends with the professor. That is already motivation, and without it there is no behavior either. It is also very important to remember the setting. Remember what Albert Hofmann wrote about handling his “problem child”? The main things are set and setting. These conditions are known to everyone, and they were once used with success. But what do they mean in reflex theory? Merely modulators, merely the conditions for the appearance of a stimulus and a response. Yet one and the same stimulus does not determine any single response; on the contrary, behavior can be diverse. Want some food? By all means — you can go to a café, or you can cook it yourself. One stimulus — different behavior. Wait a moment — which stimulus?
In the TFS, on the other hand, the components are integrated by means of a systemic mechanism — afferent synthesis. This mechanism is involved in the production of two key processes: the restriction of the degrees of freedom and the attainment of a useful adaptive result. The questions “what to do,” “how,” “where” — in general, any determination of the composition of components for making decisions — all of this is about afferent synthesis. What comes after the decision is made? The formation of the acceptor of the result of action, where, as we remember, the parameters of future results are forecast. What remains is to realize the program of action, so as to begin surveying the correspondence between the parameters of the model of future results and the results themselves. Survival of the fittest? It is now known who survives, and who the fittest is. What is important to understand is that the TFS introduces these mechanisms into the conceptual scheme, and therein lies the principal distinction of its systems approach. Roughly speaking, the operational architectonics of a functional system replaces the “stimulus — response” scheme.
Elementary physiological processes are integrated within the boundaries of specific systemic processes qualitatively distinct from them. A new kind of process in the living organism — systemic processes, which are busy organizing particular physiological processes but are not reducible to them. Think about that. Systemic processes do not regard behavior as the relation of a local influence and a response — everything is many times more interesting. Behavior is an exchange of organization, or information, between organism and environment, carried out within these informational processes. The most interesting thing is that the TFS describes the organization of the activity of the organism's elements in connection with the organization of the external environment. Long live the synchronous activity of brain and body!
An interesting question: where, then, does behavior begin? The triggering stimulus is, after all, a concept from the paradigm of reactivity. We have no need of such eclecticism. What, then, is any behavioral act — and should it be considered an isolated process, or a connection? Let us leave isolation to the wires of another network, and consider our behavioral acts as components of a behavioral continuum. We are speaking of a certain sequence of such acts performed by the individual over the course of life. In the continuum, acts are realized in a definite order. The result is achieved and evaluated — and one can move on to the next act. Here, the evaluation of the previous act is necessary for the organization of the following one. All the time, a process of transition from one act to another is underway. Does anyone still see a place for the stimulus?
We have become acquainted with a very promising direction in the research on the behavior of living organisms and have shown its differences from the highly popular paradigm of reactivity. And how do you like this news — Pyotr Kuzmich told the world about the TFS as long ago as 1971, and had begun working on the theory even earlier. This knowledge will not become the property of the man in the street for a long time yet, but whoever has read it has undoubtedly been enlightened. How good it would be if people thought less about failures in the past and more about future results. Wait — who said the word “instinct”? There, someone is already laughing — some madman with his systems approach. Then again, there is no harm in dreaming — and, as the TFS proves, it is perfectly natural.