It's actually _hard_ to explain why, I have tried several times (IRL) and it's really hard to get to the point. Funnily enough, soon after reading it I happened to be at an unconference where there was a Thinking in Systems session. And the speaker likewise tried his best to get us (I was in the audience, and tried to give a hand as well when I saw issues) to get the point, but didn't succeed either. I suspect I would need to read it 4 or 5 times before I can get to that point, but it's a book I'm actually looking forward to re-reading soon.
There's a way to the analysis of a system or a model that you can get on an intuitive level (or even, on a formal level, given where most of the HN readership works or has interests), but the exposition in TiS goes further, and tries to make you think not only on all the sources acting on a system, but how you could get to build or adapt a system for a specific objective.
See? What I wrote above makes just marginal sense. It's not a complicated book, it's an enjoyable read but the concepts inside go deeper than what I could get into something that makes much sense.
Cheers! I hope you didn't take my original comment as a criticism, which wasn't at all it's intent. I meant it as a prompt or prod, and at a general audience, rather than you specifically.
No, I didn't at all, it encouraged me to figure out something to prod people to read the book, which I was a tad too lazy in my previous comment :) Appreciated!
There's a way to the analysis of a system or a model that you can get on an intuitive level (or even, on a formal level, given where most of the HN readership works or has interests), but the exposition in TiS goes further, and tries to make you think not only on all the sources acting on a system, but how you could get to build or adapt a system for a specific objective.
See? What I wrote above makes just marginal sense. It's not a complicated book, it's an enjoyable read but the concepts inside go deeper than what I could get into something that makes much sense.