What is the first documented use of the term, "Systems Thinking"?

Although new historical discoveries can be made, as of this writing, the answer is 1938 in a book entitled, "Interpretations and Misinterpretations of Modern Physics" by Philipp Frank. There are many misconceptions and an abundance of misinformation on Google search of when the term "Systems Thinking" (or "System Thinking") was first used. This publication identifies the first documented use of the term. Note that the first use of the term is not the same as the first discussion of systems, systems, sciences, thinking about systems, complexity, etc. In this article, we are simply looking for the first documented use of the specific term.

Building a New Thursday Circle. Carnap and Frank in Prague

In 1949, Philipp Frank claimed that he and Rudolf Carnap built up a new center for the scientific world conception in Prague between 1931 and 1935. The aim of this paper is to provide historical evidence and further materials to approach this claim of Frank. Definite answers, however, require more space and contextualization, so I will just sketch some partial but hopefully promising narratives and rudimentary answers. I claim that though Carnap and Frank indeed tried to build a new center, they were unsuccessful, and possibly there were many reasons for this. This is the general claim; regarding Carnap, I will also show his way to the German University of Prague and his philosophical, scholarly, and cultural life in Prague.

Knowledge Missemination: L. Susan Stebbing, C.E.M. Joad, and Philipp Frank on the Philosophy of the Physicists

Science popularization might take different forms. In the early twentieth century, Sir James Jeans and Sir Arthur Eddington presented the most successful endeavors. Philosophers were highly unimpressed and disturbed by these popular works and various authors declared their disagreement with the physicists’ philosophical books against their own philosophical background. I will discuss three different philosophers, L. Susan Stebbing, C. E. M. Joad, and Philipp Frank, whose three lines of criticism represent three different forms of philosophy, social engagement, and scientific outlook. What is interesting is that there was a point when the most diverse philosophers (of science) agreed in contrast of their common enemy, namely, those popularizing scientists that have their reputation and use it to propagate false, or at least misleading views about science, culture, and values. What we shall see is how far this agreement went among these figures and how the divergent strategies culminated in very similar results regarding knowledge dissemination.

Logical Empiricism

At different times logical empiricists engaged one another in debates about the proper problems and methods for philosophy or its successor discipline. The most pressing problem focused on how to coordinate the abstract statements of the sciences with what can be experienced and tested. While the new logic was the main tool for coordination for Moritz Schlick, Hans Reichenbach, and Rudolf Carnap, there was no agreement on the nature of logic or its role in coordination. Otto Neurath and Philipp Frank countered with a sophisticated alternative that emphasized the social and political context within which science is done. All told, one finds in logical empiricism a high level of methodological awareness as well as a healthy skepticism about the appropriate aims and methods of philosophy.