Perspectives of the Systems Approach

My apologies for the particular style of this paper, but I've found that the usual expository method is becoming (for me) more and more ineffective. The difficulty lies in what I perceive to be a very deep lack of communication about the so-called systems approach. There are radically different opinions about how men should try to understand social systems, but the arguments usually proceed at the superficial level. The humanist cries out that we shouldn't try to quantify everything. To the systems analyst this complaint is altogether irrelevant, because of course he isn't trying to quantify everything, since at best such an effort is hopeless. From his point of view, the humanist's complaint amounts to trying to formulate all problems in a ridiculously vague way to justify the humanist's inability to reason precisely. So each side talks and neither listens. To the system's analyst models do provide a reasonable way of describing reality, whereas to the humanist they do not. But why each feel this way is rarely explained by either. I've never heard anyone who works with models explain why they are reasonable approaches to reality, although common sense would seem to argue that anyone who approaches society systematically would have to defend his own inquiring system. But then a very peculiar thing about many systems analysts is that they do not consciously include themselves in the system being studied.