The word “system” in family therapy

The word “system” has turned into a cliché of family therapy — into a word that has largely lost its original meaning due to inappropriate use, all sorts of generalizations, and great divergence in the academic environment. Although the concept of “system theory” is the cornerstone of the whole family therapy, the diversity of clinical methods indicates the existence of many different ways by which the family system can be determined and considered.
Most students react to the academic definition of the concept of “family system” with a confused look, as if wishing to say: “And what do you have to do with a self-correcting homeostatic system, which is activated when an error occurs and is self-regulated through negative and positive feedback circuits in order maintain your balance? ”(system definition in cybernetics). Or: “How should an element be handled that has an internal plan and evolves to new unpredictable levels of organization as a result of a process of discrete changes of unpredictable leaps?” (Evolutionary definition of a system).
Unfortunately, these concepts are much easier to academic definition than the application in clinical practice. Conducting clinical work, psychotherapists in most cases define the system on the basis of what, in their opinion, is the cause of the problem, and also on the basis of the method by which they intend to intervene. For example: El Salvador Minuhin defines the system on the basis of its boundaries and hierarchical organization, since they are going to change them; Murray Bowen's definition is based on the concept of triangles and degrees of differentiation, since this is the field of his intervention; As Lynne Hofman wittily remarked: “Family therapy was and still is similar to the Tower of Babel: its builders speak a completely different language”