Kwinter’s Soft Systems talks about the blending and stitching of objects from all scales into one fabric environment. The problem with this argument is that there are currently no examples of a fabric like this on the scale Kwinter is prone to advocate. The embryo is formed with multiple opportunities and trajectories. But that does not come close to what he considers the end game for soft system, primarily a collapse of the technical, architectural, biological, and social into one category. His ideas are intriguing to apply to the form finding process of a limited urban plot or some type of confined site of intervention. But to imply a global phenomena from this concept is irresponsible.
I did find it interesting that he brings up the idea of the autonomous subjectivity of soft systems. I wonder who these subjective decisions made by the system affects when all objects are submerged into this greater, interconnected textile. A meshwork or archipelago of objects talk a lot of the distinct autonomy of the objects. But what of the autonomy of the meshwork or archipelago? The point of object oriented ontology is to avoid this measure. There is a push and pull tension between the autonomous objects and the program and relationships by which they are linked. Where is the tension in Kwinter’s soft system? What happens if the soft system acts on its subjectivity? Who does it affect when all of its constituent members are spellbound by the subjectivity of the system?