[DSRP Evidence](https://dsrpevidence.org/)

# A Proposed Four-Principle Generative Architecture of Systems - Thesis

## Details

**Authors** Callender, Glen Alexander

**Year** 2026

**Publisher** Zenodo

**Kind of work** report

**Discipline** Systems Science

**Secondary disciplines** Philosophy

**Kind of engagement** public

**Applied** false

[Read it at the publisher](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21949822) 
10.5281/zenodo.21949822

## In authors' words

### What they set out to do (purpose)

To test whether four principles — Things, Relationships, Change, and Constraints — can serve as a minimal, generative architecture for analyzing systems across domains, and whether higher-order frameworks, General Systems Theory and DSRP among them, can be represented, reduced to, or derived from it.

### How they did it (methods)

A conceptual argument. The framework began as a business methodology in which recurring patterns, particularly the role of constraints, suggested a more general structure; it was then abstracted and refined by testing, reduction, and comparison. An earlier six-principle model was cut to four by asking whether Resources and Outcomes require independent status or can be expressed through the other principles. The paper then asks whether systems, processes, feedback, hierarchy, emergence, adaptation, and perspective are higher-order configurations of the four primitives rather than primitives in their own right, and treats viewer-relativity as arising from the selection of Things, Relationships, Changes, and Constraints within an analytical frame rather than as a primitive. It closes with a comparison against General Systems Theory and DSRP, and a statement of the work required for independent evaluation.

### What they found (results)

Callender concludes that the four principles may form a distinct, minimal, lower-order architecture from which higher-order systems concepts can be represented or generated, while acknowledging overlap with existing research and disclaiming novelty for the underlying concepts. He presents the framework as a testable hypothesis rather than an established theory, and lists formalization, cross-domain testing, comparative analysis, derivation, and falsification as the work still outstanding. No empirical results are reported.

## Commentary

### In short

A self-published thesis proposing Things, Relationships, Change, and Constraints as the minimal primitives of systems, and positioning DSRP as a higher-order framework that it asks whether its own four primitives could generate. It argues that perspective is not primitive but arises from how an analytical frame is drawn.

### Response

Callender offers his architecture as a hypothesis and names the conditions under which it should be given up, which is more than most frameworks positioned against DSRP have done. What it does not yet have is results; the paper says as much, listing formalization, cross-domain testing, and falsification as work still to come. DSRP's four patterns have been tested in published experiments and are supported by a corpus of independent findings, and the condition that would refute the theory is published with it: produce thinking, or any organized body of information, that does not decompose into distinctions, systems, relationships, and perspectives. On the substance, the claim that perspective is not primitive does not hold. Viewer-relativity is said to arise from selecting Things, Relationships, Changes, and Constraints within an analytical frame — but an analytical frame is a point from which a view is taken, which is what perspective names. The selection step the derivation rests on already presupposes the pattern it is meant to produce, so P has not been removed from the architecture, only moved outside it and left undescribed. The other three primitives also reduce in the opposite direction from the one proposed: a constraint is a boundary, which is an identity-other distinction applied to a relationship or a system, and change is action and reaction unfolding over time, which is a relationship. Things and Relationships are D and R under other names, and part-whole structure, which the paper assigns to the higher order, is what makes a Thing decomposable into Things at all.

**Patterns it shows** D, S, R, P

**Added** 2026-10-18

**How to cite this** Callender, Glen Alexander (2026). A Proposed Four-Principle Generative Architecture of Systems - Thesis. Zenodo.