The book's influence on later Jewish thought and continental thought may well be said to rest far more heavily on the fruitfulness of some of those individual insights in the book that appear to be decidedly anti-systematic, than on the book's own overall commitment to systematicity.
Considerations regarding productivity and systematicity are powerful.
Kant's discussion of the principle of nature's purposiveness for our cognitive faculties, and his related earlier discussion (in the Appendix to the Transcendental Dialectic of the Critique of Pure Reason) of the regulative principle of nature's systematicity, have, together, been seen as very important for the understanding of Kant's views on empirical science.
As Carnap understood the analytic/synthetic distinction, it was a distinction drawn by a logician to enable greater theoretical systematicity in the reconstructive understanding of a given symbol system, typically a fragment of a historically developed one.
[1] Nevertheless, while the diverse expression of his thought and the related lack of systematicity cause some difficulty for those interested in Marcel's work, the main themes of his thought are present in many of his works.
The precise status of the demand for systematicity is therefore somewhat controversial.
Kant is quite clear that he takes reason's demand for systematicity to play an important role in empirical inquiry.
Indeed, Kant links the demand for systematicity up with three other principles — those of homogeneity, specification and affinity — which he thinks express the fundamental presumptions that guide us in theory formation.
This combinatorial structure accounts for the properties of productivity and systematicity of the system of mental representations.
We can know that there is a systematic interconnection among all elements of the created world the PSR, together with what we can derive of God's nature seem to establish this for Du Châtelet we cannot always know all the details of that systematicity.
So, while the universalizing of Newton's theory of attraction to account for a plethora of phenomena would represent a more interconnected physical system, this systematicity must be rejected in light of our experiences of nature.
