World Hypotheses: A Study in Evidence (1942) and [The Design of Inquiring Systems](https://wulrich.com/downloads/ulrich_2015h.pdf) were both written by professors at the University of California Berkeley who shared the pragmatic tradition. Stephen C. Pepper preceded [C. West Churchman](https://newsarchive.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/03/31_chrch.shtml) by a generation.
In [1989 IEEE article](https://doi.org/10.1109/21.44017) by [Harold D. Carrier](https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Harold-D-Carrier-29934938) and [William A. Wallace](https://faculty.rpi.edu/william-wallace), the two dimensions are explicated (with philosophical connections made between Stephen C. Pepper and C. West Churchman.
Carrier and Wallace see Churchman's correlation between the inquiring systems and the figurehead philosophers with an emphasis slightly different from than taken by Pepper.
1989_IEEE_Carrier_Wallace_Figure_1
> Pepper’s view of root metaphor seems close conceptually to Churchman’s [The Design of Inquiring Systems] typology of inquiry systems and is represented within the scheme of Fig. 1, with > * Leibniz associated with formism, > * Locke with mechanism, > * Kant and Hegel with organicism, and > * Singer rooted in the pragmatics of contextualism. > Churchman’s Leibnizian inquiry system is characterized by analytical thought, and the use of catagorization or the dispersive method to discover truth. > His Lockean inquiry system, although analytic, is juxtaposed from the Leibnizian approach because it is an integrative view of scientific inquiry. > The Kantian and Hegalian inquiry systems employ synthetic logic, or what they call the “dialectic” approach, and attempt to integrate categories rather than disperse them. > Finally, the Singerian inquiry system, based on the work of American pragmatist Edgar Singer, is dispersial yet simultaneously employs the synthetic approach by emphasizing the nature of systems. [p. 1024, editorial paragraphing added]