Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complex Systems and Complexity Thinking

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Emergence of Complexity

Part of the book series: Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education ((PRRE))

Abstract

This chapter introduces fundamental aspects of what is popularly called complexity theory, though, for reasons explained in the chapter, we prefer the term complexity thinking. The concept of complexity and its accompanying cluster of key ideas, such as reduction, nonlinear relations and emergence, is outlined and discussed. Crucially, the chapter distinguishes between restricted complexity and general complexity. Whilst restricted complexity has proven to have wide applicability within mathematics and the natural sciences, we argue that it is general complexity that is more relevant to major portions of the human and social sciences. This chapter also identifies and discusses three kinds of emergence, concluding that it is weak emergence that is vitally important for the human and social sciences. Though complexity thinking remains a contested field of inquiry, this chapter does not attempt to resolve ongoing disputes within complexity thinking itself. Rather its aim is to present a coherent version of complexity thinking, one that suggests novel and fertile understandings of the unresolved issues identified in previous chapters. It is the task of the remaining chapters of the book to demonstrate the power of complexity thinking to deepen and expand our understanding of these pressing issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bedau, M. A. (2002). Downward causation and the autonomy of weak emergence. Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology, 6(1), 5–50. https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/17003/15556. Accessed November 23, 2016.

  • Bedau, M. A. (2010). Weak emergence and context-sensitive reduction. In A. Corradini & T. O’Connor (Eds.), Emergence in science and philosophy (pp. 46–63). London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedau, M. A., & Humphries, P. (Eds.). (2008). Emergence: Contemporary readings in philosophy and science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (2005). Complexity, configuration and cases. Theory, Culture and Society, 22(5), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405057194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D., & Callaghan, G. (2014). Complexity theory and the social sciences: The state of the art. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, D. (2006). Strong and weak emergence. In P. Clayton & P. Davies (Eds.), The re-emergence of emergence (pp. 1–13). Ox-ford: Oxford University Press. http://consc.net/papers/emergence.pdf. Accessed November 23, 2016.

  • Cilliers, P. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2000). Rules and complex systems. Emergence, 2(3), 40–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2001). Boundaries, hierarchies and networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(2), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1363-9196(01)00031-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2006). On the importance of a certain slowness. Stability, memory and hysteresis in complex systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 8(3), 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2008). Responses. In C. Gershenson (Ed.), Complexity: 5 questions (pp. 27–32). Copenhagen: Automatic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2010). The value of complexity: A response to Elizabeth Mowat and Brent Davis. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 7(1), 39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. (2013). A crisis of knowledge: Complexity, understanding and the problem of responsible action. In P. Derkx & H. Kunneman (Eds.), Genomics and democracy: Towards a ‘lingua democratica’ for the public debate on genomics (pp. 37–59). Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, T. W. (2007). Three levels of emergent phenomena. In N. Murphy & W. R. Stoeger (Eds.), Evolution and emergence: Systems, organisms, persons (pp. 88–110). Oxford: Oxford Universi-ty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1910). How we think (pp. 56–67). Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. (1989). Knowing and the known. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works: 1949–1952 (Vol. 16, pp. 2–294). Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press (Original work published 1949).

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317. https://doi.org/10.1086/231209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, J. (2001). An introduction to Dewey’s theory of functional “trans-action”: An alternative paradigm for activity theory. Mind, Culture and Activity, 8(4), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327884MCA0804_02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, J. W., & Watson, B. W. (2005). Food from thought. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, New Series, 19(4), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsp.2006.0006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct: History and issues. Emergence, 1(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327000em0101_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hager, P. (1996). Relational realism and professional performance. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 28(1), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.1996.tb00234.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1950). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover Publications (Original work published 1890).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, J. (2012). The complex systems of practice. In P. Hager, A. Lee, & A. Reich (Eds.), Practice, learning and change: Practice theory perspectives on professional learning (pp. 119–131). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, J. (2013). Complexity and relations. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(12), 1264–1275. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2013.763595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. (2000). The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development. Child Development, 71(1), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malpas, J. (2002). The weave of meaning: Holism and contextuality. Language & Communication, 22(4), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0271-5309(02)00017-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manson, S. (2001). Simplifying complexity: A review of complexity theory. Geoforum, 32(3), 405–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-7185(00)00035-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulecky, D. (2001). The emergence of complexity: Science coming of age or science growing old? Computers & Chemistry, 25(4), 341–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0097-8485(01)00070-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, S. (2009). Unsimple truths: Science, complexity and policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. (2007). Restricted complexity, general complexity. In D. Aerts, C. Gershenson, & B. Edmonds (Eds.), Worldviews, science and us: Philosophy and complexity (pp. 5–29). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, D. (1996). Emergence and strange attractors. Philosophy of Science, 63(2), 245–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolis, G. (1995). Introduction to nonlinear science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Osberg, D., & Biesta, G. J. J. (2007). Beyond presence: Epistemological and pedagogical implications of “strong” emergence. Interchange, 38(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-007-9014-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preiser, R., & Cilliers, P. (2010). Unpacking the ethics of complexity: Concluding reflections. In P. Cilliers & R. Preiser (Eds.), Complexity, difference and identity: An ethical perspective (pp. 265–287). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I. (1997). The end of certainty: Time, chaos, and the new laws of nature. London: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos: Man’s new dialogue with nature. London: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M., & Harvey, D. L. (1992). The new science and the old: Complexity and realism in the social sciences. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22(4), 353–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1992.tb00224.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, K., & Cilliers, P. (2001). What is complexity science? A view from different directions. Emergence, 3(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327000em0301_02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. (1987). Some epistemological issues in physics and biology. In B. J. Hiley & F. D. Peat (Eds.), Quantum implications: Essays in honour of David Bohm (pp. 314–327). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saljo, R. (2002). My brain’s running slow today—The preference for “things ontologies” in research and everyday discourse on human thinking. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21(4), 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1019834425526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (1995). To follow a rule. In C. Taylor (Ed.), Philosophical arguments (pp. 165–180). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winch, C. (2010). Dimensions of expertise: A conceptual exploration of vocational knowledge. London & New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Paul Hager

  2. Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    David Beckett

Authors
  1. Paul Hager
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Beckett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Hager .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hager, P., Beckett, D. (2019). Complex Systems and Complexity Thinking. In: The Emergence of Complexity. Perspectives on Rethinking and Reforming Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31839-0_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31839-0_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31837-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31839-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation