Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards an Understanding of Philosophical Complexity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Bridging Complexity and Post-Structuralism

  • 501 Accesses

Abstract

The term complexity is often loosely appropriated by both academics and practitioners to describe things that lack simple explanations. However, little conceptual clarity exists regarding the meaning of the term. This is partly due to the diverse history of complexity theory, which evolved from the interplay of several disciplines.

In this chapter, a partial account of this history is offered. To this end, an overview of first-order cybernetics and information theory, second-order cybernetics and autopoiesis, third-order cybernetics and artificial life, and General Systems Theory is presented. The influence of these theoretical predecessors on philosophical complexity is highlighted, as are the central points of divergence. In so doing, a description of the features of philosophical complexity emerges.

Apart from its heterogeneous history, complexity theory currently refers to a number of theoretical enterprises, based on different assumptions, methodologies, and aims. In this chapter, philosophical complexity is also compared and contrasted with the scientific school of complexity theory. The goal is to illustrate why philosophical complexity—which can best be described as presenting a particular view of ontology, rather than a theory of causation—necessitates a different methodological approach to that of scientific complexity.

The ideal art, the noblest of art: working with the complexities of life, refusing to simplify, to “overcome” doubt.

— Joyce Carol Oates, The Journal of Joyce Carol Oates: 1973-1982

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this regard, see von Foerster ’s (1984) influential book, titled Observing Systems.

  2. 2.

    See Sect. 2.5 for a discussion on how the principle of organisation in complex systems allows for an opening in informationally and operationally-closed systems.

  3. 3.

    See Sect. 2.6.1 for more detailed descriptions of self-organised criticality and the edge of chaos .

  4. 4.

    Also see Sect. 2.6.2.

  5. 5.

    Open systems are juxtaposed with closed systems that are defined by an exchange of energy only (for example, the earth that receives radiation from the sun), as well as with isolated systems in which no energy/matter exchanges take place (for example, a can of soup) (Morin 1992a).

  6. 6.

    Features 6, 7, and 8 will be revisited in Chap. 7 (especially Sect. 7.2).

  7. 7.

    The organisational character of opening will be discussed in more detail in Chap. 7.

  8. 8.

    See Sect. 2.6.

  9. 9.

    http://www.santafe.edu/about/people/profile/John%20H.%20Holland Downloaded 16 March 2015.

  10. 10.

    http://www.santafe.edu/about/mission-and-vision/ Downloaded 16 March 2015.

  11. 11.

    See Sect. 2.2.3.

  12. 12.

    See also Sects. 2.3 and 2.5.

References

  • Arnoldi, J. 2001. Niklas Luhmann: An introduction. Theory, Culture & Society 18(1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bak, P. 1997. How nature works. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, R. 1952. A sound of thunder. Colliers Magazine, June 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bühler, K. 1934. Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D., and G. Callaghan. 2014. Complexity theory and social sciences: The state of the art. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. 1998. Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Rules and complex systems. Emergence 2(3): 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Boundaries, hierarchies and networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 135–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu, D., R. Strand, and R. Fjelland. 2003. Theories of complexity: Common denominators of complex systems. Wiley Periodicals 8(3): 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyke, C. 1988. The evolutionary dynamics of complex systems: A study in biosocial complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eck, D.J. n.d. Introduction to ‘The Edge of Chaos’. http://math.hws.edu/xJava/CA/EdgeOfChaos.html. Accessed 17 March 2014.

  • Haraway, D. 1985. A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980s. Socialist Review 80: 65–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, N.K. 1994. Boundary disputes: Homeostasis, reflexivity, and the foundations of cybernetics. Configurations 2(3): 441–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatica. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J.H. 1993. Echoing emergence: Objectives, rough definitions, and speculations for echo-class models. Working Paper, 93-04-023, Santa Fe Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Emergence: From chaos to order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley (Helix Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Horgan, J. 1995. From complexity to perplexity. Scientific America, June 1995: 104–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human, O., and P. Cilliers. 2013. Towards an economy of complexity: Derrida, Morin and Bataille. Theory Culture Society 30(5):24–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S.A. 1993. Origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution, technical monograph. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafontaine, C. 2007. The cybernetics matrix of ‘French Theory’. Theory, Culture & Society 24(5): 27–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langton, C.G. 1992. Life at the edge of chaos. In Artificial life II: Santa Fe Institute studies in the sciences of complexity, vol. 10, ed. C.G. Langton, J.D. Farmer, S. Rasmussen, and C. Taylor, 41–91. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, C.G. (ed.). 1995. Artificial life: An overview, ix–xi. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lettvin, J.L., H.R. Maturana, W.S. McCulloch, and W.H. Pitts. 1959. What the frog’s eye tells the frog’s brain. Proceedings of the Institute for Radio Engineers 47(11): 1940–1951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 1986. The autopoiesis of social systems. In Sociocybernetic paradoxes: Observation, control and evolution of self-steering systems, ed. F. Geyer and J. Van Der Zouwen, 172–192. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. Social systems. Trans. J. Bednarz, Jr. (with D. Baecker). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Why does society describe itself as postmodern? In Observing complexity: systems theory and postmodernity, ed. W. Rasch and C. Wolfe, 35–49. Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H.R., G. Uribe, and S. Frenk. 1968. A biological theory of relativistic color coding in the primate retina. Archivos de Biologia y Medicina Experimentales, Supplemento No. 1. Santiago: Chile.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H.R., and F.J. Varela. 1980. Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston: New Science Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravec, H. 1988. Mind children: The future of robot and human intelligence. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. 2006. Images of organization. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. 1992a. Method: Towards a study of humankind, vol. 1, The nature of nature. Trans. and intro. J.L.R. Bélanger. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992b. From the concept of a system to the paradigm of complexity. Trans. S. Kelly. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 15(4): 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Restricted complexity, general complexity. Trans. C. Gershenson. In Worldviews, science and us: Philosophy and complexity, ed. C. Gershenson, D. Aerts, and B. Edmonds, 5–29. Singapore: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. On complexity. Trans. S.M. Kelly. Cresskill: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. 1951. The social system. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. 2009. The complexity of anticipation. Balkan Journal of Philosophy 1(1): 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. A note on the difference between complicated and complex social systems. Cadmus 2(1): 142–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., and I. Stengers. 1984. Order out of chaos: Man’s new dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, W. 1991. Theories of complexity, complexities of theory: Habermas, Luhmann, and the study of social systems. German Studies Review 14(1): 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, W., and E.M. Knodt. 1994. Systems theory and the system of theory. New German Critique 61(Winter): 3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. 1985. Anticipatory systems: Philosophical, mathematical and methodological foundations. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C.E. 1948. A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27(3): 379–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M.C. 2001. The moment of complexity: Emerging network culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teran, O. 2001. Review of ‘How nature works: The science of self-organised criticality’. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 4(4): 186–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F.J., and P. Bourgine, eds. 1992. Towards a practice of autonomous systems. Proceedings of the first European conference on artificial life. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy, L. 1972. The history and status of general systems theory. The Academy of Management Journal 15(14): 407–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Foerster, H. 1984. Observing systems, 2nd ed. California: Intersystems Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990. Ethics and second-order cybernetics. Opening address for the international conference, Systems and Family Therapy: Ethics, Epistemology, New Methods. Paris, 4 October 1990. http://web.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-2/text/foerster.html. Accessed 16 March 2015.

  • Von Foerster, H., and B. Poerksen. 2002. Understanding systems: Conversations on epistemology and ethics. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, J. 1966. Theory of self-reproducing automata, ed. A.W. Burks. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, W. 1948. Science and complexity. American Scientist 36: 536–544.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, South Africa

    Minka Woermann

Authors
  1. Minka Woermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Woermann, M. (2016). Towards an Understanding of Philosophical Complexity. In: Bridging Complexity and Post-Structuralism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39047-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation