The Complex Systems of Practice
Complexity, as it is usually understood, is based on non-linear but reductive Newtonian relations. This formulation of complexity limits its value to social theorising, including the theorising of human practices. However, if complexity is understood to be based on non-linear but complex relations, for which Deweyan trans-actions can stand as an exemplar, it can provide an onto-epistemological framework for the consideration of living systems, including those of practice. This framework allows for a non-reductive conceptualisation of practice that encompasses both individual and social aspects of human functioning. In this chapter, it is used to focus on the workings of the co-present group, that nexus of complex relations where meaning is produced from affective processing and where the social, including practice, is created and individuals learn.
KeywordsComplex Relation Affective Processing Human Practice Affective Functioning Practical Understanding
- Cilliers, P. (2006). On the importance of a certain slowness. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 8(3), 105–112.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.Google Scholar
- Heylighen, F., Cilliers, P., & Gershenson, C. (2005). Complexity and philosophy. Paper presented at the Complexity, Science and Society Conference, Liverpool, UK. Citation: uk.arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0604/0604072.pdf. Accessed Aug 2010.
- Lancaster, J. (2011). The complexity of learning: relations all the way down. Ph.D. thesis, University of Technology, Sydney.Google Scholar
- Schatzki, T. (2001a). Introduction: Practice theory. In T. R. Shatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 10–23). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Schatzki, T. (2001b). Practice mind-ed orders. In T. R. Shatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina, & E. Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 42–55). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Seidl, D. (2007). The dark side of knowledge. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 9(3), 16–29.Google Scholar