The Radical New Reality of Systems Science
Our Next
World View
An Overview of The New Science & Its Implications
Confronting the Science of Unpredictably Self-Animating Systems We Cannot Control
-
Ordering has been shown to emerge unpredictably from disorder, leading to self-ordering, self-directing systems
-
From ecologies to economies, cells to societies, systems manifest as feedback-driven, self-organizing networks
-
These self-promoting networks enable systems to act in ways we can neither fully explain nor control
-
Even human systems self-direct in ways we do not intend or perceive, often debilitating both humans and Nature
-
This emergent ordering, and resulting purposeful system behaviors, pose a profoundly new 'way things happen'
-
The facts of these 'self-animating' networks reveal our catastrophic ignorance about 'how the world actually works'
-
SYSTEMS WE CREATE BECOME AUTONOMOUS AGENTS THAT MANIPULATE US FOR THEIR SELF-ASSERTION
-
The evidence even poses a basis for a scientifically factual, naturalistic spirituality
-
We are confronted with a new scientific reality that is incomprehensible to our mechanistic modern worldview
What Science Now Tells Us that We Have Yet to Understand
​
This website seeks to introduce you to the implications recent research in complex adaptive systems science has for our understanding of 'how the world actually works.' The view taken here is inspired by a number of leading researchers from diverse disciplines within the sciences, such as Stuart Kaufman, David Nobel, Ian McGilchrist, Terrance Deacon, Robert E. Ulanowicz, Steven Johnson, Ilya Prigogine, Ervin Laszlo, Per Bak, John Holland, Alexei A. Sharov, Albert-László Barabási, Jesper Hoffmeyer. The work of these thinkers and others has stunning implications for our understanding of reality -- or 'how the world actually works.' Yet those implications have barely begun to permeate the larger realm of science, much less entered into our commonly shared, mechanistic worldview. Thus far, the novel ideas and evidence emerging from the study of complex adaptive systems seems to be regarded as 'just more information.' I suggest to you here that it is, factually, a radically different concept of 'how things happen,' of how the world gets organized, and thus 'actually works.'
The attempt made here is to abstract some of the more stunning aspects of this science in a way that average people might be able to incorporate into their understanding of their selves and the world we all inhabit. The trouble is, this new view of 'how things happen,' thus 'how the world actually works,' differs so drastically from our familiar assumptions that it is virtually un-thinkable. Nonetheless, the factual basis of that new view demonstrates how we must immediately incorporate it in our worldview if we are to change our behaviors in ways that might avoid our destroying the biosphere we depend upon. This website attempts to provide insights that will promote this now essential re-thinking of how we think about the ways order arises and sustains life on earth.
This science is not 'just more information,' but a fundamental shift in our understanding of functional reality. It is not just useful knowledge that might enable us to better 'manage' our selves and the world. It confronts us with fundamental aspects of nature that are intrinsically unpredictable, thus beyond control, yet purposeful, and lead to the manifestation of autonomous agency even in systems that are not living things. Thus it confronts us with unexpected limitations upon both our ultimate understanding and our ability to control phenomena. Yet, at the same time, it also presents us with factual mystery that can provide a basis for enhanced meaning and sense of greater purpose in our lives.
​
A Simplistic Preview:
​
The science of complex adaptive systems involves multiple fields of research, which collectively foster "complexity theory."
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
This science details, using quantitatively reductive scientific methods, how spontaneous self-organization emerges unpredictably through feedback networks forming among less ordered elements and factors, from which emerge feedback-driven self-sustaining networks of self-organization, leading to the capacity of complex adaptive systems to both self-regulate and self-adapt their forms and functions for the purpose of promoting their continued existence. These feedback relationships aggregate from less ordered conditions, building upon each other.
​
​
​
The interdependent interactions of parts can become self-perpetuating and continually self-organize into the relational wholes of systems. The more complex of such systems can selectively direct their own operations in adaptive ways to promote their continued existence, making them technically self-directing thus 'self-animating' systems.
​
​​
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​​
In this general manner, feedback interactions among various parts and actions give rise to larger scale complex adaptive systems. There is an inherent impulse in nature that promotes self-ordering interactions and, thus, self-directing systems. The interacting relationships among plant and animal species of a particular ecosystem become the basis for the emergence of that overall adaptive system. But, while the 'parts' of that system are relatively easy to specify, their enmeshed interactions are relatively 'invisible.' Thus it is said, 'you can't see the forest for the trees.' A systems 'parts' are not the same as its 'integrated wholeness' -- which turns out to be quantitatively 'more than' the traits of its parts.
​
​The wholeness of an adaptive system (the 'forest') emerges as 'something more than' its parts (the 'trees'):
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
In revealing unpredictably emergent self-ordering in disorderly systems, which leads to system capacity to self-direct, our reductive scientific methods also reveal that this phenomena cannot be fully analyzed, explained, or predicted in the mechanistic terms of deterministic causation. Its 'in puts' and 'out puts' can be fairly well quantified. But exactly how emergent self-organization happens among simultaneous interactions, then results in unpredictable system properties and behaviors, remains a 'dynamical black box.'
​
​
​​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
To become more fully scientific about reality, about 'how the world actually works,' we must confront this conundrum of unpredictably emergent self-ordering that leads to complex adaptive system 'agency,' but does not conform to our assumptions that all phenomena derive from predictably deterministic causation -- thus 'should be' potentially controllable. Here, we must confront a 'bi-dynamical' reality in which there are 'two ways things happen.'
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​​​
It is this interplay of ordering arising predictably from deterministic causation AND unpredictably from emergently self-ordering, interdependent interactions, that generates the forms and functions of self and world. Mechanistic actions interact to generate a critical state which enables the emergent properties of self-organizing interactions. From that can emerge complex adaptive systems with agency, which then interact to form collective 'meta-systems' or 'super organisms,' like ecologies, societies, economies, etc.. Those meta-systems then assert their self-determination by manipulating the sub-systems from which they emerge: humans are manipulated by the systems their interactions give rise to.
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
​​These self-organizing events, and the self-animating systems that emerge from them, are best modeled as dynamical networks of interdependent relationships -- dynamically active networks 'driven by' feedback flows between system parts, and between them and the system's external environment. Relational networks are the primary metaphor for representing these phenomena. This 'network vision' enables us to better 'see the 'forest' that emerges from the interactions of 'the trees.'
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
​
The profound challenge of comprehending complex systems science is daunting for our familiar mechanistic worldview. Fortunately, the r recent neuroscience on the functions of our left and right brain hemispheres provides us with ways to shift our understanding. That research reveals how these two aspects of our one brain can profoundly influence our thinking. The left hemisphere has been shown to promote reductive, sequential attention, while the right facilitates more inclusive, holistic attention. To appreciate the both 'ways that things happen,' deterministic and emergent, we must practice using both. But, our modern worldview is heavily biased toward the left hemisphere modality. That reduced emphasis upon our inclusive right-hemisphere mode of attention 'blinds' us to how complex adaptive systems form and function. We must promote the 'network vision' of our right hemisphere mode of attending to engage the implications of systems science.
​
Reductive left-hemisphere attention: Inclusive right-hemisphere attention:
​
​
​
​
​
​​​
​
A fuller comprehension of the implications of this science, with its 'invisible' realm of interdependent dynamics and emergent system agency, will be further facilitated by connecting it with pre-modern philosophical wisdom traditions and the symbolism of our archaic mythological and spiritual imagination. There, we can find representations of this 'new' but actually ancient bi-dynamical worldview, along with representations of uncontrollable system agency that can become 'monstrous.'
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
​By associating the unexpected new scientific knowledge of systems science about 'how the world actually works' with our ancient mythical imagination we can better comprehend both. In that way, we can gain the 'doubled vision' of 'scientific symbolism.'
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
A World made by Emergently Self-Organizing System Networks 'Beyond Control'
Basic Concepts in Outline:
From Unpredictably Emergent Order to Self-Animating Systems -- with and without Brains
A New Science of Complex Adaptive Systems
Symbolism can Elaborate the Significance of Systems Science
System 'Agency' and the Factual 'Spirituality' of Purposefully 'Self-Animating' Systems
Emergent Self-Organization as 'Technically Magical'
Civilized Systems are Destroying the Self-Organizing Network Agency of Natural Ones
Our Modern, Mechanistic Worldview is Catastrophically Delusional
Complex Systems Science frames Our Next Worldview
The Neuroscience of Our Two Brain Hemispheres can Guide Us
In recent decades, scientific research has revealed how ordering emerges in unpredictable ways that are not entirely explainable by deterministic causality alone. From Chaos Theory to Complexity Theory and complex adaptive systems science, a stunning yet little known revolution has occurred in our understanding of 'how the world actually works.' Research in nonlinear dynamics, complex systems, network theory, evolutionary adaptation, and related areas, confronts us with unpredictably emergent self-organization that enables some systems to adapt their forms and functions for the purpose of promoting their continued existence -- and that even in systems without brains.
​
​
​Now, in addition to the familiar notion of deterministic cause and effect, in which events are strictly determined by preceding factors, we must learn to perceive how ordering emerges from more disordered conditions in fundamentally unpredictable ways. We can think of this contrast as between sequences of dependently determined events, as in 'every actions has an equal and opposite reaction,' versus concurrent interactions that influence each other interdependently, as in 'every thing, every which way, all at once.' The self-ordering relationships of the latter necessarily arise from significant inconsistency. To be scientifically realistic, we must know think in these terms of both predictably deterministic causation and unpredictably emergent ordering -- the latter mode being the actual source of most order and function in human as well as natural systems. Thus we are confronted by a 'dynamical paradox' in natural phenomena: that of predictably sequential, deterministic causation and that of unpredictably emergent self-organization.
​
​
​
​The emergent self-organization of complex systems arises synergistically from interdependent relationships between system parts. The actions of each part moves, or 'flows,' through the system in multiple, interacting 'loops.' That recursive blending of influence is termed "feedback." In such systems, many parts are connected to many others, so that their interaction influences effect others then 'feed back' in an altered form to the originator. In the process, influence is modified in ways that then modify other influences across the system. These mutually modifying flows of influence are modeled as system feedback networks. The activity of relationships between parts in these networks involves areas of inconsistency or relative disorder. That underlying instability is crucial to how a system's forms and functions become self-organized, as well as how it can adpatively re-organize and change those forms and functions. The resulting increases and changes in system organization can be measured, but how it emerges from interdependent network interactivity cannot not be explicitly described and explained in strictly deterministic terms. There is an inherent impulse in nature that promotes self-ordering interactions and, thus, self-directing systems.
​​​
​​
​​​
The capacity of complex adaptive systems to emergently create and adaptively change their 'selves', whether biological entities, from body cells to animals, or collective meta-systems like ecologies and societies, requires some ability to perceive, interpret, and selectively respond to, conditions of their environments. That selective responsiveness, which 'serves the future purpose' of their continued existence, constitutes a from of self-direcitng agency -- or, the autonomous ability to act purposefully. Self-ordering, feedback-driven system networks impose and change constraints upon their own activity to produce unpredictably emergent system behaviors that are adaptively 'self-directed.' How a system's feedback network becomes configured drives its unpredictable yet characteristic behaviors. This self-directing self-assertion constitutes a from of agency: the capacity to act selectively for some future purposed -- whether overtly 'conscious' or not. Humans and animals are not the only 'agents' whose purposeful activity 'makes the world.'
​
​
​​
With this knowledge, it becomes evident that both the naturally evolved realm of the biosphere and the technologically evolved one of human societies are composed of numerous, interdependently interacting, purposefully self-asserting systems -- systems which, due to their unpredictably emergent self-organization and self-direction, are technically 'beyond predictable manipulative control.' Indeed, systems science demonstrates how attempts to control such systems can readily debilitate their self-ordering, self-adaptive network capacities. To perceive and act realistically, our science now compels us to think in terms of systems that purposefully regulate and adapt themselves through their operational networks -- and not just those of biological creatures, but also of ecologies, economies, institutions, and corporations. Even complex systems without brains self-organize and adaptively self-direct. They 'have their own purposes' and can effectively 'act like creatures.' It is these system networks that shape the world around us. And though they can be influenced, even debilitated, they are inherently beyond our direct control.
​
​​
In so far as such emergent self-organization in complex systems, with its consequences of purposefully adaptive behaviors and agency, do not entirely result directly from deterministic causation, such phenomena are 'causally impossible,' thus 'technically magical.' That is, these events and their emergent properties of selective system self-direction are somehow 'mysterious' from the perspective of the deterministic "laws of physics." That concept, however, does not necessarily classify emergent order and agency as 'supernatural.' There is no evidence that those deterministic laws are 'violated' by self-organization. Rather, our reductive science, in identifying emergent phenomena, is compelling us to redefine our cultural concept of how reality and nature are actually constituted.
​
​
​
Given that complex adaptive systems networks can manifest selectively purposeful, self-directing behaviors, then such systems are effectively 'self-animating.' That property of system networks constitutes a factually derived basis for understanding them as manifesting the sort of agency referred to by archaic cultures as 'spiritual.' Again, this is not to pose some 'supernatural' category of phenomena, but to expand our science-based conception of what is 'natural.'
​
​
​With the above insights, it becomes obvious that the contemporary phenomena of ecological collapse and climate system chaos are consequences of human system behaviors which are disabling the self-organizing networks of those natural systems. This is possible because human systems have technological leverage that enables them to evade the mutually beneficial constraints typical of interdependent, ecologically evolved natural systems. Human social and economic systems have bcome 'rogue ageens' whose self-asserting agency defies our 'best intentions' to assert dominance over humans and nature.
​
​
Complex Systems Science and New/Next Worldview
​
​​
​
​​
​Complex systems science reveals that our modern cultural bias toward perceiving all phenomena as materialistically mechanical (as consequences of predictably deterministic causation), is utterly inadequate to understanding 'how the world actually works.' It has led us to exploit natural systems to the point of collapsing their self-organizing agency. We are, thereby, profoundly, indeed catastrophically, deluded about reality. Our modern mechanistic worldview is proving biocidal for the bisphere, thus suicidal for our species.
​
​
​​
The existential threats of self-regulating network collapse in ecological and climate systems compel us to rethink what we most need to know and how we can know it effectively. Thinking through and teaching the insights of complex system science are now the most important concern for our survival. That must be the fundamental focus of our cultural and social priorities, if we are to become scientifically realistic. We must learn how to reconfigure our human systems so these act not for control and exploitation, but for the facilitation of natural systems' self-directing networks.
​
​
​
Our human survival, along with that of the biosphere, depend upon our generating a radically different cultural worldview.​ That worldview must orient our ideas, thus our goals, thus our behaviors, toward the mutually beneficial interdependency of human systems with the natural systems upon which we depend. But that requires us to think in profoundly different ways -- ways that alter our experience, thus our motives for our behaviors. Complex systems science frames the perspectives and factual references for such a 'new/next worldview' -- but, that will require a confusing metanoia, or 'complete change of mind.' However, if we employ systems science perspectives, we can re-interpret much of our existing knowledge in new ways that will change our understanding of reality -- both in science and the humanities.
​
​
Such a fundamental shift in our cultural conception of reality will be facilitated by reference to another field of scientific research -- the neuroscience of how our two left and right brain hemispheres effect our 'ways of attending,' thus thinking about and experiencing, phenomena.​ This science shows how we have 'two minds' in our one brain that evolved to facilitate knowing the dynamical paradox of deterministic causation versus unpredictably emergent self-organization. This science reveals how our modern worldview is reflexively biased toward our left hemisphere's reductive, mechanistic mode of understanding. A systems science framing can restore the role of our right hemisphere's inclusive, holistic mode of knowing.
​
​
​​
To effectively change the behaviors of human systems, we require an emotionally compelling cultural impetus. That will involve the cultural incorporation of some form of 'spiritual reality' based upon the scientific evidence for self-directing system agency. This shift would constitute a scientific 'reinvention of the sacred,' one in which unpredictably emergent system agency becomes 'all important' because it 'makes the world,' and does so in ways that are technically mysterious from the perspective of predictably deterministic causation. Such a view of an 'self-animating world' is not a matter of 'belief.' It is a logical consequence of the factual science.
​
​
​That 'new/next wordview,' based upon systems science, proves to have many similarities to pre-modern human imaginations of an 'animated world.' Consequently, the science can be elaborated by the same metaphorically symbolic imagination that has assisted archaic human cultures to adapt to reality sustainably for tens of thousands of years. By correlating the concepts of systems science with the dynamical symbolism of our trans-cultural, mytho-logically spiritual imagination, and its modern manifestations in artistic expression, we can enhance our comprehension of the science with emotionally compelling experience.
​​