Friday, June 12, 2009

Phelan: What is Complexity Science, Really?

Phelan, SE. 2001. What is complexity science, really? Emergence 3, no. 1: 120-136.

"It is my contention that much of the work in complexity theory has indeed been pseudo-science, that is, many writers in this field have used the symbols and methods of complexity science...to give the illusion of science even though they lack supporting evidence and plausibility" (120).

"The purpose of this article is twofold: to provide a working definition of complexity science; and to use this definition to differentiate complexity science from complexity pseudo-science" (120).

The author then explores arguments in philosophy of science, moving from empiricism, to positivism, to historicism, to constructivism. The author argues that complexity theory offers a new way of studying regularities that is methodologically different from previous science. Science has always been about reducing complexity.

"Complexity science posits simple causes for complex effects. At the core of complexity science is the assumption that complexity in the world arises from simple rules. However, these rules...are unlike rules...of traditional science. Generative rules typically determine how a set of artificial agents will behave in their virtual environment over time, including their interaction with other agents. Unlike traditional science, generative rules do not predict an outcome for every state of the world. Instead, generative rules use feedback and learning algorithms to enable the agent to adapt to its environment over time" (130-1).

Three things that complexity science is not: general systems theory, a postmodern science and a set of "metaphores or analogies based on resemblance thinking" (132).

"Complexity science, defined earlier as the search for generative rules, does not embrace the radical holism of systems theory. Complexity scientists are seeking simple rules that underpin complexity...In contrast, systems theory almost seems to surrender to complexity because it is not particularly interested in the identification of regularities. Regularities do not exist in open systems, almost by definition.