Three Generations of Complexity Theories: Nuances and Ambiguities
Michel Alhadeff-Jones
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
The contemporary use of the term ‘complexity’ frequently indicates that it is considered a unified concept. This may lead to a neglect of the range of different theories that deal with the implications related to the notion of complexity. This paper, integrating both the English and the Latin traditions of research associated with this notion, suggests a more nuanced use of the term, thereby avoiding simplification of the concept to some of its dominant expressions only. The paper further explores the etymology of ‘complexity’ and offers a chronological presentation of three generations of theories that have shaped its uses; the epistemic and socio-cultural roots of these theories are also introduced. From an epistemological point of view, this reflection sheds light on the competing interpretations underlying the definition of what is considered as complex. Also, from an anthropological perspective it considers both the emancipatory as well as the alienating dimensions of complexity. Based on the highlighted ambiguities, the paper suggests in conclusion that contributions grounded in contemporary theories related to complexity, as well as critical appraisals of their epistemological and ethical legitimacy, need to follow the recursive feedback loops and dynamics that they constitute. In doing so, researchers and practitioners in education should consider their own practice as a learning process that does not require the reduction of the antagonisms and the complementarities that shape its own complexity.
Key takeaways
- The terms 'complex' and 'complexity' are usually .used as the opposite of simplicity.
- From the 1940s until today, three generations of theories have emerged, suggesting a progressive shift from the study of 'organised complexity' to issues related to 'organising complexity' (Le Moigne, 1996), and thus reintroducing the fundamental uncertainties of the researcher as envisaged by Bachelard.
- The perspectives opened by this research helped to reinforce an understanding grounded in a quantitative evaluation of complexity that considered, for example, the length of the account that must be given to provide an adequate description of a system (descriptive complexity), the length of the set of instructions that must be given to provide a recipe for producing it (generative complexity), or the amount of time and effort involved in resolving a problem (computational complexity) (Rescher, 1998).
- During the 1980s, complexity research followed two different paths.
- Between 1945 and 1975, the status and epistemological legitimacy of sciences constituted within the paradigm of organised complexity was rarely investigated and the term 'complexity' seldom used (Le Moigne, 1996).
Related papers
Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching and Research
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 2009
Complexity as a theory of education
Transnational Curriculum Inquiry, 2009
Educational research, as a domain of academic inquiry, is a relatively young field. Most of its major journals have been established since the 1960s, and only a few of them were in place a century ago. University-based colleges and faculties of education are similarly recent. Very few have been around for more than a half-century. For the most part, when they were first established, colleges and faculties of education drew their personnel from specialists in psychology, sociology, history, philosophy, management, and the subject matter areas. And even though the situation has changed so that a huge majority of current faculty members have been credentialed by schools of education, the derivative nature of the field continues to be manifest in the names of its subfields and departments: educational psychology, educational philosophy, educational history, mathematics education, and so on. Few branches, with the obvious exception of curriculum studies, can justly be seen as proper to e...
A review of "Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching, and Research" by Brent Davis and Dennis Sumara, 2006
Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity in Education, 2010
Brent Davis and Dennis Sumara's Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching, and Research is an insightful, clearly-written, and provocative contribution to the body of educational complexivist literature-an account we think particularly relevant for researchers and practitioners engaged in a transformative educational ethic. Evoking the phrase "more than human" (Abrams, 1996) as a sensibility where human concerns and action are nested within broader worlds of meaning, and the notion of knowing as adhering to a logic of adequacy, not optimality (a position Maturana and Varela (1998) also hold), Davis and Sumara present complexity thinking as a "pragmatics of transformation" (p. 74) offering "explicit advice on how to work with, occasion, and affect complexity unities" (p. 130). Davis and Sumara take care not to position complexity thinking as a "hybrid" seeking "common ground" (p. 4) or a "metadiscourse" (p. 7), but as a deeply complicit and participatory way of acting which might offer education itself as an "interdiscourse" (p. 159), and simultaneously as a pragmatics with which to engage in the practical educational project. Davis and Sumara see complexity thinking as irreducible participation across multiple, interrelated systems of organization. They introduce the term level-jumping to describe knowing or learning as the capacity to participate in such a multiplicity of separate, yet inseparable, systems (e.g., biological, individual, social, evolutionary). We could quibble with the authors' use of the term level, one of those linear terms so embedded in everyday language, and which may easily suggest "higher" and "lower", or leaving one level behind while moving to another. Yet the authors' point is precisely that these levels or organizational systems are embedded in the action of learningsimultaneously interconnected and inseparable. What such terms render visible is the © Copyright 2010. The authors, RANDA KHATTAR and CAROL ANNE WIEN, assign to the University of Alberta and other educational and non-profit institutions a non-exclusive license to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The author also grants a non-exclusive license to the University of Alberta to publish this document in full on the World Wide Web, and for the document to be published on mirrors on the World Wide Web. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author.
Revisiting Educational Research Through Morin’s Paradigm of Complexity
I was recently invited by Deborah Osberg and Wiliam E. Doll Jr., the new editors of the journal Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education to reflect on Ton Jörg’s paper “Thinking in Complexity about Learning and Education: A Programmatic View“. The reflection I developed in my paper Revisiting Educational Research Through Morin’s Paradigm of Complexity follows the epistemological and anthropological critique characterizing the “paradigm of complexity” proposed by Edgar Morin (1977/1992, 1980, 1986, 1991, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2008). It invites one to question the way one conceives changes and transformations brought by the use of the notion of complexity itself. In this perspective, instead of focusing on the content of Jörg’s theoretical propositions, my intent is to question and comment on what I interpreted as being some of the implicit assumptions which frame his reflection. The aim of this paper is therefore to question the way one conceives the use of a specific theoretical approach (i.e., theories associated with the concept of complexity) in order to promote changes in educational practices and theories. The position I am adopting in this paper translates indeed the conviction that any reform of thought has to be conceived in conjunction with a reflection about the idea of reform itself (Morin, 1999). It is therefore assumed that the use of the notion of complexity, to be critical and to bring significant changes, supposes not only to use a specific theoretical vocabulary, but also and above all to change the way scientific activity itself is conceived in order to bring about such a transformation. The reflection proposed is articulated around five axes: Morin and the Paradigm of Complexity; Program versus Strategy of Research; Prescription versus Interpretation; Monoreferentiality versus Multireferentiality; Distance and Generalization versus Contingency and Implication. Additional contributions from Deborah Osberg, Klaus Mainzer, Gert Biesta, Brent Davis, M. Jayne Fleener David Kirshner and David Kellogg, Bernard Ricca, and William E. Doll, Jr, are available at http://www.complexityandeducation.ualberta.ca/COMPLICITY6/Complicity6_TOC.htm
COMPLEXITY. Roots and meaning of a concept that we cannot do without. A manual against clichés.
2023
The word "complexity" for many remains a terra incognita, so much so that some mistake it for "complication" while for others it is synonymous with "confusion", a way of not wanting to see reality in its clear contours. Unfortunately, for decades now it has not been possible to go beyond the cultural contrast between the use of absolute laws-values and unpredictability, which automatically leads to cultural relativism. In this book I will try to show how there is a path other than determinism and unpredictability and this path is what complexity science has been developing for at least 30 years. This path is the path of complexity. The greater complexity of individuals and societies today does not mean that simple aspects have disappeared: there are times when I must choose, either this or that and war is one of them. Complexity does not deny data, information, indeed there is no complexity without content and information. Complexity is made up of networks, hubs, links, vision, strategy, priorities and requires a new mental approach and is what people and institutions (primarily schools) are missing. This book aims to introduce elements of understanding of a reality with which we must increasingly come to terms; we are immersed in a complex world but we face it with inadequate tools because they were fine once or with fantasies without cultural foundations. Complexity is not a simple word, but a cultural universe whose characteristics we must know and recognize.
Reader's response: Complicity: An international journal of complexity and education
2007
While complexity science has been a part of the fields of cybernetics, artificial intelligence, organizational and systems theory, and nonlinear dynamics for quite some time, it has only recently been taken up by researchers in the field of education. The on-line journal Complicity: An international journal of complexity and education does an admirable job of introducing the reader to wide-ranging discussions within education that engage the reader with a theoretical basis to which complexity has been applied. The research and discussions reported are very recent, and have the feel of cutting-edge reporting.
Higher education from a complexity theory perspective
2018
Complexity theory, as part of mathematics and physics, deals with complex systems (also called dynamical systems) in which many variables and many interactions between them, expressed as non-linear dependences, are involved. Such systems describe ever evolving processes happening in nature, where only change is a constant and unpredictability is omnipresent. The complexity theory also examines the dependencies of the processes. In what extent the outcome from one process will affect the other? As educational issues (educational system itself, class community, teaching methods, online learning, student community, student engagement, staff development, curriculum development, educational policy, local or global changes of the environment) in a great extent are behaving as complex systems, the complexity theory has inherently became well established discipline in educational research. In this paper we highlight the importance of a complexity theory as a viewpoint in educational researc...
Thinking (in) complexity: (In) definitions and (mis)conceptions
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2019
The rise of complexity sciences has led to the development of new language about systems. Concepts such as 'complex systems thinking' or 'complexity thinking' have appeared in the literature, appealing to ways of thinking (in) complexity. The notion of 'complex thinking,' may be considered as referring to a mode of thinking more congruent with the complexity of the world. The widespread and sometimes undifferentiated usage of these concepts results in a lack of clarity and terminological confusion, which jeopardizes their heuristic and pragmatic value. We identify literature using terms related to thinking (in) complexity and use a combination of computational and qualitative methods to extract definitions and analyse their usage. We map the relationships of the concepts and their usage across different intellectual communities. Our goal is to clarify these concepts and to strengthen their pragmatic value for the promotion and management of positive changes in complex systems.
Bridging Complexity and Post-Structuralism: Insights and Implications
This work addresses the topic of philosophical complexity, which shares certain assumptions with scientific complexity, cybernetics, and General Systems Theory, but which is also developing as a subject field in its own right. Specifically, the post-structural reading of philosophical complexity that was pioneered by Paul Cilliers is further developed in this study. To this end, the ideas of a number of contemporary French post-structural theorists and their predecessors - including Derrida, Nancy, Bataille, Levinas, Foucault, Saussure, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Hegel - are introduced. The implications that their various insights hold for our understanding of complex human systems are teased out at the hand of the themes of economy, (social) ontology, subjectivity, epistemology, and ethics. The analyses are also illuminated at the hand of the problematic of the foreigner and the related challenges of showing hospitality to foreigners. The study presents a sophisticated account of both philosophical complexity and philosophies of difference. By relating these subject fields, the study also extends our understanding of philosophical complexity, and offers an original characterisation of the aforementioned philosophers as complex thinkers.
Complexity and Sociology
Sociology Study, 2017
This study focuses on the correlation between sociology and complexity and it operates a reflection on the deep epistemological and ontological meaning of complexity, revealing how complexity goes beyond the analysis of the global society and is linked to sociology itself and to the issue of its scientific trait. The study shows how complexity, rediscovered following the globalization processes, reconnects sociology with its own origins and concerns the issue of the relation of sociological science with its own object, that is to say, society and social order. In a more radical manner, the challenge of complexity is intertwined with the road of revisiting modern science and epistemological identifying among "order", "intelligibility", and "science". In such a vision, complexity, not only reconnects sociology to its object, but highlights how those traits considered as non-scientific residue of human and social sciences belong to the fundamental issue of scientific knowledge. The challenge of complexity is outlined, as questioning the idea according to which the "modern" science depletes the "scientific vision of the world".
Related papers
Complexity theory and education
… Research Association, Hong Kong Institute of …, 2006
Abstract: This paper introduces central tenets of complexity theory and current issues that they raise, including: the consequences of unpredictability for knowing, responsibility, morality and planning; the significance of networking and connectedness; non-linear learning ...
Complexity Knowledge and Pedagogical Practices
Educação e Pesquisa, 2022
This study deals with a research conducted with Brazilian and Portuguese teachers through an online course that aimed to design a continuing education approach that integrated basic, undergraduate and graduate education teachers, based on the "Seven Complex Lessons in Education for the Future." To this end, it focused on the "lesson" that deals with error and illusion, from Edgar Morin's perspective. The problem that guided the investigation sought to analyze participants' perceptions about the influence of pedagogical practice, methodology and the proposed learning on a transformation in teaching. The research used a qualitative, action-research approach, and the data was submitted to content analysis using the IBMS Statistics program. Results indicated the occurrence of reflections about the need to consider a thought-reform approach to education, one that overcomes the fragmentation of knowledge. About student engagement in activities proposed by the teacher in class, participants were found to value interdisciplinarity, collaboration, collective work, and the mediation role, and to recognize the influence of psychological aspects on students' interest in and motivation for learning. Finally, the need to overcome determinist thoughts was considered, thus allowing participants to understand that knowledge is subject to errors and illusions also in education, and that expanding human thought can help in the search for solutions to educational problems.
Complexity thinking in ALL practice
2014
Complexity Theory is a movement that has its beginnings in the physical sciences and mathematics. However, the understandings of this movement have led to recent developments in theories of learning and cognition. Learning is no longer seen as an act of capturing information or a process of meaning construction; learning is understood as a process of adaptation and evolution that emerges through the learner’s interactions with a dynamic and responsive environment (Davis, Sumara, & Luce-Kapler, 2000; Doll, 1993). It is important to assert here that this theory is not one that lends itself to prescriptive practices, but what it offers is insights into the nature of learning, and as such guides preparation in facilitating learning (Davis & Sumara, 2005). This paper will explore complexity theory and how it can be used to inform ALL practice.
Complexity and the Universe of Education
In this paper, I take the position that in order for education policy makers and teachers to reform teaching and learning, they must be good consumers of education research. Good consumers of education research understand that education is a complex endeavor and as such resist accepting findings that simplify or complicate teaching and learning. A second position maintained in this paper is that influences on teaching and learning are holons, a term coined by Koestler (1996). There are several categories of holons; education is considered a social holon. All holons are influenced and governed by their own sets of rules. Within the social holon of education exists other social holons such as policy and students.
Thoughts on a Pedagogy OF Complexity
Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education
There is now a developed and extensive literature on the implications of the ‘complexity frame of reference’ (Castellani & Hafferty, 2009) for education in general and pedagogy in particular. This includes a wide range of interesting contributions which consider how complexity can inform, inter alia, research on educational systems (Cochran-Smith et al., 2014; Radford, 2008) and theories of learning (Mercer, 2011; Fromberg, 2010), as well as work dealing with specific pedagogical domains including physical education (Atencio et al., 2014, Tan et al. 2010), clinical education and in particular the learning of clinical teams (Noel et al., 2013; Bleakley, 2010; Gonnering, 2010), and learning in relation to systems engineering (Thompson et al., 2011, Foster et al., 2001). This material has contributed considerably to my thinking about the subject matter of this essay which is not the implications of complexity for pedagogy but rather how we might develop a pedagogy OF complexity and, mo...
Towards complexity thinking in education with Juri Lotman
Lexia. Rivista di semiotica, 39-40 Re-Thinking. Juri Lotman in the Twenty-First Century, 2022
This paper discusses the potential of Juri Lotman’s semiotic theory for a complexity-based understanding of learning and education. Complexity thinking as a separate approach to research and practice in education has arisen as a response to the growing need to understand how learning systems, such as individual students, schools, and whole societies, can become more adaptable in the light of the accelerating change of our environment. While the issues of learning, teaching or education are not explicitly discussed in Lotman’s semiotic works, his theoretical investigations of creativity, unpredictability and cultural dynamics can serve as suitable ground for envisioning education in ways that transgress the currently dominant paradigm of learning as a controlled linear process with predictable outcomes. We will focus on the dynamics between two different orientations of semiotic activity in Lotman’s semiosphere: on the one hand, we will view learning as non-linear meaning-making oriented towards generating new information; on the other hand, we will focus on how the process of learning is guided by various educational models that serve as stabilizing mechanisms that in turn are continuously transformed by the learners’ unpredictable choices. The tension between these two tendencies is what allows learning systems to develop while maintaining their identity. In the last part of the article, Lotman’s unique take on artistic modelling in which he sees the potential for making sense of extremely complex systems is considered as a means for addressing educational change and channelling learning towards greater adaptability.
The Politics in Complexity
2008
The increased visibility of complexity in the social sciences has raised questions about the ability of complexity theories to address political concerns. Many of these concerns are legitimate, particularly where complexity is portrayed as a superior naturalistic metaphysics of "life" which comes complete with a set of metaphors that can be used to legitimate certain social arrangements. In response to an article by Kevin Kelly in which complexity is portrayed in this way, Steve Best and Douglas Kellner (1999) rightly point out some of the shortcomings associated with this use of complexity and remark that this "uncritical approach to political realities and social power" is the "Achilles heel of complexity theory" (p. 155). However, while I have no problem with Best and Kellner's assessment of this genre of complexity research in the social sciences, it is important to be clear that the genre is one that many who use complexity in the social sciences are themselves critical. Nevertheless, the objection raised by Best and Kellner a decade ago is relevant in that in education there is still very little work that draws on complexity to address education's political concerns and in this regard complexity's potential to be critical in an educational context is largely overlooked. In this issue of JCACS we bring together seven papers which were initially developed for a symposium entitled Complex Criticality in Educational Research (presented in the Complexity SIG of AERA in April 2007). The symposium aimed to address the perceived lack of a "political
Complexity and Truth in Educational
This paper considers the impact of complexity theory on the way in which we see propositions corresponding to the reality that they describe, and our concept of truth in that context. A contingently associated idea is the atomistic expectation that we can reduce language to primitive units of meaning, and tie those in with agreed units of experience. If we see both language and the reality that it describes and explains as complex, this position becomes difficult to maintain. Complexity theory, with its emphasis on non-linear and dynamic interactions between multiple variables, within indeterminate and transient systems, supports the case for a connectionist and holistic analysis. Theories are more likely to be under-determined by evidence and open to interpretation, with the potential for ‘certainties’ weakened. If educational situations are complex, then the drive towards specific and focused research findings that will support policy and practice, and the associated notion of control, is illusory. Rather than providing evidence for prescription, research is thus understood as descriptive and explanatory, within a range of interpretative possibilities. Action takes place within a necessarily incomplete and constantly changing situation, more appropriately understood in terms of survival than control.
Complexity Theory and Social Theory: A Critique of Anthony Giddens, and Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe
MA Thesis, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Simon Fraser University, Aug. 1998
The emergence of complexity theory presents itself as a new, potential framework that might be expected to make a contribution to contemporary, critical social theory. The following is a theoretical exploration of complexity theory and its possible interpretations, uses, and limits in critical social theory. By analyzing the work of Anthony Giddens, and Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, it is argued that the concept, language, and metaphor of complexity theory may be utilized in social theory as a formalized strategy to describe, understand, and model the dynamics of both social and cultural systems. As a result, complexity theory may provide a model that is either/both/neither modern or/and/nor postmodern. This characterization of complexity theory is exactly what makes its study and possible application important to contemporary, critical social theory.
Complexity science and education: Reconceptualizing the teacher's role in learning
Interchange, 2007
This writing is structured around the question, "What is teaching?" Drawing on complexity science, we first seek to demonstrate the tremendously conflicted character of contemporary discussions of teaching. Then we offer two examples of teaching that we use to illustrate the assertion that what teaching is can never be reduced to or understood in terms of what the teacher does or intends. Rather, teaching must be understood in terms of its complex contributions to new, as-yet-unimaginable collective possibilities.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.