Complexity and the Idea of Human Development

Abstract

Reflecting on 'human development' theorists face conceptual confusion, borne out experientially by contemporary ecological, social, and economic crises. Since concepts create realities (i.e. justify and motivate practices), and philosophers create concepts, it is important to consider how philosophers might respond to conceptual difficulties caused by the modern era's still influential 'binary' paradigm, exemplified by the law of the excluded middle, which entails a discursive split between modernism's ultimately predictable cosmos and postmodernism's insistence on fundamental chaos. Supposedly obliged to choose between opposites, theorists are caught between the necessity and iniquity of both. This impasse sets up conditions for what Lyotard calls 'differends,' and constrains our power to create responsible concepts.To show that Morin's 'generalised complexity' takes us beyond the modernist/postmodernist impasse, I take up his injunction to promote 'an epistemological reversal,' starting from the notion of 'open system' and moving through 'emergence' and 'organization' to 'logical complexity.' Our epistemological task accordingly is to establish strategies for interpreting multiple dimensions of phenomenal reality, given the irreducibly complex relation of co-implication between mutually negating opposites. I agree with Cilliers that deconstruction is exemplary in this respect, but aim to broaden the adventure by suggesting ideas for a 'pragmatics of complexity' involving vocabulary, concepts, strategies, metaphors, and heuristics derived also from other philosophers and psychoanalytic theorists.

On Paul Cilliers’ Approach to Complexity:Post-structuralism versus Model Exclusivity

“…As mentioned in the introduction, for post-structural complexity theorists, we cannot get a semantic or epistemic fix on complex systems. Thus, instead of trying to decomplexify complexity, we should "abandon our reductionist tendencies" and "learn to dance with" complexity [5,7,8]. Post-structuralism suggests a "'playful' approach", writes Cilliers, [w]hen dealing with complex phenomena, no single method will yield the whole truth.…”

“…Like complex systems, neural networks have no central controller; "[p]rocessing is distributed over the network and the roles of the various components (or groups of components) change dynamically" [2; p.19]. Neural networks can also learn to perform complex tasks either when shown examples of these tasks successfully performed, or by using criteria internal to the network that signal success 7 .…”

“…Cilliers may respond that connectionism is the best way to model complex systems given the scientific paradigm we currently occupy even if there is no absolute fact of the matter. There are no meta-models or meta-perspectives, but some norms or methods are more 'long-lived' than others due to provisional, contingent or heuristic factors [1,7]. However, by reductio, it should then follow that our best scientific modelse.g.…”

“…It should be of particular interest to those contemporary writerse.g. Human [6], Hurst [7], Woermann [8] and Preiser [9] who draw inspiration from Cilliers in continuing to develop the post-structural approach to complexity. It should also be of potential interest to those non-post-structural complexity theorists who currently advocate for some specific model of complex systems but may be considering adopting the post-structural interpretation.…”

The Complexities of Development: The South African National Industrial Participation Programme in Perspective

“…However, analyzing the impact of such programmes and deciphering their myths (Balakrishnan and Matthews 2009) are challenges to the relevant state agencies, industry practitioners and scholars alike. Andrea Hurst points out that development analysis and prescription should be grounded in a greater conceptual appreciation of the complexities and contradictions of social and economic reality (Hurst 2010).…”