Monday, May 12, 2014

Complexity - M. Mitchell Waldrop

The spontaneity of matter. The uncertainty of the universe. The emergence of novelty. The balance between consistency and change. These physicists and computer scientists, economists and programmers seem to resemble new age gurus and mountaintop philosophers. Yet such claims hardly come from Zarathustra's cave, Lao Tzu's way, or the river of Heraclitus: these men (and they are almost entirely men) insist that such illuminations are grounded upon only the most rigorous science. They should know, some of the great minds of the past fifty years are making these claims.

Waldrop's is a history which recounts the very emergence of the science of complexity. Primarily tracing the birth and development of the Sante Fe Institute in New Mexico, Waldrop investigates not only the ideas, but also the personalities that forged what may be the cutting edge in refashioning how western society conceives of the world and our place within it. Complexity theory has many subtly different formal and informal definitions, but most theorists would likely agree that anyone who studies complex systems is interested in how the multiplicity of relationships between numerous entities occurring within a system yields novel and unforeseen consequences which transcend a simple agglomeration of the system's parts. Complex systems are unpredictable and Waldrop himself relates the science of complexity as essentially the science of understanding emergence.

Waldrop has succeeded in providing a lucid, readable, and engaging account of what might otherwise seem a rather dry topic. He communicates the type of excitement which can characterize any burgeoning field's development. However, though this approach may broaden the audience, it does not convey the character of debate and discussion, nor the discourse and uncertainty which is still present in the science of complexity. One might be forgiven for assuming the field is well-set to convey unified conclusions. There is little attempt to ground the science in concerns beyond those of the history's participants, nor a reflexive or critical look at the development of the theory itself. That complexity theory may surprise the so-called 'experts' more than the layperson or thinkers coming from other arenas of knowledge remains an unconquered issue for understanding the importance of complexity research. As a primer the work is strong, yet we may be left feeling as though Waldrop orbits the issue without directly confronting some of its more wicked problems or potential implications. Why complexity theory is worthy of a recounting in the first place remains unclear.