This post looks at how to define ‘complexity’ and particular its close relationship to the way we think. The 2008 translation of some of Edgar Morin’s essays in ‘On Complexity’ shall serve as the focal point for my discussion.

What is complexity and what is complex thinking? The best way is to understand it is to compare it to its cousin; systems thinking. Anderson and Johnson (1997) identify five features of systems thinking.

1. Think of the big picture.
2. Balance short-term and long-term perspectives.
3. Recognise the dynamic, complex and and interdependent nature of systems.
4. Take into account measurable and non-measurable factors.
5. Remember we are part of the systems.

Morin’s oeuvre says ‘complexity is a fabric (complexus: that is woven together) of heterogenous constituents that are inseparably associated: complexity poses the paradox of the one and the many. Next complexity is in fact the the fabric of events, actions, interactions, retroactions, determinations and chance that constitute our phenomenal world. But complexity presents itself with the disturbing traits of a mess, of the inextricable, of disorder, of ambiguity, of uncertainty’ There is a lot to decipher and discuss here. Firstly, it seems, like systems thinking, to highlight dynamism. ‘Events, actions, interactions, retroactions, determinations and chance’ all suggest a movement away from a static worldview. Yet, there are a number of differences in Morin’s complex thinking. Firstly, look at the mention of ‘uncertainty’. Some systems thinkers and indeed complexity theorists search for laws. For example, there is the Sante Fe Institute’s approach to history and its search for the laws that determine the history of the universe (Krakauer, Gaddis, Pomeranz, 2017) or consider Barabasi’s (2002) look at laws in complex networks. One does not sense this approach in Morin. He states ‘complexity coincides with a part of uncertainty that arises from the limits of our ability to comprehend, or with a part of uncertainty inscribed in phenomena. But complexity cannot be reduced to uncertainty; it is uncertainty at the at the heart of richly organised systems.’ There are two things to notice, the focus on uncertain dynamics and the paradoxical nature of what Morin is saying; there is organisation and uncertainty in systems.

Paradoxes are at the heart of ‘complex thinking’. The mention of ambiguity in the first quote supports this, but this is confirmed by Morin’s tackling of organisation and disorder. He states ‘that disorder and order, although enemies, cooperate in a certain way to organise the universe.’ One example he cites in none other than the formation of the Universe, the Big Bang was a ‘giant deflagration’ and ‘the universe began as disintegration and in disintegrating, it organised itself.’ Organisation/disorganisation are therefore not two opposing forces. Kelso (2009) has provided a framework for understanding the interactions between organisation and disorganisation through his coordination dynamics. In short, coordination dynamics looks at how coordination works in living things, and because of this how their coordinated patterns adapt, persist and change. One concept within coordination dynamics is metastability, this helps us understand how a system may neither be organised or disorganised. Kelso (2009) suggests metastability is a state where stable coordination states no longer exist, but attraction remains to where the fixed points used to be. This leads to a flow of phase-scattering and phase-trapping. In other words, there is a mixture of repulsion and gathering within the system.

Morin is, of course, not the first thinker to emphasise ambiguity. Basarab Nicolescu (2016), for example, speaks of ‘The Hidden Third’ and also ‘the infintie ambiguity of the binary thought.’ Nicolescu, like Morin, is a transdisciplinarian and so it is notable to see this convergence on opinion. Derrida (1977) has the idea of Différance, this also implies ambiguity, except in language, by suggesting a word never fully summons its meaning due to its interplay with other words. My point here being that Morin is not alone in theorising states of contradiction, of paradox and ultimately of ambiguity. This nevertheless does not lessen the impact of his work, especially given his application of it to systems.

What does ‘complex thinking’ mean practically? Morin (2014), in an article, announces his surprise at how researchers investigate complex systems. Apparently, ‘they study complex systems with uncertainty, randomness, chaos theory, but they don’t change their mind, they don’t change the structure of their worldview, but in fact they need to undergo a paradigmatic change.’ So how would this changed worldview affect us? Morin, in On Complexity, describes action as a wager and in a wager there is always ‘an awareness of risk and of uncertainty.’ He suggests we adopt a strategy, but this ‘does not mean a predetermined program we can apply.’ Rather, it envisages ‘a certain number of scenarios of action, scenarios that can be modified according to information arriving in the action, and according to chance occurrences that will occur and disrupt the action.’ The best comparison to complex strategy and thought can perhaps be found in software development and project management. ‘Agile’, as a development or management strategy, suggests managers should ‘have flexibility in a project system in order to be able to adjust constantly to emerging challenges and opportunities.’ and that such thinking can aid the tackling of ‘complex and uncertain project situations (Fernandez and Fernandez, 2008). This sounds an awful lot like Morin’s complex thought. In fact, one comparison can be found in ‘Agile’ and Morin’s examination of nonlinearity. Morin writes ‘as soon as an individual takes an action, whatever that action may be, it begins to escape from his intentions. The action enters the universe of interactions.’ One technique in Agile is the use of feedback to affect project or product development, with the service also being delivered incrementally (Dybå, Dingsøyr and Moe, 2014). This means development/management is affected by feedback that goes back and affects the system and the way it does this is inherently unpredictable. ‘Agile’ and ‘Complex Thought’ therefore have some similarities in the approach they take.

Talking about project management/development brings me to another pertinent point. Teams themselves are dependent on coordination dynamics and the way they coordinate affects how effective they perform. Gorman, Polemnia and Cooke (2010) suggests, while discussing surgical teams, that ‘if the surgical team always coordinates in a static, unchanging fashion, regardless of how appropriate it is for a particular situation, then the result is potentially fatal.’ Again, this seems indicate a need for Morin’s ‘complex thinking’, one that adjusts to a situation, like a surgical team should to save lives. This all suggests coordination dynamics, ‘complex thinking’ and teamwork should all work together to tackle the complex problems found in the modern world.

In this post, I have discussed Edgar Morin’s ‘On Complexity’. The point to emphasise in his work is that it is not enough to recognise complex problems, but we must find a way to deal with them. Morin believes this can be done through by being adaptable and changing the way you think; whether this is through identifying how organisation/disorganisation are not always opposites or through adapting a strategy consisting of multiple scenarios. Morin therefore calls for a major shift in how we not only think, but also act.

Bibliography:

Anderson, Virginia and Lauren Johnson. Systems thinking basics. Cambridge, MA: Pegasus Communications, 1997.

Barabasi. Albert L. Linked: How Everything is Connected to Everything Else and What It Means for Business, Science and Everyday Life. New York: Perseus Publishing, 2002

Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press 1977.

Dybå, Tore, Torgeir Dingsøyr, and Nils Brede Moe. “Agile project management.” In Software project management in a changing world, pp. 277-300. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014

Fernandez, Daniel J and John D. Fernandez. “Agile project management—agilism versus traditional approaches.” Journal of Computer Information Systems 49, no. 2 (2008): 10-17.

Gorman, Jamie C, Polemnia G. Amazeen, and Nancy J. Cooke. “Team coordination dynamics.” Nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and life sciences 14, no. 3 (2010): 265

Kelso, James AS. “Coordination Dynamics.” (2009): Accessed at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Scott-Kelso/publication/301949127_Coordination_Dynamics/links/572f8af108ae744151904ab8/Coordination-Dynamics.pdf on 22/08/2022.

Krakauer, David, Gaddis, John and Kenneth Pomeranz. History, Big History and Metahistory. Santa Fe: SFI Press, 2017.

Morin, Edgar. “Complex thinking for a complex world–about reductionism, disjunction and systemism.” Systema: connecting matter, life, culture and technology 2, no. 1 (2014): 14-22.

Morin, Edgar. On Complexity. New York: Hampton Press, 2008.

Nicolescu, Basarab. The Hidden Third translated by William Garvin. New York: Quantum Prose, 2016.