Dear Igor and colleagues,
I have the impression that there is an agreement about the existence of
biological and sociocultural constraints that impact on our ability to
understand and manage socioeconomic complexity. These constraints are
organized hierarchically, as Stan puts it, {biological {sociocultural }}.
I would agree that this is the way to organize our explanations. But
dynamically the real world is open at all levels: very simple amplification
or feed forward processes would produce phenomena capable of escalating
levels and percolate around (e.g., minuscule oxidation-combustion phenomena
initiating fires that scorch ecosystems, regions). Socially there is even
more "openness": a very tenuous rumor may destroy an entire company, or
put a sector on its knees... Arguing logically about those hierarchical
schemes may be interesting only for semi-closed, "capsule" like entities,
but not really for say (individuals (cities (countries)))... My contention
is that we should produce a new way of thinking going beyond that classical
systemic, non-informational view.
To some extent, it may be a sign of diminishing returns to complexity in
problem solving that Joe addressed in his book "The collapse of complex
societies"... If we cannot manage the energy sector to serve certain
social and economic goals, how can we hope to be able to manage more
complex situations like the climate change, poverty reduction and
population growth in the South?
Did we reach the limits (cognitive and cultural) to manage our complex world?
After the industrial revolution, on average every passing generation (say
each 30 years) has doubled both the material and the immaterial basis of
societies: social wealth, income, accumulated knowledge, scientific
fields, technological development, social complexity... provided the
environment could withstand, maybe the process of generational doubling
would continue around almost indefinitely, or maybe not! Euristic visions
like those mentioned by Igor on energy policies by the UE or the US have
been the usual and only tool during all previous epochs: the case is
whether after some critical threshold human societies cannot keep their
complexity any longer... Joe might agree on the "necessary" collapse of
complex societies.
best
Pedro
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
