Abstract
Health is a complex notion and it, or its absence, manifests itself under complex conditions. The acknowledgement that a certain situation is complex has a number of implications for the way in which we deal with that situation. First and foremost among these is the fact that traditional “reductive” approaches lead to problematic results. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that some vague “holistic” approach is not an alternative. In order to deal with complex situations as best we can, we need to understand something of the dynamics of complex systems and then reflect on the implications of this understanding.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This chapter is a slightly altered version of a chapter called “Complexity Theory as General Framework for Sus-tainability Science” which appeared in Burns and Weaver [1]. Permission to reuse the material is acknowledged.
- 2.
The notions “modern” and “postmodern” have to be used with caution. Modernism is often treated in a much too simplistic way, as if there was one coherent “movement” which simply relied on an oversimplified understanding of rationality. Modernism was, or is, a divided strategy containing different strategies not easily reducible to one another. Sophisticated attempts to clarify the role and limits of rationality, as in the work of Habermas, for example, cannot be treated as if they are simply an extension of the Cartesian/Newtonian paradigm. The notion “postmodern” is also misused frequently. For some it simply means the justification of relativism, while for others it is merely a tag of approval without much content. These misunderstandings should not get in the way of recognizing the real problem, namely the inadequacy of reductive thinking when dealing with complex things.
The notion “scientific” is similarly problematic. What is criticised in this chapter is probably described better by the notion “scientistic”; i.e. an uncritical reliance on first-order logic and verifiable observation. The critical use of complexity theory in this chapter in no way intends to dismiss science; it seeks to expand the notion, or at least, to mark its limits.
- 3.
Byrne [5] argues in the same way as Morin. He distinguishes between “simple” complexity and “complex” complexity, and then insists that simple (restricted) complexity plays in the court of current orthodoxy: “This is why simplistic complexity is so attractive to the worst sort of evolutionary psychology and contemporary ideologues of market models. Write a few rules—the selfish gene, the territorial imperative, profit maximisation, rational choice, or, preferably, a combination of all of these, and away we go. Simplistic complexity does deal with a kind of complex emergence but it remains reductionist” ([5]: 103).
McLennan [6] makes a similar argument about the way in which complexity theory has been applied to sociology. It seems, for him, as if complexity theory—and what he refers to as “restricted complexity”—is not providing a critique of outdated meta-paradigms; it is simply providing a new one.
- 4.
The significance of “constraints” is discussed in the chapter.
- 5.
- 6.
The following two sections are based on Cilliers [10].
- 7.
The work of Niklas Luhmann provides a good example of this approach. For a monograph in English, see Luhmann [11].
- 8.
Although it will not be elaborated on in this text, a number of the ideas presented have a close affinity to arguments from deconstruction. For more detail, see Cilliers [8], especially Chap. 3.
- 9.
This is perhaps again a legacy of biological models—subsystems are seen as “organs”. Biological systems are subjected to constraints that may not apply to all complex systems, especially not social systems.
- 10.
References
Burns M, Weaver A. Exploring sustainability science: a southern African perspective. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media; 2008.
Novotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M, editors. Re-thinking science. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2001.
Toulmin S. Cosmopolis: the hidden agenda of modernity. Free Press: New York; 1990.
Morin E. Restricted complexity, general complexity. In: Gershenson C, Aerts D, Edmonds B, editors. Worldviews, science and us: philosophy and complexity. Singapore: World Scientific; 2007. p. 5–29.
Byrne D. Complexity, configurations and cases. Theor Cult Soc. 2005;22(5):95–111.
McLennan G. Sociology’s complexity. Sociology. 2003;37(3):547–64.
Cilliers P. On the importance of a certain slowness. In: Gershenson C, Aerts D, Edmonds B, editors. Worldviews, science and us: philosophy and complexity. Singapore: World Scientific; 2007. p. 53–64.
Cilliers P. Complexity and postmodernism: understanding complex systems. Routledge: London; 1998.
Cilliers P. Complexity, deconstruction and relativism. Theor Cult Soc. 2005;22(5):255–67.
Cilliers P. Boundaries, hierarchies and networks in complex systems. Int J Innov Manage. 2001;5(2):135–47.
Luhmann N. Ecological communication. University of Chicago Press: Chicago; 1989.
Khalil EL, Boulding KE, editors. Evolution, order and complexity. Routledge: London; 1996.
Midgley G, Munlo I, Brown M. The theory and practice of boundary critique: developing housing services for older people. J Oper Res Soc. 1998;49:467–78.
Pattee HH. Hierarchy theory: the challenge of complex systems. New York: George Braziller; 1973.
Simon HA. The architecture of complexity: hierarchic systems. Proc Am Phil Soc. 1962;106(6):467–82.
Emmeche C. Aspects of complexity in life and science. Philosophica. 1997;59(1):47–68 (see http://logica.ugent.be/philosophica/fulltexts/59-3.pdf).
Cilliers P. Knowledge, complexity and understanding. Emergence. 2000;2(4):7–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cilliers, P. (2013). Understanding Complex Systems. In: Sturmberg, J., Martin, C. (eds) Handbook of Systems and Complexity in Health. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4998-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4998-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4997-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4998-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)