Abstract
It was post-modernity that first told us that facts were now to be considered interpretations, whereupon the value of theorization diminished to the point where theories became little more than opinions. As a reaction, the reductionisms and determinisms that had previously been dismantled by a novel, non-Newtonian perspective returned as a “tyranny of concreteness,” foreshadowing tomorrow's post-normality. So, what then is “normality”? Human societies have always been wrapped in chaos, complexity, and contradictions: this is normal for all living beings and for all living systems. A volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, therefore, has always existed, and as such is perfectly normal and natural. Therefore, a science based on “post normality” should take into account that normality itself implicates unpredictability, uncertainty, and the impossibility of controlling or managing complexity, including the unexpected events called “black swans,” which are simply intrinsic features of the complex adaptive systems we inhabit.
TopIntroduction
The uncertainties and relativities which have been plaguing our civilization from the era of post-modernity onward, from the first announcement of the overcoming of the ‘objectivity principle’, both in philosophical terms and in the realm of the ‘hard’ sciences, the announcement that there were no longer any such things as facts, only interpretations, gave rise to a series of paradoxical ‘side effects’, in which the value of theorization was diminished to the point where all theories became equivalent, considered little more than opinions themselves. As a result, the same reductionisms and determinisms which had previously been dismantled by a novel perspective in physics, focusing on non-Newtonian, quantum phenomena and properties, have since returned (with a vengeance) under the guise of an ‘evidence-based’ search for a completely neutral and absolute…objectivity, in the realm of social sciences as well, resulting in a reinforced “tyranny of concreteness” (Dominici, 1996, 2017b; Hammersley, 2013). And might not this ‘new’ objectivity be yet another social construct, and as such subject to an unavoidable amount of subjectivity, considering that all human beings are, first of all, subjects?
In any case, before speaking of post-normality, we should perhaps ponder normality itself. Our human societies have always been wrapped in chaos, complexity and contradictions: this is normal for all living beings and for all living systems, which in general can be grouped together as ‘complex adaptive systems’ (CASs). A volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, therefore, has always existed, and as such is perfectly normal; as a matter of fact, it is both natural and desirable. Therefore, the idea of a science based on “post normality” should take into account that normality itself implicates unpredictability, uncertainty, and the impossibility of controlling or managing the complexity that comprises us, including the unexpected events often called “black swans”, which are simply an intrinsic feature of the CASs we inhabit (Haken, 1977; Morin, 1977; Kiel, 1994; Kuhlmann, 2013).
In the thirty or so years that I have been studying, teaching, writing, and carrying out research on complexity, I have, time after time, come up against experts from various fields who misinterpret the concepts behind terms such as complexity and chaos. That is the reason that I always insist upon defining and distinguishing the difference between complex and complicated systems before introducing any epistemological or methodological considerations. As a result, I am often accused of repeating myself. But how is it possible to analyze issues, overcome inadequacies, or identify connections, much less find solutions for problems (which turn out inevitably to be simple solutions aimed at resolving complex problems), based on totally false premises? I find myself obliged to insist on these points, because the confusion between the two abovementioned systems, the tendency to think that a complex system can be described as complicated – and consequently, dealt with in the same way --is the fatal error which is leading humanity into a trap of its own making, a trap which is revealing itself to be a progressive hardening of vital, living communities into a “society-mechanism” (Dominici, 2019a, 2022a, 2023a; see also: Luhmann, 1990; Laszlo, 1996; Rosa, 2010).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Tyranny of Concreteness: The obsession with predictability and with numbers, facts, statistics, dates, measures, and so on, which tells us that only quantitative data are important, and that only what is “ useful ” is worth pursuing.
The Grand Illusions of the Hypertechnological Civilization: The illusions of control, rationality, measurement, predictability and the elimination of error, along with the myths of simplification, facilitation, and disintermediation.
Transdisciplinarity: An approach, along with interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity, which calls for a radical rethinking of educational praxes, avoiding the mistake of maintaining disciplinary fields isolated from one another in separate, narrow tracks. This can be achieved by uniting, or healing the fracture, between “False Dichotomies”, such as technology vs culture, rationality vs. imagination, science vs the humanities, etc.
Post-Normality: The normality of what is currently termed post-normality can be demonstrated by showing that our world has always been volatile, unpredictable, complex and ambiguous (VUCA), and that such features, along with the unexpected events known as “black swans”, have always been intrinsic to the complex world we inhabit.
Simplification: A particular process, which is a means and not an end, of focusing on the interacting sub-units within a system, which however can never “reduce” the complexity of the system.
Complex Systems vs. Complicated Systems: These are terms whose significance is often equated, leading to a fatal error that gives rise to many others (such as the “Great Mistake” of delegating carte blanche to technology in educational processes), whereas complicated systems, which are artificial, are completely different from complex systems, which are living, unpredictable, uncontrollable, interdependent, interactive, emergent, and self-organizing systems.
Facilitation: The process by which society intends to make all processes and activities “easier”, at least apparently, leading inevitably to a progressive deterioration of our motivations, resistance, health, physical and mental capacities, and spirit.