Abstract

The “magic” word complexity evokes a multitude of meanings that obscure its real sense. Here we try and generate a bottom-up reconstruction of the deep sense of complexity by looking at the convergence of different features shared by complex systems. We specifically focus on complexity in biology but stressing the similarities with analogous features encountered in inanimate and artefactual systems in order to track an integrative path toward a new “mainstream” of science overcoming the actual fragmentation of scientific culture.

Highlights

  • Warren Weaver stressed that we are usually facing three order of situations about complexity: (1) organized simplicity, where the relationships among particles do not change across time and laws of classical physics holds up; (2) disorganized complexity, where the behavior of a huge number of entities—each of one has an individually erratic or unknowable behavior—can be caught by looking at macroscopic parameters governed by laws of statistical mechanics, altogether with the support of probability theory; (3) organized complexity, a specific feature of systems where several entities establish relationships that can change over time, enabling the overall system in acquiring a form, according to organizing principles

  • This approach, remnant of the conceptualization established for understanding the phase transition occurring in inanimate gas–liquid systems, has been conceptualized according to the self-organized criticality (SOC) [59] or by other models based on downward causation in which internal and external driving forces are integrated into a whole system [60]

  • Physics always tries to find a precise and rigorous definition of its concepts, so the question: What is meant by complexity?

Read more

Summary

Complexity

What we do mean by “biological complexity”? A number of attempts have been made to catch the meaning and the implications that such a word has to lay out the fundamentals of a theory of biological organization. It was not until the second half of the 20th century that it became evident that science has succeeded in solving a bewildering number of relatively easy problems, “whereas the hard problems and the ones which perhaps promise most for man’s future, lie ahead” [7] In his seminal paper, Warren Weaver stressed that we are usually facing three order of situations about complexity: (1) organized simplicity, where the relationships among particles do not change across time and laws of classical physics holds up; (2) disorganized complexity, where the behavior of a huge number of entities—each of one has an individually erratic or unknowable behavior—can be caught by looking at macroscopic parameters governed by laws of statistical mechanics (thermodynamics), altogether with the support of probability theory; (3) organized complexity, a specific feature of systems (like the living ones) where several entities (besides being not enough to rely on a “simple” statistical mechanics approach) establish relationships that can change over time, enabling the overall system in acquiring a form, according to organizing principles. We can identify the mesoscopic realm the level where objects organize themselves and function in ways unlike anything we know at very large or very small scales, displaying astonishing and unpredictable properties, as seen in both living and nonliving systems where apparently spontaneous organization processes take place

Systems
Hierarchy of Levels and Emergence
Symmetry Breaking
Form and Relationships
Scale Dependence
Nonlinearity
Critical Transitions
Concluding Remarks
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call