Why tinkerers, kibitzers, environmentalists, regulators and others often land us in a lot of unnecessary trouble
They often fail to understand complex systems. Michael Crichton’s meditation on changes we need to make to deal with the world we have created in the last 150 years:
[W]e must embrace complexity theory. We must understand complex systems.
We live in a world of complex systems. The environment is a complex system. The government is a complex system. Financial markets are complex systems. The human mind is a complex system—most minds, at least. By a complex system I mean one in which the elements of the system interact among themselves, such that any modification we make to the system will produce results that we cannot predict in advance. Furthermore, a complex system demonstrates sensitivity to initial conditions. You can get one result on one day, but the identical interaction the next day may yield a different result. We cannot know with certainty how the system will respond. Third, when we interact with a complex system, we may provoke downstream consequences that emerge weeks or even years later. We must always be watchful for delayed and untoward consequences.
The science that underlies our understanding of complex systems is now thirty years old. A third of a century should be plenty of time for this knowledge and to filter down to everyday consciousness, but except for slogans—like the butterfly flapping its wings and causing a hurricane halfway around the world—not much has penetrated ordinary human thinking.
On the other hand, complexity theory has raced through the financial world. It has been briskly incorporated into medicine. But organizations that care about the environment do not seem to notice that their ministrations are deleterious in many cases. Lawmakers do not seem to notice when their laws have unexpected consequences, or make things worse. Governors and mayors and managers may manage their complex systems well or badly, but if they manage well, it is usually because they have an instinctive understanding of how to deal with complex systems. Most managers fail.
Why? Our human predisposition treat all systems as linear when they are not. A linear system is a rocket flying to Mars. Or a cannonball fired from a canon. Its behavior is quite easily described mathematically. A complex system is water gurgling over rocks, or air flowing over a bird’s wing. Here the mathematics are complicated, and in fact no understanding of these systems was possible until the widespread availability of computers.
One complex system that most people have dealt with is a child. If so, you’ve probably experienced that when you give the child an instruction, you can never be certain what response you will get. Especially if the child is a teenager. And similarly, you can’t be certain that an identical interaction on another day won’t lead to spectacularly different results. If you have a teenager, or if you invest in the stock market, you know very well that a complex system cannot be controlled, it can only be managed. Because responses cannot be predicted, the system can only be observed and responded to. The system may resist attempts to change its state. It may show resiliency. Or fragility. Or both.
An important feature of complex systems is that we don’t know how they work. We don’t understand them except in a general way; we simply interact with them. Whenever we think we understand them, we learn we don’t. Sometimes spectacularly.
30 years ago it was global cooling that was going to kill us all. Now it is global warming. Back then, and today, the shouters shout “do something now!” Almost invariably that is the absolute worst thing to do.
See also How your iPod ruined America.
December 29th, 2005 at 3:32 am
“…..30 years ago it was global cooling that was going to kill us all. Now it is global warming.”
You blinked and while you did, they changed their “sky is falling” junk science to ….CLIMATE CHANGE! Now they can’t be wrong ever again….
In Montreal they proclaimed that any (weather)cold, hot , dry, wet, stormy, calm, was evidence of man caused climate change and lowly man was always to blame. the US must therefore send money -Quite being so productive – turn our sovereignity to a green helmuted police force.
January 8th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
Crichton’s position (his) statement at the end of his recent book, State of Fear, is simply brilliant, as was the book. It is a must-read for everyone who thinks that we are on the brink of an environmental disaster. It is fact portrayed as fictional story.
He succinctly and elegantly put the concerns of the enviroweenies where they belong, as poorly supported theory rather than as the “fact” that current reporting and liberal Democrat bloviating would have you believe.
The book is appendixed with references for every claim made by Kenner, the scientist-hero of the story, elevating the book above its perceived fiction status.