Systemic negligence in engaging with complexity

Unthought as Cognitive Foundation of Global Civilization (Part #4)

In the The Sage Handbook of Complexity and Management (2011), a paper by Robert Chia (Towards an Oblique Strategy for Dealing with the Complex, pp. 182-198) comments on remarks by Edgar Morin (Method: towards a study of humankind, 1977/1992) to the effect that:

Our thought must lay siege to the unthought which commands and controls it... we need a principle of knowledge that not only respects but reveals the mysteries of things. (Morin 1977/1992, 16). It entails recognition that all forms of seeing and knowing involve the simultaneous act of foregrounding ad backgrounding: that there is an inevitable blindness in seeing and an unacknowledged "owing" in our "kn-owing". In directing our attention to the unthought, complex thinking heightens awareness of our ignorance. We must start by extinguishing false certainty, says Morin, setting out only in "ignorance, uncertainty, confusion... Uncertainty becomes viaticum; doubt of doubt gives doubt a new dimension, the dimension of reflexivity... the acceptance of confusion... becomes a means of resisting mutilating simplification (Morin, 1977/1992, 10). This is the radical starting point for genuinely thinking complexity.

Lack of systemic analysis: A theme of this argument is that there has been little systemic analysis of the issues by which governance claims to be challenged -- as argued in justifying the original production of the Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential. What has been undertaken has been deprecated and marginalized (Graham Turner, A Comparison of the Limits to Growth with Thirty Years of Reality, 2007; Brian Hayes, Computation and the Human Predicament: The Limits to Growth and the limits to computer modeling, American Scientist, 2012).

It can be argued that there are systemic interdependencies which are for various reasons ignored (Map of Systemic Interdependencies None Dares Name: 12-fold challenge of global life and death, 2011). Ironically, the focus is now on massive computer simulations -- driven primarily by concerns with potential social unrest and threats to security, narrowly conceived (FuturICT Living Earth Platform; Synthetic Environment for Analysis and Simulations, Sentient World Simulation). Arguably these have limited capacity to explore the processes explored below, most notably as a consequence of systematic "scientific gerrymandering" (as mentioned below).

Negligence: Whilst individual issues may be recognized as a consequence of human negligence and "lack of oversight", or lack of respect for regulatory provisions, more relevant to this exploration is the nature of systemic negligence. This may be understood as the consequence of designing systems such as implicitly to define some factors as irrelevant "externalities". Having been so defined, they are -- "by definition" -- no longer a matter of any concern.

Such externalities then no longer figure in the awareness of those associated with the initiative (Disastrous Floods as Indicators of Systemic Risk Neglect: implications for authoritative response to future surprises, 2011). The recent Fukushima disaster offers one example (Anticipating Future Strategic Triple Whammies: in the light of earthquake-tsunami-nuclear misconceptions, 2011). See also Ryan Sayre (The Un-Thought of Preparedness: concealments of disaster preparedness in Tokyo's everyday. Anthropology and Humanism, 2011).

When negligence is "systemic", interdependencies engendering vulnerabilities are no longer of any significance (as noted above). The unrecognized systemic negligence may well reach critical proportions in (subconsciously desired) conformity with religious prophecy (Spontaneous Initiation of Armageddon: a heartfelt response to systemic negligence, 2004). There is a peculiar sense in which the externalities are effectively "unknown" and incomprehensible (Unknown Undoing: challenge of incomprehensibility of systemic neglect, 2008). The argument may be extended further by exploring the practices and mindset associated with "remaindering" (Reintegration of a Remaindered World: cognitive recycling of objects of systemic neglect, 2011).

Government incompetence: The current challenges of global civilization are indicative of incompetence of the highest order in governance. The problematic condition of the global financial system is exacerbated by the case of public indebtedness (considered below). This is however merely one indicator suggesting that there are unexamined assumptions -- based on "unthought thought" -- regarding the capacity to govern a system of increasing complexity challenged by democratic deficit. The issue may be variously argued (Ungovernability of Sustainable Global Democracy ? 2011; Emergence of a Global Misleadership Council: misleading as vital to governance of the future? 2007).

Curiously, as pronouncements are made by various parties as to "what should be done" these appear increasingly "hollow" -- given the track record of inability to deliver on promises other than in a purely tokenistic manner. Many issues, irrespective of how urgent or controversial they may be, suggest an unthought thought undermining the capacity for collective decision-making (The Art of Non-Decision-Making, 1997).

Overpopulation: The dramatic increase in the global population over the past decades is a matter about which little is formally said (Institutionalized Shunning of Overpopulation Challenge: incommunicability of fundamentally inconvenient truth, 2008). Not only is little said, but it is potentially hazardous to professional and political careers to seek to do so, as discussed separately (Overpopulation Debate as a Psychosocial Hazard: development of safety guidelines from handling other hazardous materials, 2009). It might even be said to be the subject of a form of "superinjunction".

Most curious is the manner in which many issues which are a direct consequence of the increase in numbers -- resource shortages, lack of accommodation, energy shortages, pollution, and the like -- are treated as though they had no detectable causative factor within human understanding. In that manner, increasing population is simply beneath the level of collective awareness, and most notably of systemic scientific analysis, as separately argued (Scientific Gerrymandering of Boundaries of Overpopulation Debate: review of The Royal Society report -- People and the Planet, 2012).

The consequence is an amazing effort to design global strategies as though that increase was not a causative factor (Lipoproblems: Developing a Strategy Omitting a Key Problem -- the systemic challenge of climate change and resource issues, 2009).

Main menu

Directions

You are here

Main menu

Search form

Directions

You are here

Systemic negligence in engaging with complexity