I thank everyone on this list for the lively and excellent discussion
that we had late last year on social and cultural complexity. There is
much in that discussion to file and think about.
I attempt here to spark a new discussion. The immediate example is not
social/cultural complexity (although the example certainly generates
social and cultural complexity), but something more fundamental: the
complexity of the human brain. As I hope to show, some questions about
brain complexity lead into general questions about social and cultural
complexity, and indeed about complexity in general.
I need hardly laud the qualities of the human brain. It is large
(relative to body mass), differentiated, organized, comprised of
millions of neurons, and always capable of doing things that earlier
humans never encountered (like typing an email message). I have often
wondered how the brain evolved to be able to resolve problems that
earlier humans never knew--but that is a topic for another discussion.
My purpose here is more limited. It is to explore the topic of the
complexity of the human brain. Most persons, and certainly nearly all
scientists, would concur that the brain is complex. Its differentiation
and organization fit my concept of complexity, which I offered at the
start of this FIS session.
In that inaugural message I described my collaboration with Timothy
Allen, a brilliant ecologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Tim likes to challenge audiences about the complexity of the brain.
After he first raised the matter with me, I thought of the following
example: For certain extreme types of epilepsy, the treatment is to cut
the corpus callosum, the bundle of nerve fibers that connect the brain's
hemispheres. It seems to work: People who have the treatment go on to
have great relief of their seizures. I am not sure why it works, but I
am happy for the relief that people obtain.
But this poses an interesting dilemma in complexity. For the purpose of
this treatment, the brain is not complex at all. It is, in fact, a
simple system, comprised of only three parts: the left hemisphere, the
right hemisphere, and the corpus callosum. The keyboard on which I write
this is more complex than that.
Is the brain complex or simple? Does it depend, as former President
Clinton might say, on what the meaning of 'is' is? Does the complexity
of the human brain rely on human semantics? The Nobel Laureate Murray
Gell-Mann once suggested that the complexity of a system can be measured
by the length of the shortest description of its regularities. In such a
linguistic approach, the brain in this treatment of epilepsy is very
simple: two hemispheres and a bundle of nerves connecting them.
So the brain is simple for this purpose. Therein lies the broader
question. Is the complexity of the brain relative to the perspective of
the analyst? Or is the complexity of the brain innate? Surely a simple
brain of three parts could not generate social and cultural complexity
as we know them? But to a doctor treating a patient with epilepsy, this
is irrelevant. The brain is simple, and so is the treatment.
Inevitably we are led to more general issues. Is social/cultural
complexity an attribute of a society/culture, or is it an attribute of
the observer's perspective? Is complexity innate or asscribed? Clearly
this question applies to any kind of complex system, not just social or
cultural ones.
I hope you find this question as challenging as I do. I don't have a
firm answer to it, and look forward to the discussion.
With best wishes,
Joseph Tainter
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Fri Jan 26 22:33:46 2007
