ABSTRACT
Ralph: Peter distinguishes between four types of models of reality. These are equilibrium models, dynamical systems models including mathematical chaos, self-organizing models, by which he means dissipative structures, and the fourth type is complex evolutionary systems. The move from one to the next has to do with dropping assumptions that are made In the previous one. So, the first one, the equilibrium model, is based upon the assumption that the entities comprising the model are homogeneous and that events Impinging on the system are average events. This means that all of the micro dynamics, the micro diversity, is assumed away. And then you get equilibrium and any small change is rapidly dampened away so that the system rapidly and predictably returns to its stable state. The model has no Internal capacity to change. It can only be changed from the outside. The next model, systems dynamics and chaotic systems, drops the assumption that the system will move to equilibrium. Now you can get unpredictability but the system does not have the internal capacity to move spontaneously to another pattern or attractor. The third model, self-organizing systems or dissipative structures, does not assume a move to equilibrium either and in addition drops the assumption about average events. This model Introduces non-average events in the form of fluctuations, modelled as a random variable or noise. Now some element of the micro dynamics has been Introduced and the model displays the internal capacity to move spontaneously from one pattern or attractor to another, but only to another pattern that is already there, rather like an archetype. The final model drops the assumptions dropped by the models mentioned so far and in addition drops the assumption of homogeneous entities or agents. It introduces agents that are different from one another and you therefore get much richer micro diversity and the consequence of this is that the model now has the internal capacity to produce novel attractors spontaneously. This is a model that can
NOTES
1 Luhmann, N. (1984) Soziale Systeme, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main. 2 Mead, G. H. (1934) Mind, Se lf and Society, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, !L. 3 Elias, N. and Scotson, J. L. (1994) The Established and the Outsiders, Sage,
London. 4 Griffin, D. (1998) Dealing with the Paradox of Culture in Management Theory,
doctoral thesis, University of Hertfordshire. 5 Parsons, T. (1951) The Social System, Free Press, New York. 6 Gell-Mann, M. (1995) The Quark and the Jaguar: adventures in the simple and
the complex, Abacus, New York. 7 Holland, J. (2000) Emergence: from chaos to order, Oxford University Press,
Oxford. 8 Goodwin, B. C. (1994) How the Leopard Changed its Spots: the evolution of
complexity, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. 9 Marion, R. (1999) The Edge of Organization: chaos and complexity theories of
formal social systems, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
