Stuart A. UmplebyThe George Washington University

Washington, DCwww.gwu.edu/~umpleby

Complexity to Reflexivity: Underlying Logics Used in

Science

Four models currently used in science

• Linear causality

• Circular causality

• Complexity or self-organization

• Reflexivity

1. Linear causality

• The way most dissertations are written• Many statistical techniques, including

correlation and regression analysis• Hypotheses can be falsified• Propositions can be assigned a level of

statistical significance• The objective is to create descriptions

which correspond to observations

2. Circular causality

• Essential to any regulatory process – thermostat, automatic assembly line, driving a car, managing an organization

• Can be modeled with causal influence diagrams and system dynamics models

• Often a psychological variable is involved – perception of, desire for

3. Complexity theory

• Primarily a method of computer simulation – cellular automata, “the game of life”

• A very general concept – competition among species or corporations, conjectures and refutations in philosophy

• Differentiation and selection – creation of new variety, selection of appropriate variety

• Explains emergence

4. Reflexivity

• Requires operations on two levels – observation and participation

• Involves self-reference, hence paradox, hence inconsistency

• Violates three informal fallacies – circular arguments, the ad hominem fallacy, the fallacy of accent (two levels)

A further explanation of complexity theory

Self-organization

• What is currently called complexity theory can be seen as an extension of the work on self-organizing systems around 1960

• There are two processes – differentiation or the creation of new variety and selection of appropriate variety

• The first is done within an organism or organization; the second is done by the environment

Earlier versions of the idea 1

• Adam Smith used the idea in The Wealth of Nations when he described the process of innovation and competition among firms or nations (1776)

• Charles Darwin used the idea when describing genetic mutation and selection by the environment (1859)

• Karl Popper used the idea in philosophy -- conjectures and refutations (1950s)

Self Organizing Systems

Early Conception

Self Organizing System Environment

Ashby’s Conception

Organisms

Self Organizing System

Background on reflexivity theory

Observation

Self-awareness

Reflexivity in a social system

Four reflexive theories

• Heinz von Foerster: Include the observer in the domain of science (1974)

• Vladimir Lefebvre: Reflect on the ethical system one is using (1982)

• Donald Schon: Management as reflective practice (1983)

• George Soros: Individuals are actors as well as observers of economic and political systems (1987)

Von Foerster’s reflexive theory

• The observer should be included within the domain of science

• A theory of biology should be able to explain the existence of theories of biology

• “Reality” is a personal construct• Individuals bear ethical responsibility not

only for their actions but also for the world as they perceive it

Lefebvre’s reflexive theory

• There are two systems of ethical cognition• People are “imprinted” with one or the other

ethical system at an early age• One’s first response is always to act in accord

with the imprinted ethical system• However, one can learn the other ethical system

and act in accord with it, when one realizes that the imprinted system is not working

Soros’s reflexive theory

• Soros rejects Popper’s conception of “the unity of method,” the idea that all disciplines, including the social sciences, should use the same methods of inquiry as the natural sciences

• Soros says in social systems there are two processes – observation and participation

• The natural sciences require only observation

The informal fallacies

1. Fallacies of presumption which are concerned with errors in thought – circular reasoning, circular causality

2. Fallacies of relevance which raise emotional considerations – the ad hominem fallacy, including the observer

3. Fallacies of ambiguity which involve problems with language – levels of analysis, self-reference

Which models are acceptable?

1. Linear causality – the dominant conception of science

2. Circular causality – used in first order cybernetics, but involves circularity

3. Self-organization – Stephen Wolfram’s “new kind of science,” complex systems

4. Reflexivity – second order cybernetics, violates 3 informal fallacies

Acceptable and unacceptable models

• Models 1 and 3 – linear causality and self-organization – are acceptable. No informal fallacies are involved

• Model 2 – circular causality – is suspect. It involves circular reasoning. But it has proven to be useful

• Model 4 – reflexivity – violates 3 informal fallacies, so is highly suspect. Scientists shun it, do not take it seriously

A decision is required

• Should traditions concerning the form of arguments limit the scope of science?

• Or, should the subject matter of science be guided by curiosity and the desire to construct explanations of phenomena?

• Cyberneticians have chosen to study certain phenomena, even if they need to use unconventional ideas and methods

Some definitions

• A reflexive phenomenon – a boom and bust cycle, an idea spreads through a population

• Reflective practice – think about what one is doing, observe consequences of actions, and make adjustments

• Reflexive practice – think about one’s self as a participant in a reflexive phenomenon

Describing what is occurring

• Reflexive phenomena can be described using positive feedback loops

• Managers and policy analysts engage in reflective practice but an epistemology of reflective practice, separate from classical science is not well-developed

• Metaphor of taking a photograph vs. metaphor of riding a bicycle

• Classical science has constrained our thinking

Two conceptions of how to structure knowledge

• Most philosophers of science

• Cause and effect• If, then• Analysis• Reductionism• Theory

• E.A. Singer, Jr., Churchman, Ackoff

• Producer - product• Necessary conditions• Synthesis• Expansionism• Method

Science one vs. science two

• Observation• Description• Test knowledge• Extrapolate/ forecast• Reproduce

experiments • Accuracy/ precision

• Participation• Prescription• Solve problems• Create/ design• Achieve agreement or

acceptance• Usefulness

Three changes are needed in economics

1. Economists, and other social scientists, need to accept the uncertainty that accompanies violating the informal fallacies

2. Social scientists need to expand the philosophy of science by including the observer in the domain of science

3. Economists need a model of economic systems which allows participants to be observers and observers to be participants. This is a large step beyond behavioral economics

Our conception of science is the obstacle

• Practicing managers and social scientists will readily agree that human beings are both observers and participants in social systems

• Indeed, they say this idea is “not new”• But this perspective is not permitted by the

current conception of science• Our conception of science needs to be

expanded in order to encompass social systems

Contact information

Stuart A. Umpleby

Department of Management

The George Washington University

Washington, DC

www.gwu.edu/~umpleby

umpleby@gmail.com

Presented at the biennial conference of the Washington Academy of Sciences

Washington, DC

March 27-28, 2010