This article arises out of
my interest in technology and science. The article will apply some basic
concepts to various world situations. Being around 2100 words, I do not expect
many people to take the time to read it, but I invite comments.
Kevin Kelly has written a
book called Out of Control: The New
Biology of Machines, Social Systems and the Economic World, (1994).
"Out of control" does not mean running amok. It means outside of
external control; these systems run on their own dynamic. No one outside the
system directs it.
Kelly uses an analogy from
biology and its conception of coevolution. The Wikkepedia article describes coevolution
as "the change of a biological object triggered by the change of a related
object." It can refer to microscopic relationships, such as amino acids in
a protein. However, we can see such relationships in the relationship between a
host and a parasite. Another interesting one is that organisms develop mutually
helpful relationships, such as between certain bees or birds and the flowers
they pollinate. The general conclusion is that coevolution may be responsible
for much of the genetic diversity seen in normal populations. It does not
account for large changes in the biological system.
He will also discuss the
notion of “hive mind,” a notion in sociology and philosophy that explores
collective consciousness and intelligence. He addresses how biological systems
handle complexity, moves over into industrial ecology and network economics,
and concludes with many inspiring reflections on the convergence of biological
and technical systems.
One reviewer on Amazon,
Chris Anderson, poses the question of why the three most powerful forces in our
world, evolution, democracy, and capitalism, are so controversial. They have
been around long enough to understand. “We” still cannot believe that they
work. Thus, socialist Europe resists capitalism, the religious right in America
questions evolution and the Middle East makes a mockery of democracy. The basic
point is that our brains are not wired to understand matters at such a “macro”
level. Such theories do not work at the anecdotal level of personal experience.
Instead, they are statistical, operating in the realm of collective
probability. They are not predictable and controllable—they are inherently out
of control. That is scary and unsettling, but also hugely important to
understand in a world of increasing complexity and diminishing institutional power.
This book seeks to make sense of all of this.
Kelly recognized that the messy markets of natural selection, enlightened
self-interest and invisible hands all anticipated the Internet and the delights
of watching peer-to-peer cacophony create the greatest oracle the world has
ever seen. Some of the examples may be a bit dated a dozen years later, but the
message has only become truer: "There is no central keeper of knowledge in
a network, only curators of particular views," he writes. The emergent mob
wisdom of the blogosphere and Wikipedia were unimaginable then, but somehow
Kelly imagined them all the same. This may be the smartest book of the past
decade.
The book is in the field of
enquiry that involves the phenomenon of non-hierarchical/centralized models of
organization. The main premise of the book is the idea of intelligent beings,
in this case humans, giving up control of their creations, which are machines,
and letting them "adapt on their own, evolve in their own direction, and
grow without human oversight." No sustaining ecosystem is in equilibrium
or completely "in control". Some chaotic or "out of
control" events are required for complex systems to function. For example,
the earth's atmosphere is made up of 20% oxygen. This oxygen content is just
enough to maintain viable ecosystems without burning up the earth from fires.
Kelly demonstrates quite
convincingly how the technological is becoming biological. By looking at a lot
of contemporary systems research, on everything from living coral reefs through
new management theory to the building/evolving of little mechanical creatures
that are "fast, cheap and out of control," Kelly has come up with
some new system rules, which he calls "The Nine Laws of God." They
are:
1. Distribute being. The spirit of a beehive, the
behavior of an economy, the thinking of a supercomputer, and the life in me are
distributed over a multitude of smaller units (which themselves may be
distributed). When the sum of the parts can add up to more than the parts, then
that extra being (that something from nothing) is distributed among the parts.
Whenever we find something from nothing, we find it arising from a field of
many interacting smaller pieces. All the mysteries we find most interesting --
life, intelligence, evolution -- are found in the soil of large distributed systems.
– So, nature is distributing life over many smaller unites rather than
centralizing it. Yet, in your personal experience, you have to focus your life,
or waste the brief time you have on this planet. This law of God is counter-intuitive.
2. Control from the bottom up. When everything is
connected to everything in a distributed network, everything happens at once.
When everything happens at once, wide and fast moving problems simply route
around any central authority. Therefore, overall governance must arise from the
most humble interdependent acts done locally in parallel, and not from a
central command. A mob can steer itself, and in the territory of rapid,
massive, and heterogeneous change, only a mob can steer. To get something from
nothing, control must rest at the bottom within simplicity. – So, the attempts
to control economies (socialism or crony capitalism) and attempts to dictate
the culture (Islam and Shira Law) are the opposite directions humanity needs to
go for the heath of humanity. Yet, in your personal experience, if you are
constantly trying to please others, you will never be the unique presence you
need to be. You will simply become part of the herd. You have to become the one
who steers your life in a direction.
3. Cultivate increasing returns. Each time you use
an idea, a language, or a skill you strengthen it, reinforce it, and make it
more likely to be used again. That is known as positive feedback or
snowballing. Success breeds success. In the Gospels, this principle of social
dynamics is known as "To those who have, more will be given."
Anything that alters its environment to increase production of itself is
playing the game of increasing returns. Moreover, all large, sustaining systems
play the game. The law operates in economics, biology, computer science, and
human psychology. Life on Earth alters Earth to beget more life. Confidence
builds confidence. Order generates more order. Them that has, gets. This rule
does seem consistent with the way the world works. Yet, it feels unfair, and is
therefore counter-intuitive.
4. Grow by chunking. The only way to make a complex
system that works is to begin with a simple system that works. Attempts to
install instantly highly complex organization -- such as intelligence or a
market economy -- without growing it, inevitably lead to failure. To assemble a
prairie takes time -- even if you have all the pieces. Time is needed to let
each part test itself against all the others. Complexity is created, then, by
assembling it incrementally from simple modules that can operate independently.
– So, attempting to turn a country in the Middle East, such as Iraq, into a
complex, higher order form of government, such as democracy, could never work.
The same would be true of capitalism. The same was true in Russia after the
collapse of Soviet communism. The counter-intuitive element here is that in an
ideal world, you could design a system and put it to work. Yet, every system
has a history. You are never dealing with a blank slate, whether in a church, business,
or country.
5. Maximize the fringes. In heterogeneity is
creation of the world. A uniform entity must adapt to the world by occasional
earth-shattering revolutions, one of which is sure to kill it. A diverse
heterogeneous entity, on the other hand, can adapt to the world in a thousand
daily mini-revolutions, staying in a state of permanent, but never fatal,
churning. Diversity favors remote borders, the outskirts, hidden corners,
moments of chaos, and isolated clusters. In economic, ecological, evolutionary,
and institutional models, a healthy fringe speeds adaptation, increases
resilience, and is usually the source of innovations. –So, appreciation of
diversity is a learned behavior. We typically connect with people who are like
us and disconnect with those who are not.
6. Honor your errors. A trick will only work for a
while, until everyone else is doing it. To advance from the ordinary requires a
new game, or a new territory. However, the process of going outside the
conventional method, game, or territory is indistinguishable from error. Even
the most brilliant act of human genius, in the final analysis, is an act of
trial and error. "To be an Error and to be Cast out is a part of God's
Design," wrote the visionary poet William Blake. Error, whether random or
deliberate, must become an integral part of any process of creation. Evolution
can be thought of as systematic error management. – One person told me that
golf is a game of managing imperfect shots. We tend to think that perfection is
the goal, when in reality, most of our lives are attempts to manage our lives
in the midst of the errors we have made. We tend to keep wishing our errors had
not happened, when instead, we need to find ways of incorporating them into our
lives and learn.
7. Pursue no optima; have multiple goals. Simple
machines can be efficient, but complex adaptive machinery cannot be. A
complicated structure has many masters and none of them can be served
exclusively. Rather than strive for optimization of any function, a large
system can only survive by "satisficing" (making "good
enough") a multitude of functions. For instance, an adaptive system must tradeoff
between exploiting a known path of success (optimizing a current strategy), or
diverting resources to exploring new paths (thereby wasting energy trying less
efficient methods). So vast are the mingled drives in any complex entity that
it is impossible to unravel the actual causes of its survival. Survival is a
many-pointed goal. Most living organisms are so many-pointed they are blunt
variations that happen to work, rather than precise renditions of proteins,
genes, and organs. In creating something from nothing, forget elegance; if it
works, it is beautiful. – So, here we have something that is almost the
opposite of what we do as individuals. We need to have a goal, a mission, a
vision of our lives. Simple systems need to have specific goals. Yet, such is
not the case with a macro-system.
8. Seek persistent disequilibrium. Neither constancy
nor relentless change will support a creation. A good creation, like good jazz,
must balance the stable formula with frequent out-of-kilter notes. Equilibrium
is death. Yet unless a system stabilizes to an equilibrium point, it is no
better than an explosion and just as soon dead. A Nothing, then, is both
equilibrium and disequilibrium. A Something is persistent disequilibrium -- a
continuous state of surfing forever on the edge between never stopping but
never falling. Homing in on that liquid threshold is the still mysterious holy
grail of creation and the quest of all amateur gods. – We tend to think we want
stability, but in reality, some instability and even the tension it creates are
important to live on the creative, life-giving edge.
9. Change changes itself. Change can be structured.
This is what large complex systems do: they coordinate change. When extremely
large systems are built up out of complicated systems, then each system begins
to influence and ultimately change the organizations of other systems. That is,
if the rules of the game are composed from the bottom up, then it is likely
that interacting forces at the bottom level will alter the rules of the game as
it progresses. Over time, the rules for change get changed themselves.
Evolution -- as used in everyday speech -- is about how an entity is changed
over time. Deeper evolution -- as it might be formally defined -- is about how
the rules for changing entities over time change over time. To get the most out
of nothing, you need to have self-changing rules. – In your personal life, you
will need to direct change as much as you can toward what you believe to be
healthy ends. Such is not the case for a complicated system, in which change is
already happening and what one needs is coordination of the change.
Such
reflections have given me much to ponder. I have recently read been in a
reading group considering the views of Alfred North Whitehead. Much of this
seemed consistent with his philosophy. It also summarizes quite well my
resistance to centralized political and economic authority. The growth and
health of a nation will emerge from many complex and free relationships, some
competitive and some cooperative, rather than from a center that seeks to
control. Again, I would view this as consistent with Whitehead as well.
