Complexity and Control

Naming the Axes

In the previous topic, the likely layout of the TET was determined based on taxonomic principles and using resonance as a guide.

We can now consider the formal properties further and label:

• the X- and Y-axes,

so as to get an understanding of the four quadrants and the two diagonals.

The two axes define the psycho-social dimensions that paradigms must take into account to a greater or lesser degree when handling change.

The X-axis determines the social or output dimension affecting the use of any depiction method/paradigm. This appears to be how much the paradigm addresses the complexity of situations.

The Y-axis determines the psychological or input dimension when using any depiction method/paradigm. This appears to be how much the paradigm addresses control of situations.

This then generates a TET with quadrants as shown at right.

Labelling the axes and quadrants in this way makes it possible to see whether the proposed plot fits. If not, either the axes are in error or the plot is in error.

Checking X-Axis Complexity via Diagonals

The diagonal that stretches from lower left (LL) to upper right (UR) depicts entities or situations as compound i.e. with internal structures or components. It appears that the focus in all is on an evolution generated by the interaction of components and handling of the environment. In moving up the diagonal and along the X-Axis, the coverage of the paradigm is increasingly comprehensive as complexity is given progressively more attention.

Details

• The Atomistic paradigm depicts a situation/entity as discrete with internal and external interactions assumed but not specifically depicted. These interactions potentially lead to evolution, but addressed complexity is minimal.
• The Structural paradigm depicts situations as a system with interacting components that are specifically defined and ordered. This means some limited complexity is considered, and the need to fit with the environment leads to some evolution.
• The Dynamic paradigm depicts a situation as a system whose ordered components dynamically affect each other with an explicit aim to generate evolution. Consequently, the paradigm addresses much greater complexity.
• The Unified paradigm attempts to comprehensively depict any situation to generate a dynamic system of systems all interacting including with the environment. There is co-evolution and the deliberate appreciation and acceptance of maximum complexity.

The diagonal that stretches from upper left (UL) to lower right (LR) contains relatively simple unstructured depictions. Moving down the diagonal and along the X-axis progressively increases the orientation to complexity. Correspondingly, moving up the diagonal from LR to UL shows an increasing disinterest, neglect or rejection of the complexity inherent in any situation.

Details

• The Unitary paradigm depicts a situation as a single indivisible entity without components or connection to the environment, which means a minimal orientation to complexity.
• The Dualistic paradigm depicts a situation as two opposing components amidst a non-specified variety. So addressed complexity is greater but still limited.
• The Few factors Causal paradigm depicts a situation as a multiplicity of specified relevant components with no more than a couple or a few causally linked. So the focus on complexity becomes significant.
• The Multi-factorial Causal paradigm is similar in depicting a situation as a multiplicity of specified relevant components, but with many more involved in causation. So much more complexity is addressed.

Checking Y-Axis Control via Diagonals

The diagonal that moves upward from lower right (LR) to upper left (UL) contains unstructured depictions that are increasingly oriented to control. Control in this set is desired to serve domination which increasingly demands the exercise of power.

Details

• The Causal paradigm depicts situations as containing a variety of components with some having causal links. If there are large numbers of causal links or multivariate causation, then exerting power achieves little and concern with control is lowest. When fewer causal links are perceived, then some control in handling change becomes possible and power can be used to persuade others of validity.
• The Dualistic paradigm depicts situations as two opposing components each seeking to dominate the other as well as other factors in the situation. Use of the paradigm involves using power to win significant control over one component and to have as much influence as possible over the situation as a whole.
• The Unitary paradigm depicts situations as single and indivisible with a concern for domination within and also domination of the environment as far as possible. There is a maximum orientation to control with enforcement and coercion, which leads to demands for ever more power.

The diagonal that moves upwards from lower left (LL) to upper right (UR) contains compound entities or systems that are increasingly concerned with control. This concern results from the challenge of increasing comprehensiveness and the desire to shape situations effectively through harnessing evolution.

Details

• The Atomistic paradigm depicts situations as discrete systems whose self-regulation and natural unregulated interaction expects and provides a minimum form of control.
• The Structural paradigm depicts situations as containing components that are ordered in specified way so as to maintain a structure and present an identity. This leads to a necessary concern with control.
• The Dynamic paradigm depicts situations as the deliberate development of the system via cooperation. This demands a greater and more continuous focus on control to direct desired evolutionary developments.
• The Unified paradigm depicts situations as including the environment and showing organic growth of systems of systems in the evolving environment. This generates a very high focus on control: how it manifests in the situation and how it can be effectively engaged.

Zones on the Axes

Based on the above descriptions, it is possible to identify zones on the axes and see similarities between otherwise very different paradigms.

Complexity Orientation : X-Axis

On the X-axis, there are four zones which, moving from left to right, show a progression in their capacity or preference for complexity in the situation i.e. in the entity and/or the environment.

Atomistic – Unitary	Complexity is singular i.e. just one component or entity.
Structural – Dualistic	Complexity is fixed i.e. specific and limited components
Few Factor Causal – Dynamic	Complexity is selective i.e. multiple components with optional choices.
Multi-factor Causal – Unified.	Complexity is inclusive i.e. considers all relevant components

Control Orientation : Y-Axis

On the Y-axis, there are four zones which, moving from bottom to top, show a progression in their concern for control of the situation. This control may be exercised within the entity or on the environment.

Atomistic – Multi-factor Causal	Control is discretionary i.e. flexible. discontinuous, minimal.
Structural – Few factor Causal	Control is rigid i.e. concentrated in specific linkages between components.
Dualistic – Dynamic	Control is persistent i.e. to direct the components continuously
Unitary – Unified.	Control is pervasive i.e. extensive, intensive, comprehensive.

---

Having confirmed and elaborated on the layout, it is now possible to commence an exploration of how the paradigms address various change issues.

• Start with where change is expected to happen: within or without.

Originally posted: 30-Jun-2024