A General Theory of Complex Living Systems: Exploring the Demand Side of Dynamics

complex living systems, unified theory, dynamics, general theory, demand-side, methodology

Recession, Depression, and Financial Crisis: Everything Economists Want to Know But Are Afraid to Ask

Once again the economic experts are telling us that the current (October 2008) financial “crisis” will lead to a deep recession or depression. The financial press is even claiming that we are headed for “global meltdown”. Heard it all before? The last time was in 1998 when we were told that the financial difficulties in the East would generate the “East Asian meltdown”, which would last for at least a decade and would generate a “global economic crisis”. The economic summit called by President Bush for later in 2008 is reminiscent of the G7 and G22 meetings called to discuss similar issues in 1998. And yet nothing happened. Of course the financial gurus, such as Alan Greenspan were quick to claim the credit, but the truth is that financial crises are supply-side happenings that generate a lot of excitement among the stock market speculators but have little real-world fallout as long as the dynamic strategies being pursued by the world’s leading societies are viable. The stock market crash of 1987 is another case in point: nothing serious happened in the real economy. Depressions only occur when dominant dynamic strategies are finally exhausted and new ones are slow to emerge: as happened in the USA during the 1920s and 1930s. The conventional wisdom among the orthodox economic fraternity, that the Great Depression was the outcome of the 1929 Wall Street crash, is totally incorrect. Economists and their political masters will only understand the relationship between recession, depression, and financial crisis, when they have developed a realist general dynamic theory of human society. Until then, economic policy will be confused, ineffective, and distorting. A general dynamic theory is presented in this paper and used to analyse financial crises and economic downturns. To the degree that the real global economy is in trouble, it is due not to financial mismanagement, but to the misconceived policy of inflation targeting pursued for the past decade or so. Once again, our compulsion to intervene exceeds our capacity to understand the implications of our actions.financial crisis, depression, dynamic-strategy theory, inflation targeting, economic policy, global meltdown.

Constructing a General Theory of Life: The Dynamics of Human and Non-human Systems

The ultimate objective of theorists studying living systems is to construct a general theory of life that can explain and predict the dynamics of both human and nonhuman systems. Yet little progress has been made in this endeavour. Why? Because of the inappropriate methods adopted by complexity theorists. By assuming that the supply-side physics model – in which local interactions are said to give rise to the emergence of order and complexity – could be transferred either entirely (social physics) or partially (agent-based models, or ABMs) from the physical to the life sciences, we have distorted reality and, thereby, delayed the construction of a general dynamic theory of living systems. Is there a solution? Yes, but only if we abandon the deductive and analogical methods of complexity theorists and adopt the inductive method. With this approach it is possible to construct a realist and demand-side general dynamic theory, as in the case of the dynamic-strategy theory presented in this paper.complex living systems, unified theory, general theory of life, dynamics. Demand-side, methodology

The Neanderthal Enigma: A New Theoretical Approach

The limited material evidence relating to Neanderthal culture has enabled scholars to give free rein to their imaginations in reconstructing the mind and society of this extinct branch of Homo. Despite their remarkable success, the Neanderthals are often characterised as being incapable of symbolic thought, language, and action. Sociobiologists have even suggested that the Neanderthal mind was structurally different to that of modern humans. To provide a realist perspective on the “Neanderthal enigma”, a new general dynamic theory is presented and applied to the available evidence. This new theoretical approach shows that, despite possessing distinct mitochondrial DNA, Neanderthal minds and society were little different to those of modern humans, and that our ultimate success was far from inevitable.Neanderthal extinction, dynamic-strategy theory, evolution, symbolic thought, language, complex systems

The New Global Crisis Makers: Economic Intervention and the Loss of Strategic Leadership

The “crisis exaggerators” are telling us that current economic conditions amount to an “unprecedented” global economic recession. This is historically incorrect. What is unprecedented is the degree to which economic commentators and political leaders are talking up economic downturn. What is their agenda? Could it be an attempt to prepare the way for an “unprecedented” degree of government intervention in the economy? The “new interventionists” – some of whom, like Kevin Rudd, are now calling themselves “social democrats” – have attacked neoliberalism – the prevailing philosophy of Western governments over the past three decades – for failing to provide the direction and regulation needed to prevent the emergence of global financial crisis. But this misses the real point. Neoliberal governments have in fact been dangerously interventionist. Owing to the inflation-targeting policies they have championed, the dynamic mechanism of modern society has been disrupted, economic growth has slowed dramatically, and unemployment has risen – just as I warned in The Global Crisis Makers in 2000. The new global crisis makers are these new interventionists, who, ironically, not only accept neoliberal policies of inflation targeting but also intend to launch massive Keynesian and climate-mitigation programmes of intervention that will throw our strategic life-system into a downward spiral from which we will recover only with great difficulty and cost. Modern governments have lost the age-old art of strategic leadership, which once facilitated the effective operation of humanity’s dynamic life-system.global crisis, neoliberalism, social democracy, strategic leadership, economic intervention

Self-organisation or Selfcreation? From Social Physics to Realist Dynamics

The currently fashionable theory of self-organisation has its origins in statistical physics. Many believe that the underlying physics model, which is based on inanimate systems, can be employed to explain and predict the emergence of social structures, even of history itself. Some are even convinced that it will be possible to construct a social physics to displace the social sciences. The purpose of this article is to test those claims by reviewing some of the physical studies that have been made of human society, and its conclusion is that those claims cannot be substantiated. The underlying problem is that self-organisation is a one-dimensional theoretical concept that focuses exclusively upon supply-side interactions, from which order and complexity are said to ‘emerge’. But there is a better way. By systematic observation of living systems, both human and non-human, it has been possible to derive a general dynamic theory that embraces a more complex reality, involving a creative exchange between decision-making individuals and the changing needs of their society. I have called this interaction between the dynamic forces of demand and supply in living systems, the process of ‘strategic exchange’. And it is this strategic exchange that determines all other structural relationships in society, including the interaction between its constituent members. It is important in the social sciences, therefore, to move on from social physics to realist dynamics.agent-based modelling, complexity theory, dynamic-strategy theory, power laws, realist dynamics, self-organised criticality, Snooks-Panov algorithm, social physics, strategic demand

Dynamics Downunder: Australian Economic Strategy and Performance from the Palaeolithic to the Twenty-first Century

This essay attempts to quantify and explain the economic performance of the Great South Land – later called Australia – from the first migrations some 60,000 years ago to the present, and beyond. A general dynamic theory – the ‘dynamic-strategy’ theory – has been employed to provide a new interpretation of ‘dynamics Downunder’. It is shown, among other things, that the bold attempt from the 1910s to the 1960s to turn aside from the traditional development policy of exogenously driven natural-resource exploitation in order to embark on an endogenously determined dynamic process, has broken down during the course of the present generation. This was mainly due to a failure of ‘strategic leadership’ on the part of recent Australian governments that have, quite rightly, dismantled the framework of protection, but have failed to replace it with the infrastructure of strategically relevant technological ideas. Once again Australia’s economic prosperity depends heavily on the fluctuating fortunes of the global economy. While in the nineteenth century this took the form of reliance on the prosperity of Britain, today it centres on the continuing growth of Japan and China. This critical problem has been exacerbated by misconceived monetary policies that are damaging the central endogenous dynamic mechanism. What then of the future? It all depends on whether strategic leadership can ever be rediscovered

Self-organisation or Selfcreation? From Social Physics to Realist Dynamics

The currently fashionable theory of self-organisation has its origins in statistical physics. Many believe that the underlying physics model, which is based on inanimate systems, can be employed to explain and predict the emergence of social structures, even of history itself. Some are even convinced that it will be possible to construct a social physics to displace the social sciences. The purpose of this article is to test those claims by reviewing some of the physical studies that have been made of human society, and its conclusion is that those claims cannot be substantiated. The underlying problem is that self-organisation is a one-dimensional theoretical concept that focuses exclusively upon supply-side interactions, from which order and complexity are said to ‘emerge’. But there is a better way. By systematic observation of living systems, both human and non-human, it has been possible to derive a general dynamic theory that embraces a more complex reality, involving a creative exchange between decision-making individuals and the changing needs of their society. I have called this interaction between the dynamic forces of demand and supply in living systems, the process of ‘strategic exchange’. And it is this strategic exchange that determines all other structural relationships in society, including the interaction between its constituent members. It is important in the social sciences, therefore, to move on from social physics to realist dynamics

Climate Mitigation or Technological Revolution? A Critical Choice of Futures

Mankind currently is not only facing a major environmental challenge, it is embarking on a hugely risky enterprise — that of climate mitigation. This unprecedented global adventure is an attempt to change the nature and shape of human society on the grounds that our traditional market system has failed us. The current enterprise is hugely risky because it is based not on what has happened but on what we are told by “climate-mitigation engineers” might happen. The argument in this essay is simple but powerful, and can be outlined in the following five propositions: • The science of climate change is challenging but compelling, based as it is on an impressive and growing body of expert empirical research. What it shows is that recent climate change is human induced. Hence, further climate change and its mitigation are problems primarily for the social not natural sciences. • The “science” of climate mitigation is nonexistent, because orthodox social science has failed to model the dynamics of human society. And it is the dynamics of human society that will largely determine future climate change. • Orthodox economics, which has attempted to fill the void, has failed completely. Economic theory is suitable only for the analysis of small, shortrun issues that can be accommodated within a static framework — such as the price of a cup of tea; whereas the issue of climate mitigation is one of the biggest and most important issues humanity will ever face, it is long-run in nature, and it can only be adequately handled within a dynamic framework. As orthodox economics has been unable to develop a realist general dynamic theory, its practitioners have been forced to employ simplistic historicist models when analyzing future climate change. • What we need is a new science of human dynamics. The basis for this new science is provided by the author’s dynamic-strategy theory. It is a realist theory in the sense that it has been derived from a long-term, systematic observation of the fluctuating fortunes of both human society over the past 2 million years (myrs) and life over the past 4,000 myrs. • Economists have massively underestimated the costs of their proposed climate mitigation program aimed at stabilizing greenhouse-gas concentrations, because they have employed the inadequate static cost–benefit methodology. This essay takes a very different approach. By estimating the dynamic costs — essentially the costs of suppressing the imminent technological revolution that can only be identified in a realist dynamic framework — I have found that total costs will be almost 100 times greater than current estimates by the year 2100. This puts a comprehensive mitigation program totally out of the question. What, then, is to be done? This essay provides the answer.climate mitigation, technological revolution, human dynamics, economic intervention, dynamic costs and benefits