> On 02-Apr-2019, at 11:24 PM, Brian Holmes
> wrote:
>
> Because of this permeability, highly invasive techniques are continually
> designed and applied in order to get people to behave, not as their own
> system with its own autopoietic compass, but instead, as a subordinate or
> even
On 03.04.19 11:38, James Wallbank wrote:
> Felix, this is the sort of post that social media conditions me to want
> to click "Like" but also to feel that it's an inadequate response.
>
> I'd only add (or perhaps, draw out):
>
> * "Managing" is the wrong way to think about maximising human
Felix Stalder wrote:
On 30.03.19 21:19, Brian Holmes wrote:
However, the surging sense of intellectual mastery brought by the
phrase, "managing complexity," declines precipitously when you try to
define either "management" or "complexity."
Complexity is relati
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:26 AM Prem Chandavarkar wrote:
there is no neutral outside ever available. One is always within a system,
> or rather, always within a hierarchy of systems, almost all of them complex
> and polycentric. Just as when one is within a room one can never see all
> four
ceive and organise
ourselves works in the opposite direction. The economic assumption of the
invisible hand as a means of managing complexity rests on the assumption of
each individual as a selfish maximiser of his/her own utility. In other words,
governance and market regulation seek to push
Hi Felix --
The 'size' of the system is an externally applied abstraction in that, unless
one is speaking theoretically, a 'system' is always a subset of wider system: a
subset conveniently defined via limits (of interaction with that wider system)
and so-called boundary conditions. If one
This is a brilliant thread, with fundamental interventions from everyone
who has posted. I'm also told the Technopolitics group is meeting in
Vienna, which is something like serendipity. I'm gonna throw in my two bits
here as well.
Felix's idea of "managing complexity" suggests a way
There are simpler ways of viewing this:
1. The 'complexity' is so complex that individual actors do not matter
any more, and what is there is new emergent phenomenon so complex it's
nearly impossible to understand; we need to spend our lives analyzing it
while in semi-catatonic paralysis.
On 30.03.19 21:19, Brian Holmes wrote:
> However, the surging sense of intellectual mastery brought by the
> phrase, "managing complexity," declines precipitously when you try to
> define either "management" or "complexity."
Complexity is relatively easy
I would define complexity as the interaction between autonomous agents. An
ecosystem is surely the prime example, with the multiple destinies of multiple
species playing out in a circumscribed milieu, with limited resources, and so
inevitably one at the expense of the other – or with one being
Hello,
As I recall ‘complexity’ as discussed extensively by Henri Lefebvre is related
more to urbanism (as Joe mentioned) than management. Complexity is more about
the politics and social realities relating to the ‘right to the city’ than
managing systems. Managerial complexity invariably leads
.
In polycentric systems and in non-linear systems, the term ‘managing
complexity’ is an oxymoron. I find a similar situation in my discipline of
architecture where the latest buzz word is ‘designing for sustainability’.
‘Design' is used here in an interpretation very similar to ‘management’ - the
desire
, sewage, drainage...) operating under
> our pavements. They do not compete, but when one sees the same pavement
> being dug up over and over again, one sees the difficulty of organising
> their coexistence.
>
> Joe.
>
>
>
> Le 30 mars 2019 à 21:19, Brian Holmes a
> écr
oexistence.
Joe.
> Le 30 mars 2019 à 21:19, Brian Holmes a écrit :
>
> However, the surging sense of intellectual mastery brought by the phrase,
> "managing complexity," declines percipitously when you try to define either
> "management" or "compl
hat ordering capacity to ever larger amounts of
> people. Maybe a better computer (AI) could solve our present problems?
>
> However, the surging sense of intellectual mastery brought by the phrase,
> "managing complexity," declines percipitously when you try to define either
&g
, and personal computers extend that ordering capacity to
ever larger amounts of people. Maybe a better computer (AI) could solve our
present problems?
However, the surging sense of intellectual mastery brought by the phrase,
"managing complexity," declines percipitously when you try to def
16 matches
Mail list logo
