Postscript : Chaos, Complexity, and Metaphysics (continued)

Introduction
 In Tractate 16 and Tractate 17 we established the new direction of theoretical metaphysics. Theoretical metaphysics, with the onset of Volumes I, II, and III of this work, now becomes the exploration of what this work proposes lies outside the physical universe and the exploration of the interrelationship such an existence has to what lies outside itself.

Such being the case we can apply our model of metaphysics to an established field of study namely: Chaos and Complexity.

As with philosophy, mathematicians perceive the problem regarding chaos and complexity to be either/or in nature.

Either

Complexity arises from chaos

Or

Chaos arises from complexity.

But just as the philosophers could not come to grips with the solution to their paradox when they perceived the solution to be either/or in nature. Likewise mathematicians may be unable to come to grips with the solution to their paradox as long as they perceive the solution to be either/or in nature.

It is metaphysics, which can provide the solution to the mathematical paradox regarding chaos and complexity. The metaphysical system of ‘being’ being ‘Being’ is a model, which can demonstrate the resolution to the mathematicians’ paradox just as it provided a solution to the oldest of philosophical paradoxes.

Because the process involves an application of metaphysics to the ‘real’ world we shall now consider the application of this metaphysical solution to the paradox regarding complexity and chaos to be a ‘practical’ utilization of metaphysics or in short, practical metaphysics.

We shall begin by exploring the concept regarding which system is the most rational of what we now understand may be three options:

Complexity emerges from chaos
Chaos emerges from complexity
Both occur simultaneously

As we explore the issues of which emerges from which, order emerging from chaos or chaos emerging from complexity, we shall begin to understand that there are not just two options nor are there just three options rather there are a myriad of options from which to choose. Due to the lack of space and time, we shall limit our precursory discussion to twenty- eight options and limit our in-depth discussion to four options. As we shall see, the third option of the three listed above emerges as the most rational of the remaining twenty-eight options, which in turn emerge in our precursory discussion.

The outcome of the discussion demonstrates: Complexity/order shows itself to be indispensable to the system as a whole as opposed to being ‘simply’ a product of the whole of the system.

Likewise, chaos/disorder shows itself to be indispensable to the system as a whole as opposed to being ‘simply’ a product of the whole of the system.

The understanding of the relationship regarding chaos/disorder and complexity/order, as might be expected, emerges from philosophical thought and in particular from metaphysical thought.

Applying Ockham’s Razor to metaphysical systems we obtain systems reduced to their simplest forms. Such a form, the simplest form, is the most versatile model format to use when exploring a subject as complex as the interrelationship existing between chaos, complexity, and the whole of reality.

As a preliminary step, we will examine visuals of a few metaphysical/mathematical/scientific systems, which could emerge from three basic components: individuality/order/active complexity, action/chaos/the universe, and summation/order/passive complexity.

We will represent the three, Strange Attractors, Complexity, and Chaos, through linguistic symbolization and definition as follows: Complexity is divided into two forms: Passive and Active. Passive Complexity is defined as Complexity/order that has been established and Active Complexity is defined as Complexity/order that is in the process of being developed/created.

Linguistic symbolization: Definitions:

  1. The Strange Attractor – The ‘seat’/soul/nucleus of Active Complexity
  2. Active Complexity - ‘being’ n: individuality emerging
  3. Chaos - being vb - active: The Universe, action, Process/reality, the region within which creation, development takes place
  4. Passive Complexity – ‘being’ n: Individuality complete
  5. Complexity/Order - ‘Being’ n: summation, totality, the whole
  6. Existence - being vb - passive: the state of being

At this point, a few words regarding Active Complexity are critical to the discussion. Active Complexity can be classified into two distinct types:

Active complexity of active action:

Active complexity of passive action:

Active complexity of active action is the manifestation of a pattern established by a strange attractor (knowing in nature) through the forces of free will/choice.

Active complexity of passive action is the manifestation of a pattern established by a strange attractor (knowing and/or unknowing in nature) through the forces of determinism/no choice.

Distinguishing between these two forms of Active Complexity leads to intuitively obvious conclusions in and of themselves. As such these intuitive conclusions will not be addressed within this dialectic. The full examination of such intuitive conclusions can be found within Volumes I, II, and III of this work: The War and Peace of a New Metaphysical Perception.

It may help to use charts to define linguistic symbolizations in relationship to religious, scientific, mathematical, and philosophical perceptions. The purpose of such charts is to help those with religious, scientific, or philosophical leanings to better understand the discussion.