Book Review: Complex Society - In the middle of a middle world (B. Radej, M. Golobi?)

"This is an ambitious book in which the authors contextualise contemporary developments regarding the relevance and utility of models derived from complexity theory for dealing with social complexity at various levels by reference to enduring debates in philosophy, social science and the philosophy of science. By doing so they develop both theory and concepts which are coherent, convincing and original. The literature on complexity is hefty by any standards but the authors’ knowledge and understanding of key issues, debates and sources is such that the finished product is substantive in all senses. By synthesising this contextual material with original case studies which test the practical veracity of the ideas and concepts they develop, the authors have provided an innovative framework for thinking about the challenges individuals, organisations and wider social movements face at this juncture. Their approach simultaneously takes on board the strengths of complexity theory but also acknowledges its limitations and in so doing makes the case for an alternative perspective in amongst already existing approaches. Overall, this is no mean feat, and ought to be welcomed and applauded.

The authors draw upon existing literature concerning the utility of complexity theory to set the parameters of their own interpretation of the value of this perspective. A deep knowledge of social philosophy is threaded throughout the text which implicitly provides an excellent primer in social philosophy for students at all levels. This is supported by a very useful overview of key concepts and ideas associated with different strands of complexity theory. Although relatively novel, this literature is voluminous, and inevitably the authors approach reflects their own foci and preferences, and as such is selective, albeit necessarily so. Sources that nevertheless might usefully have been drawn upon, but were not (see ‘Potential additional sources', below). None of these are essential however as it would be impossible to cover every contribution to this debate as it manifest across disciplinary domains.

I do think that the authors make an original contribution with this manuscript. Although not everyone will be convinced of the merits of their key ideas, the integration of multiple perspectives from diverse literatures, and in-depth knowledge of the links between contemporary developments and the history of philosophy makes for an inspiring read.

The manuscript works well as both an original synthesis of diverse theoretical perspectives as well as their application to the specific issues encapsulated within each of the three case studies.

The manuscript works well as a coherent exemplification of the value of a meso level responses to social complexity. Each of the three embedded case studies functions to test the veracity of the perspective developed by the author. The case studies are pitched at levels which enable the exposition of an overarching cohesive framework. Each of these studies is methodologically robust and includes sufficient detail of method and analysis to enable readers to subject evidence to critical appraisal. In my view, the data is strong, lending credence to the overall model. Of course, the objectives of these studies are such that inevitably there are alternative ways in which such data might be interpreted, For some this is as it should be, while for others it highlights the limitations of complexity as a framework for understanding social dynamics. I doubt that one particular study, project, manuscript or whatever would bring these opposing perspectives together.

It is worth mentioning that the case studies are very specific to the domains within which they are conducted. The language and method are highly technical and so the detail of these studies may not appeal broadly beyond the specific domains concerned. The authors make appropriate efforts to generalise but still this remains an issue, and not one that is easily resolvable. It is more a matter of balance, which thankfully tips marginally favourably.

The approach which the authors develop in this manuscript – a meso-level: hybrid approach to the understanding and intervening in social phenomena within an inherently uncertain environment and future – is one that personally I find convincing. In specifying a mid-way between micro and macro it seeks to transcend the duality of art and science. In my view, it broadly succeeds. I am less convinced, however, that those on the opposing side of the debate will be convinced. On balance, this is probably as much as can reasonably be expected.

This book will be particularly welcome in the broadly defined social sciences, including social policy political science and sociology. It will also be relevant to methods programmes at a generic level across the social sciences, both as a primer in the philosophy of method, but also, via its case studies, as an example of the interplay between method, theory and outcomes. It might also be useful in practice based ‘clinical’ disciplines – public health, health sciences, social work – although it will be for instructors and students to make these links. It would be very relevant to programmes concerning the philosophy of science or social philosophy within philosophy and broader humanities departments, where it would be welcomed as a challenging, stimulating contribution. By the same token, however, it is written at a high academic level, which makes it less likely that it will appeal to non-academic audiences.

Book review by Vernon Press

Readers' reviews: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/book-complex-society-reviews-bojan-radej/

Link to the manuscript presentation: https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/social-complexity-complex-society-middle-world-bojan-bojan-radej/