This is the set of levels of complexity that I wrote for a
book, titled "Mind Over Matter", that I worked on with my father's
intellectual supervision. It was intended to be a book translating his basic
core theoretical concepts, and how they fit together in a framework, into
plain English. My reason for doing it was that the language he used in his
books was/is so far beyond any ordinary person's ability to decipher that the
ideas aren't accessible to many of the people who could apply them
constructively. Particularly social science and medicine, in my mind, are two
areas of human thought that desperately need the insights my father was
generating in biology, but his books were hard even for many biologists to
decipher! A medical doctor or a human behaviorist, for example, would
look at one of his books and decide it wasn't useful for their area of
expertise, and they would be so wrong! But it is an inescapable fact that, in
his books, my father used extensive mathematical notation for the examples of
what he's describing. When he verbally explained his ideas to me, he used
entirely different examples and his work was perfectly comprehensible to this
non-scientist, non-mathematician. I said, "How come you don't just write it
like that?". He said, "Well, I write as if I'm talking to myself. The stuff I
write makes perfect sense to me." "Great, Dad. What about the rest of us?" The
truth is, he really didn't even think about making his work accessible to
readers at all. His only duty, as you saw in his "Autobiographical
Reminiscences" was to "report". So he did, and then moved on to the next area
of the frameword that he felt required his further thought or development. The
way he reported was not relevant, in his opinion.
Anyway, this was just a preliminary list, and very rough,
because I never did finish that manuscript. But my father read this list and
ultimately said it was acceptable. If he had felt I was going in the wrong
direction, he would have pointed it out, explained why, and worked with me on
the way it should go. Some people may believe that he let "errors" in
this list go because he was an indulgent and loving father (which he was,
indeed), but I can tell you from experience that, where his work was
concerned, he didn't stop explaining it unless I got it right. His work was
too important for him to leave, unchallenged, any gross misunderstandings. And
this was in print, mind you, where he could have gone over it with a red pen
if he needed to. He didn't make a single mark or point to any of these levels.
His only comment, after telling me I got it right, was to muse that he had
never even thought about categorizing the levels of complexity. But then he
shrugged and said that it wasn't what he was interested in. It was the
kind of thing he would leave for other people to do if they wanted to. So, I
did.
REGARDING ROSENNEAN COMPLEXITY
A Rudimentary Catalogue of Levels of Robert Rosen's
Complexity,
Copyright, Judith Rosen
Level One
The systems in this group are not alive and are not
complex. These are simple systems; they are both computable and
simulable. There may be different categories of simplicity... but this list
isn't about that. These simple systems may or may not have complex systems
incorporated in them as components, like the atom (see Level Two) but these
systems, themselves, are not defined as "complex" based on their own
organization. One example would be a car engine.
Level Two
Systems in Level Two are complex; in other words, they
satisfy the requirements for definition as a complex system according to
Robert
Rosen's theoretical framework. But they are not alive and do
not have other complex systems as components. An example: the atom. Atoms are
the first level of Rosennean Complexity, as far as is currently known. These
systems satisfy the requirements for definition as a complex system according
to Robert Rosen's theoretical framework.
Level Three
This is a huge group, with many possible subdivisions but
they all share certain crucial aspects of organization. Systems in this level
are still not alive, but are more complex than atoms by virtue of having other
complex systems as "parts or components" along with simple systems. They can
even have, in their organization, higher levels of complex systems
(ie: organisms) as some of their "parts". This group includes global
weather, ecosystems and social systems. (Note: I didn't ask my father, but I
suspect that systems in this group lack an "anticipatory model" as part of
their organization. That would be an interesting area, in my opinion, for
discussion here.)
Level Four
Life! Here we have single-celled organisms. "Life is an
emergent property of a sufficiently complex system", according to Robert
Rosen. In this level of complexity, systems exhibit the qualities that satisfy
the Rosennean definition of living systems.(Note: All systems at higher
levels of complexity than this are also living.) In these systems, there
is already an anticipatory model inherent in the organization of each
system, which acts as a "brain" for the organism. Examples, which may need to
be subdivided further, would include algae, bacteria, protozoa, yeasts, and so
forth. (Caveat: Viruses may need to be categorized in an earlier subgroup
separate from the rest, because they are not quite "alive" by themselves yet
have the potential to achieve life when certain necessary aspects to their
organization are provided, such as by a host organism.)
Level Five
This level is comprised of multicellular living systems that
do not have a central nervous system or brain, only their internal
anticipatory model to guide them. Example: Multicellular plants.
Level Six
The systems in this level are multicellular living systems
that have a rudimentary brain and central nervous system. The brain in
these organisms is purely sensory and motor processing. The anticipatory model
is still the guiding force of these organisms. One example:
worms.
Level Seven
Multicellular organisms with more advanced brain
development. These organisms are capable of learning and can use their brains
to adapt to surprise developments in their environments as a survival tactic.
[This is a huge group that could benefit from further subdivision but I don't
have the expertise necessary to do the dividing myself.] Insects such as bees,
and other creatures like birds, mammals, fish, octopi, all fit within this
group. This group displays the quality of Intelligence. Intelligence seems to
be another feature of increasing complexity within the brain.
Level Eight
Multicellular organisms with brains of sufficient complexity
to achieve consciousness. Robert Rosen described consciousness as an emergent
property of a sufficiently complex brain. (Note: He has written extensively
about the difference between the physical organ, referred to as the brain, and
the entity generated by it, referred to as the mind.) Organisms in this group
have achieved the ability to think abstractly and apply that ability in the
material world. Some might argue that human beings are the only organism in
this level of Rosennean Complexity. [I tend, based on my observation of our
species, to disbelieve that, however!] The ability to conceive an idea and
then create it as a real object is unique to this level of complexity.
Intelligence, consciousness, and the talent of abstract thinking combine to
create..... what? Perhaps the next level of complexity?
Level Nine
As far as we currently know, there is nothing beyond Level
Eight. However, the power of abstract thought leads us to speculate that it is
likely there are infinite levels.
***************************************************************************************************************************************************************