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.
***************************************************************************************************************************************************************