I read this line about McShea’s concept of “types of complexity“:
“The definitions that McShea proposes are based upon two dichotomies: object versus process, and hierarchical versus nonhierarchical structure.”
I think there may be some value in taking note of another perspective:
Objects may also be understood as process.
At first this may sound like a paradox, but if we use multispective thinking to reference science (physics) we may also understand objects as the process of interactions between particles.
Multispective thinking helps us exit the typical dialectical dynamics of “either/or” binary thinking. It opens up the door for a larger understanding.
The proposal here is not to invalidate McShea but rather to compliment his concepts.
Nevertheless, if we use the multispective lens, the the idea of 4 or 10 types of complexity seem limited. Through the multispective lens there is an infinite number of complexities.
Related in this blog:
Types of complexity (McShea and other) Read the blog posting >>