Is Simpler Better?
Monday, June 13th, 2005
Kurt Cobb writes: Is Complexity bad for us? Joseph Tainter first posited in his book, The Collapse of Complex Societies,
that complex societies most frequently attempt to solve their problems
by increasing their complexity. This usually requires the input of
additional energy from people or fuel sources or both. This strategy
may be a good one when returns from complexity are high. But, such a
strategy may also subject a society to collapse. Returns tend to
diminish as complexity increases. Ultimately, returns go negative. In
short, more complexity isn’t necessarily better. For Tainter there are
many reasons to believe that contemporary civilization has reached the point of diminishing returns from complexity.
If he is correct, this calls into question proposals for technical
fixes for our energy problems since by definition those fixes will
increase complexity in an energy-starved world. Will solar platforms in
space or a vastly increased number of nuclear power plants lead to a
more stable, sustainable society? There are many ecological reasons to
doubt this in the long run. But there are historical reasons to believe
that these things might not even work in the short run, say, the next
several decades. Increased complexity may result in less resiliency in
our current world system making it vulnerable to novel or persistent
shocks. Terrorist attacks on infrastructure and proposals to militarize
space are just two that relate to the examples given above. The alternative would be to simplify our systems. (06/13/05)
more…





