Science, civilization and democracy

493

SCIENCE, CIVILIZATION AND DEMOCRACY Values, systems, structures and affinities Ilya Prigogine

It is argued here that mankind is in an age of transition. Professor Prigogine presents a penetrating perspective on the nature of science and technology, observing that science is complex and probabilistic where the notions of irreversibility randomness and bifurcation are profoundly altering hitherto This new reconceptualization of unchallenged concepts. science has implications for the human sciences and for planning-it is leading to new dialogues of man with man, and of man with nature. The Zeitmotiv of this article is that the future and this implies ethical is not given: time is a cofistruction, responsibilities.

MANKIND IS IN AN AGE OF TRANSITION. Interestingly enough, science is also in an age of transition. We are not only witnessing a ‘scientification’ of technology, to use the term mentioned by Umberto Colombo. Something deeper is happening: the dimensions of the scientific endeavour are changing, and this alters the meaning of scientific rationality, and therefore the relations between science, civilization and democracy.

Professor Ilya Prigogine, Nobel Laureate (1977), is Professor at the Free University of Brussels, Service de Chimie Physique II, Code Postal 231, Campus Plaine ULB, Boulevard du Triomphe, 1050 Brussels, Belgium; Director, Centre of Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics, University of Texas; and Special Adviser to the Commission of the European Communities. Professor Prigogine expresses his appreciation to Sir Hermann Bondi and Mr John Hartland for suggestions and discussions. Thanks are also due to Peter Allen, Gregoire Nicolis, Serge Perhaut and Mich& Sanglier for their active help in elaboration of the text. This article is an edited version of a paper given at the VIth Parliamentary and Scientific Conference of the Council of Europe, Tokyo, June 1985, and the editor of Futures wishes to thank the Council of Europe for permission to publish the article here. For discussion of this text and others, including a synthesis of a number of the themes discussed in this article, see, EuropeJapan: Futures in Science, Technoloo and Democracy (Butterworths, Guildford, UK, 1986).

FUTURES August 1996

0016-32871861040493-15503.000

1986 Butterworth & Co(Publishers)

Ltd

494

Science, civilization and democracy

I am especially proud of two breakthroughs for which As a European, Europe is responsible, and which seem to be of decisive importance for the future-the formulation of the project of modern science in the 17th century, and the promulgation of the ideal of democracy. Europeans live at intersection of at least two different systems of values-scientific rationality

the on

one side, and collective behaviour rationality on the other. This polarity imposed by historical evolution could not but lead to some stress which was to be felt in much European thought. It is of great importance, particularly at present, involved

that we reach a better harmony between in science, democracy and civilization.

the

different

rationalities

I believe that the clash between these two forms of rationality was real in the classical perspective; however, the main message of this communication is that we were victims classical science, saying

by Albert

classical science be eliminated.

of a distorted the intelligible Einstein

representation was identified

is that

were to describe

time

is an

of science. It is true that, for with the immutable. A famous ‘illusion’:

a fundamental

the ultimate

level from

which

aims

time

of

would

On the one hand, this attempt to reach eternity through reason appears as grandiose; on the other, it leads to a description of nature viewed as a passive tool, dominated by the rationality of the human mind, and therefore radically alien to it. In this perspective, living systems become, as lucidly observed by If life as a whole is alien to the basic laws of Jacques Monod, ‘strange objects’. nature,

this will be even more

so for man.

Monod’s

conclusion

is well known:

Now does (Man) at last realise that, like a gypsy, he lives on the boundary of an alien world. A world that is deaf to his music, just as indifferent to his hopes as to his sufferings or his crimes. l continues This image of ‘science’ ority. It permeates many aspects often identified the distinguished

to be propagated of human

with timelessness and equilibrium. economist Walter A. Weisskopf:

The Newtonian paradigm underlying the economy according to the pattern analogy to the planetary system, to a system ruled by endogenous factors moving to a determined, predictable

with

sciences,

considerable

in which To

quote

auth-

rationality

is

a conclusion

of

classical and neo-classical economics interpreted developed in classical physics and mechanics, in machine and to clockwork: a closed autonomous of a highly selective nature, self-regulating and point of equilibrium.2

The importance of this distortion imposed by the classical cultural perception of nature cannot be overestimated. Let us mention the introduction to a UNESCO colloquium:

vision

on

our

For more than a century the sector of scientific activity has been growing to such an extent within the surrounding cultural space that it seems to be replacing the totality of culture itself. Some believe that this is merely an illusion, due to its high growth rate Others consider that the recent triumph of science entitles it at least to rule over the . whole of culture . Others again, appalled by the danger of man and society being manipulated if they come under the sway of science, perceive the spectre of cultural disaster looming in the distance.3 In this

text,

science

appears

as a threat

to civilization.

Much

of the

most

FUTURES August 1966

Science, civilization and democracy

significant

recent

intellectual

pessimism,

clearly

present

in the works

only some

well-known

Strauss,

to quote

In the USA, is more

history

of Europe

expressed

involvements; straightforward

in terms

by

Sartre,

this

cultural

Freud

or L&i-

names.

we can also find a somewhat

often

is tainted

of Heidegger,

495

diffident

of ecological

attitude

activism,

but generally, both in Japan positivist attitude, in which

to science,

but it

of fear of technological

and the USA we often meet a science is considered as a simple

recipe for success. Whatever this may be, we are witnessing today the birth of a new scientific rationality, which brings closer the ‘two cultures’. Therefore this seems the right

moment

realities Laws

to relaunch

the

and new perspectives

‘science-culture’

debate,

of contemporary

in the

light

of the

science.

of nature

Science

and

interacted

civilization on

universe’.

have

intellectual

As beautifully

interacted

and

moral

expressed

through

technology.

planes,

via

by Sir Karl

the

They

have

‘conception

of

also the

Popper:

There is at least one philosophic problem in which all thinking men are interested. It is the problem of cosmology: the problem of understanding the world-including ourselves, and our knowledge, as part of the world.4 The role of internal and external centre of a heated debate. There the

ideology

of science

context. The formulation

factors in the history of science remains at the is, however, a fact which cannot be dismissed:

is strongly

of modern

science

influenced

by

by Isaac

Newton

absolute monarchy, under the sign of an Almighty rationality. The Western concept of ‘law of nature’ from

its judicial

according

and religious

to the omniscience

resonances:

vision,

time

could

indeed

occurred

God, simply

to a ruler. Therefore, embodiment

and

cultural

in a period

of

‘supreme garant’ of cannot be separated

the ideal of knowledge

we may ascribe

be no distinction between past and future. which the scientist represents the human

its historical

For Him,

is patterned there

would

in this perspective, in of a transcendental

only be an illusion .5

The atemporal world of classical physics was shaken by the industrial revolution. One of the greatest intellectual novelties of that new period was probably 1865:

the formulation

of the laws of thermodynamics

by Rudolf

Clausius

in

Die Energie der Welt ist konstant. Die Entropic der Welt strebt einern Maximum

tu.

In this view the world has a history. But beware: as entropy leads to disorder, to the forgetting of initial conditions, this history is a history of decay, of degradation; a history expressed by the increase of entropy. It expresses the anxiety of losing the resources which have made the industrial revolution possible; it expresses a deep pessimism, which is also present in the relativism of Darwin’s theory of biological evolution. As is well known, in Darwin’s theory random fluctuations are selected through interaction with the environ-

ment . This gives the appearance FUTURES August 1996

of complexification.

But globally

everything

is

496

Science, &iltzatm

running

and democrq

down.

This

scientific literature. Classical science eternity. decay.

fundamental is associated

Nineteenth

century

But the history

trophes Empire.

pessimism with

science

the

is still

negation

cannot

in most

of time

is associated

of our world

present

with

in the

a concept

be a succession

of the

name

of

of time

as

of historical

catas-

only, such as Gibbon’s description of the decline and fall of the Roman After all, if there was decay, there must also have been some moments

of creation.

The history of the world presented as a progressive decay clashes so essential for our adherence to the ideals of with the vision of progress, democracy. Curiously enough, this simple truth seems to have been first perceived as

by artists:

Mondrian

or

some of the most important creators of our century (such were deeply aware of the duality between

Kandinsky)

destruction

and creation.

At present,

physics

It is this duality

is in search

which

of a third

time,

inspired

their

reducible

creative

neither

effort.

to repetition

nor to decay. Reconceptualization We now move human history,

of science

to the 20th

century,

whatever

perspective

to our

century.

we consider.

It is a turning This

science with two major breakthroughs-relativity and which opened the way to new frontiers, the first one the other to a new microscopic world. processes, The

novelty

constants, This

inherent

in

such as the velocity

heralded

these

of quantum

consider

scientific

information

revolution

and

mechanics

revolutions

is the for there

cannot which

the biotechnological

we

be

in in

quantum mechanics, to large-scale cosmic role

c, and Planck’s

in physics;

point started

of universal constant,

overestimated

experience

revolution.

h.

was no empirical

theory: it could be applied in the same way whatever this was no more the case in the universe described

modern physics. The importance two

revolutions

of light in a vacuum,

the end of universality

constant in Newton’s scale of the objects-but

the

two

century

the by

if we

today-the

It is amazing

to

notice that these revolutions started through the work of a few scientists (no towns such as Gottingen, more than a few hundred) 1iving in small university Leydon or Cambridge. At present, it is one of our basic aims to discover some comparable small disturbances (the hopeful fluctuations) which could have a comparable effect on human life. Still, quantum mechanics and relativity shared some of the basic aspects of classical science. In classical science, the basic laws were deterministic (at the level of the wave function for quantum mechanics) and time-reversible. Future and past play the same role. In contrast, wherever we look today, we find evolution, diversification and instabilities. A fundamental reconceptualization of science is going on in the second half of the 20th century. We have long known that we are living in a pluralistic world in which we find deterministic as well as stochastic phenomena, reversible as well as irreversible. We observe deterministic phenomena such as the frictionless pendulum or the trajectory of the moon around the Earth; we know that the frictionless pendulum is also reversible. But other pro-

FUTURES August 1966

Science, civilization and democracy

cesses

are irreversible,

as diffusion,

acknowledge

the existence

of referring

the

moment

variety

of the Big Bang.

or chemical

of stochastic of natural What

reactions;

processes

and we are obliged

to

if we want to avoid the paradox

phenomena

has changed

497

to a program

since the beginning

printed

at the

of this century

is

our evaluation of the relative importance of these four types of phenomena. The artificial may be deterministic and reversible. The natural contains essential elements of randomness and irreversibility. This leads to a new vision of matter-no longer passive, as in the mechanical worldview, with spontaneous activity. This change is so deep that I believe

but endowed we can really

speak about a new dialogue of man with nature. At the start of this century, continuing the tradition of the classical research programme, physicists were almost unanimous in admitting that the fundamental laws of the universe were deterministic and reversible. Processes which did not fit this scheme were supposed to be exceptions, some complexity, which had itself to be accounted ignorance, or lack of control on the variables involved. century,

we are more

and more

numerous

even artefacts due to for by invoking our Now, at the end of this

in believing

that

laws of nature are irreversible and stochastic; that deterministic laws are applicable only in very limited circumstances.

the fundamental and reversible

It is interesting to inquire how such a change could occur over a relatively short time. It is the outcome of unexpected results, obtained in quite different fields of physics and chemistry such as elementary particles, cosmology or the study of self-organization in far from equilibrium systems. Who would have believed, 50 years ago, that most and perhaps all elementary particles are unstable?; that we could speak about the evolution of the universe as a whole?; that far from equilibrium, molecules may communicate, to use anthropomorphic

terms,

These relation

unexpected discoveries have had a drastic effect between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ sciences. According

as witnessed

in the ‘chemical

clocks’? on our outlook to the classical

on the view,

there was a sharp distinction between simple systems, such as studied by physics or chemistry, and complex systems, such as studied in biology and human

science.

Indeed,

one

could

not

imagine

a greater

contrast

than

that

which exists between the simple models of classical dynamics, or the simple behaviour of a gas or a liquid, and the complex processes we discover in the evolution of life or in the history of the human societies. This gap is now being filled. Over the past decade, we have learned that, in non-equilibrium conditions, simple materials such as a gas or a liquid, or simple chemical reactions, can acquire complex behaviour. We have already mentioned the second law of thermodynamics, which expresses interest Today,

the

increase

of entropy

of thermodynamics interest shifts to

for isolated

concentrated non-equilibrium

systems.

on isolated systems

surroundings through an entropy flow. Let us difference with the description of classical mechanics. are dealing with ‘embedded’ systems: interaction through entropy flow plays an essential to objects like towns or living systems, embedding in their environment.

FUTURES August 1996

For

a long

time,

the

systems at equilibrium. interacting with their emphasize an essential In thermodynamics, we with the outside world

role. This immediately which can only survive

brings us closer because of their

498

Science, civilization and democracy

There is another basic difference with mechanics. Suppose we have some foreign celestial body approaching the earth: this would lead to a deformation of the earth’s trajectory, which would remain forever-dynamic systems have no way to forget perturbations. This is no longer the case when we include dissipation. A damped pendulum will reach a position of equilibrium, whatever the initial perturbation. We can now also understand in quite general terms what happens when we drive a system far from equilibrium. The ‘attractor’ which dominated the behaviour of the system near equilibrium may become unstable, as a result of the flow of matter and energy which we direct at the system. Non-equilibrium becomes a source of order; new types of attractors, more complicated ones, may appear, and give to the system remarkable new space-time properties. Consider two examples which are widely studied today. The so-called BCnard instability is a striking example of instability in a stationary state giving rise to a phenomenon of spontaneous self-organization; the instability is due to a vertical temperature gradient set up in a horizontal liquid layer. The lower face is maintained to a given temperature, higher than that of the upper. As a result of these boundary conditions, a permanent heat flux is set up, moving from bottom to top. For a small difference in temperature, heat can be conveyed by conduction, without any convection; but when the imposed temperature gradient reaches a threshold value, the stationary state (the fluid’s state of ‘rest’) becomes unstable: convection arises, corresponding to the coherent motion of a huge number of molecules, increasing the rate of heat transfer. In appropriate conditions, the convection produces a complex spatial organization in the system. There is another way of looking at this phenomenon. Two elements are involved-heat flow and gravitathe force of gravitation has hardly tion. Under equilibrium conditions, any effect on a thin layer of the order of 10 mm. In contrast, far from equilibrium, gravitation gives rise to macroscopic structures. Non-equilibrium matter becomes much more sensitive to the outer world conditions than matter at equilibrium. I like to say that at equilibrium, matter is blind; far from equilibrium it may begin to ‘see’. Consider secondly the example of chemical oscillations. Ideally speaking, we have a chemical reaction whose state we control through the appropriate injection of chemical products and the elimination of waste products. Suppose that two of the components are formed respectively by red and blue molecules in comparable quantities. We would expect to observe some kind of blurred colour with perhaps occasionally some flash of red or blue spots. This is, however, not what actually happens. For a whole class of such chemical reactions, we see in sequence the whole vessel become red, then blue, then red again: we have a ‘chemical clock’. In a sense, this violates all our intuitions about chemical reactions. We used to speak of chemical reactions as being produced by molecules moving in a disordered fashion and colliding at random. But, in order to synchronize their periodic change, the molecules must be able to ‘communicate’ in a sense. In other words, we are dealing here with new supermolecular scales-both in time and space-produced by chemical activity. The basic conditions to be satisfied for such chemical oscillations to occur is FUTURES August 1999

Science, ciuilizafion and democracy

499

auto- or cross-catalytic relations, leading to ‘non-linear’ behaviour, such as described in numerous studies of modern biochemistry. Remember that nucleic acids produce proteins, which in turn lead to the formation of nucleic acids. There is an autocatalytic loop involving proteins and nucleic acids. Non-linearity and far-from equilibrium situations are closely related; their effect is that they lead to a multiplicity of stable states (in contrast to near-fromequilibrium situations, where we find only one stable state). This multiplicity is to be seen on a ‘bifurcation diagram’ (Figure 1). In Figure 1 we have plotted the solution of the problem, X, against some bifurcation parameter A (X would be for example the concentration in some chemical component, and A could be related to the duration that the molecules are left in the chemical reactor). For some critical value of control parameter, say AC, new solutions emerge. Moreover, near the bifurcation point, the system has a ‘choice’ between two branches-we could therefore expect a stochastic behaviour: near a bifurcation point, fluctuations play an important role. We have said that dissipative systems may forget perturbations: these systems are characterized by attractors. The most elementary attractors are points or lines such as one may see on Figures 2(a) and 2(b). On Figure 2(a), we have a point attractor P in a two-dimensional space (Xl and X2 may be concentrations of some species): whatever the initial conditions, the system will evolve necessarily towards P. On Figure 2(b), we have a line-attractor: whatever the initial conditions, the system will eventually evolve on this line, called a limit-cycle. But attractors may present a more complex structure; they may be composed of a set of points such as on Figure 2(c). Their distribution may be dense enough to permit us to ascribe them an effective (non-zero) dimensionality. For example, the dimension of the attractor on Figure 2(c) may be any real number between 2 and 3. Following the terminology of Benoit Mandelbrot, one may say that this is a ‘fractal’ attractor. Such systems have unique properties, reminiscent of, for example, turbulence which we encounter in everyday experience. They combine both fluctuations and stability. The system is driven to the attractor; still, as this one is formed by so ‘many’ points, we may expect large fluctuations. One speaks

b-

Figure 1. Bifurcation

of stationary

FUTURES August 1986

Multiple Jolutions

states for variable X, plotted against

control

500

Science, civilization and democracy

x

2

EL P

c

Dimemion:2cdc3

5

a

b

Figure 2. Three types of attractors for dynamic fractal (non-integer dimension) attractor (2~).

C

systems.

Point attractor

(2a); line (limit-cycle)

often of ‘attracting chaos’. These large fluctuations are connected to a great sensitivity in respect of initial conditions. The distance between neighbouring trajectories grows exponentially in time (this growth is characterized by the socalled Lyapounoff exponents). Attracting chaos has now been observed in a series of situations including chemical systems or hydrodynamics; but the importance of these new concepts goes far beyond physics and chemistry properly. Let us indicate some recently studied examples. We know that climate has fluctuated violently in the past. Climatic conditions that prevailed during the past 200-300 million years were extremely different to what they are at present. During these periods, with the exception of the quaternary era (which began about 2 million years ago) there was practically no ice on the continents, and the sea level was higher than its present value by about 80 metres. A striking feature of the quaternary era is the with an average periodicity of 100 appearance of a series of glaciations, thousand years, on which is superposed an important amount of ‘noise’. What is the source of these violent fluctuations (Figure 3), which have obviously played an important role in our history.-3 There is no indication that the intensity of solar energy may be responsible. A recent analysis by C. and G. Nicolis6 has shown that these fluctuations can be modelled in terms of four independent variables, which form a non-linear dynamic system leading to a chaotic attractor of dimension 3.1 embedded in a phase space of dimension 4. The variability of climate could have been thought of as resulting from the interplay of a large number of variables, acting in a deterministic fashion; it would then be a situation very similar to the outcome of the law of large numbers. The new insight is that it is not so. The temporal complexity is only due to four independent variables. We may therefore speak of an intrinsic complexity or unpredictability of climate. In a quite different field, recent work’ has shown that the electrical activity of the brain in deep sleep as monitored by electro-encephalogram (EEG) may be modelled by a fractal attractor. Deep sleep EEG may be described by a dynamic involving five variables; again, this is remarkable as it shows that the brain acts as a system possessing intrinsic complexity and unpredictability. It is this instability which permits the amplification of inputs related to FUTURES August 1966

Science, ciuilization and democracy

501

-2

I

I

I

I

400

200

600

600 Time (IO’ yews BP)

Figure

3. Series of temperatures

characteristic

of the earth’s

global climate

for the past million

years.

sensory

impression

the human instability. would A new

in the awake

brain cannot Is biological

be the basic

state.

be an accident. evolution the

ingredient

Obviously,

the dynamic

complexity

of

It must have been selected for its very history of dynamic instability, which

of creativity

characteristic

of human

existence?

rationality

Let us summarize

our main

findings.

The

universe

has a history.

This

history

includes the creation of complexity through mechanisms of bifurcation. These mechanisms act in far from equilibrium conditions as realized in the earth’s biosphere. Obviously, to understand the origin of irreversibility on a cosmic scale, we would have to turn to the origin of the universe, but we do not attempt Peter

this here. Allen likes to compare

the evolutionary

pattern

represented

by a tree of

bifurcations through the example of origami (Figure 4). A piece of paper can be folded into many striking forms according to a ‘tree’ of evolution. Characteristic traits emerge over time, and critical moments exist after which the evolution is definitely towards one particular form and not another. The emergent properties of a ‘horse’, a ‘vase’, a ‘flapping bird’ and a ‘cap’ are qualitatively different. In our discussion of irreversibility, we considered only the macroscopic level.

FUTURES August

1999

502

Science, civilization and democracy

Figure 4. Origami bifurcation tree, which shape ‘Box’ is built after nine foldings.

But,

today,

irreversibility

can no longer

has therefore to be present definitely no longer a kind applies lected),

should

be read as showing

that,

be seen as the outcome

for example,

the

of ignorance.

It

at all levels of physical existence. The of museum (as was the classical world,

world is and this

also to the quantum world when the measurement process is negin which each bit of information is supposed to be conserved: it is a destroying and generating information and structure. In of processes,

world the classical world, the action of time was compared to that of a tornado, which throws into pieces objects whose scattered pieces still remain; and with enough

ingenuity we could put these pieces back together. In the vision which includes irreversibility, the flow of time could be compared to the damping and vanishing of the waves which arise when we throw a stone into the pond. Instead of a museum, the world appears as a succession of destructive and creative processes. In this new approach, rationality is no longer to be identified with ‘cerAt all levels, probability plays an tainty’ , nor probability with ignorance. essential role in the evolutionary mechanism. Our visions of the world as we see it around us and in us, converge. Sigmund Freud told us that the history of science is a history of alienation: after Copernicus we no longer lived at the centre of the universe; after Darwin, man was no longer different from the animals; and since Freud himself conscience is just the emerged part of a complex reality hidden from us. Curiously, we now reach an opposite view. With the role of duration and freedom so prevalent in human life, human existence appears as the most striking realization of the basic laws of nature, as expressed by irreversibility and randomness.

FUTURES August 1999

Science, hilization

and democracy

503

This new rationality of science leads us to reconsider the relations between man and man as well as the relations between man and nature. We have already mentioned that we live at the intersection of at least two systems of values. Clearly, a social system is by definition a non-linear one, as interactions between the members of the society may have a catalystic effect. At each moment fluctuations are generated, which may be damped or amplified by society. An excellent example of a huge amplification (which we have already mentioned) is the acquisition of knowledge which in a few decades led from the work of a few pioneers in solid state physics to the information revolution that we are witnessing today. Scientific and technological progress ‘probes’ the stability of the social system. In this view, there can be no question of the ‘axiological neutrality’ of science. Problems that may arise at the science/society interface can only be solved by understanding the actual complexity of societal processes. If these are not understood, the response of the system may ultimately be a negative one. Impact on the human sciences From the period of the enlightenment, human conduct was supposed to be governed by ‘natural laws’ rather than by metaphysical ones. By basing the methods of social and economic sciences on those of classical physics, it was thought that a ‘scientific’, supposedly ‘value-free’ analysis, could be achieved. These ‘objective methods’ would give results imbued with the authority of science, which was considered as being above human values and beliefs. Such ideas still flourish today. Markets are supposed to be made up of small buyers and sellers, each of which has ‘perfect’ information, which enables them to compare all the alternative products or investments. This, together with the perfect mobility of production factors such as labour, leads to a ‘general equilibrium’, which corresponds, according to this paradigm, not only to what is observed in the real world, but also to the ideal state of the economy. Neoclassical economics is based on the concept of marginal utility, which assumes that consumers and producers express choices by calculating precisely their ‘utility’. Furthermore, they are assumed to know how this ‘utility’ would change with their expenditure in a given domain. Such assumptions take for granted quite unrealistic ‘computing’ and ‘informational’ powers on the part of actors, as Herbert Simon’ has pointed out. They also imply that different factors are separable and additive, and more importantly, they exclude cultural attachments and motivations other than those of ‘utility maximization’. But what are the alternatives? We have already mentioned the conclusions of Weisskopf. If we turn to Marx’s view of the market system, he saw it evolving to its inevitable destruction, in accordance with the pessimism prevalent in the natural sciences of the first industrial age. We have seen, however, that complex systems evolve in an evolutionary process of creative discovery, where both stochastic and deterministic processes play essential roles. Instead of seeing human systems in terms of ‘equilibrium’ or as a ‘mechanism’, we see a creative world of imperfect information and shifting values, in which many different futures can be envisaged. The value problem of society can be associated largely with non-linearity. Values are the

FUTURES August 1996

code we adopt to maintain the social system on a branch which has been chosen by history. Value systems are always facing the destabilizing effect of fluctuations generated by the social system itself, which give the whole process its characteristics of irreversibility and non-predictability. Instead of leading to a feeling of frustration or alienation, this new vision of the world suggests an active attitude -seeking a better understanding of this value system. One of the expressions of this active attitude may be to make explicit the dialogue between modelling and planning. This dialogue through model building has in fact already started. In particular, models have been developed which can generate the spatial evolution of socioeconomic structure in a city or a region. Econometric modelling has already dealt with dynamic models. However, it generally uses a simple descriptive dynamics simply based on observed trends of past series. The introduction and development of system dynamics must be hailed as a considerable advance on equilibrium methods. However, the models we are advocating go one step further. The interest of this class of models is that they enable us to make the interplay between the actors and the constraints of the environment more transparent. Anticipation here plays an essential role. We may mention the example of traffic flow: the desired speed of each driver is hindered because of the existence of other drivers; the gap between desired and actual behaviour of the system leads to the adoption of strategies. To model this kind of process, we have to take into account the multiplicity of actors and of points of view. The fact that each actor influences the behaviour of each other leads to coupled, non-linear processes involving different populations (white collars, blue collars, consumers etc) and different economic functions (services, industry etc). This in turn gives the system access to divergent evolutionary paths leading to structures and organizations. The existence of these multiple states implies that fluctuations play an important role near bifurcation points. Last but not least, this active role of fluctuations and innovations corresponds to a ‘non-functional’ behaviour in the classical sense of the term. In these models, the interaction mechanisms lead to the exclusion or concentration of certain variables in particular zones. For example, Brussaville generates a central business district and suburban shopping centres itselfsince potentially all variables can exist at every point. In this way, structure emerges during a simulation, and when the future is explored, the possibility of structural change and of the appearance of new centres and behaviour can be taken into account.g Let us emphasize the importance of such models for social sciences in order to make the decision mechanisms more transparent in a democratic society: we have here an example of a process of evolution in which science and collective rationality may interact in a constructive way. Perhaps this will be a way of demythologizing the process of collective decision making, without negating its complexity. Models alone will of course not be a substitute for political decision making, but they may help to make their implications more explicit. Another example is some recent work on fishing strategies, in which anticipation is considered explicitly in the description of the global system, which includes the marine ecosystem itself, as well as different groups of fishermen, the processing industry, and the retail and export markets. Thus,

FUTURES August 1986

Science, civilization and democracy

the choice problem

of which involving

zone and which prices,

expected

species

of fish is a complicated

catches

and risk.”

The

505

behavioural

demand

for specific

types of fish is a culturally determined phenomenon. A very homogeneous population may have highly specific and narrow demands, while a heterogeneous one may permit much more varied fishing. Also, it can be shown that stochastic behaviour is an important part of the system, and that successful exploitation of a marine resource requires actors who are ‘stochastic’ and others which are ‘rational’ (non risk-takers), who act only on information. The United

fishery project forms a part of a more integrated project, which the Nations University is sponsoring, where this intrinsic randomness and

complexity

play an essential

role.

We may

also quote

the studies

initiated

by

the Risk Institute of Geneva, which is launching a project which emphasizes the positive contribution of risk in any creative process. We may also quote the projects sponsored by the International Federation of Institute for Advanced Studies (IFIAS). Erwin Laszlo

speaks

of the crucial

epochs

in the history

of mankind:

these

are the moments at which non-linear systems such as societies are approaching bifurcation points. I1 In biological evolution, bifurcation may be for the better or for the worse. We expect a bifurcation to arise in societies when they are destabilized exaggerating bifurcation.

by changing socioeconomic conditions. It is perhaps not to say that our present planetary system is approaching such a The difference with biological evolution is that human societies

can behave

in a purposeful

way: we can to some extent

choose

pace. The leitmotiu of my communication is that the future construction, and this implies ethical responsibilities. A new

dialogue

with

reconceptualization of science whose dialogue of man with man, transparent the complex decision mechanism of society. It leads also to direction opened by the important

have

seen

this second

that

time is a

nature

The

Wisest. ’ 2 I illustrate

our evolutionary

is not given:

the history

aspect

that we have described leads to a new ultimate aim must be to make more mechanisms which ensure the survival a new dialogue of man with nature, in the book by Jonas Salk, The Survival of the

by coming

of climate

back

is that

to the problem

of an unstable

of climate. dynamic

We

system.

Curiously, the climate of the first half of this century constituted an anomaly rather than a typical sample of climate’s long and tumultuous history. During this period, mankind experienced relatively predictable weather and a retreat of the northern hemisphere’s ice cap. Agriculture and food production benefited considerably, and this contributed to the increase in world population. On the other hand, this apparent permanence has given a false idea as to what is or is not ‘normal’ in climatology. Since the mid-1970’s the return of climatic variability has been observed. One example is the abnormally harsh winter of 1976-77 that struck the eastern part of North America and the prolonged drought in the western part of Europe. It seems that this phenomenon was related to a weakening, or even to a real ‘blocking’ of atmospheric circulation as reflected, for instance, by large

FUTURES August 1988

displacements of parts of the jet stream to the south (in the eastern part of the American continent) and to the north in the western part of Europe. A recent result13 indicates that there are essentially two possibilities-blocking or nonblocking, whose outcome may be considered as random as the outcome of the tossing of a coin. This is a really extraordinary example of the randomness of the environment in which we are embedded. This presses upon us the need to adopt a new way of communicating with nature. In the classical vision complexity was associated with incomplete knowledge of the number of variables involved but the existence of simple laws linking these variables on some basic level was not in doubt. We now discover an intrinsic complexity in nature around us. We have thus to explore the limits of predictability both on long and short timescales. The progress of non-equilibrium physics and non-linear mathematics makes it possible to study many new problems-the history of the earth’s climate, the blocking phenomenon we just spoke about, the generation of instabilities such as those induced by the ‘heated island effect’ in areas such as lakes, cities, tropical islands or large irrigation-cultivated surfaces. We are now in possession of adequate tools to approach these problems. Recognition of the intrinsic complexity and unpredictability of our natural environment must not lead to an attitude of resignation. The last climatic optimum is generally situated 7000 years ago, since when the combined biological and meteorological situation of the earth has continuously deteriorated. This deterioration is largely independent of man, as the density of human population was too low to influence the formation of great deserts such as the Gobi or the Sahara. We can now conceive of a strategy to be elaborated in the future, which would permit us to leave the unfavourable bifurcation of which the earth is captive. We should quote in this context the important programme designed by the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU), ‘ ‘Global change: an international geosphere biosphere programme”.‘* Obviously, this type of programme should have both important experimental and theoretical components. The implementation of such programmes could lead to a reinforcement of the relation between science, democracy and civilization, as it would show that science can and must go beyond a purely conservative approach to global problems, as is usually the case in the ‘ecological’ point of view. The kind of topics which we have enumerated could be the nucleus of such a global research programme. Why not name it &meter, from the name of the of Greek goddess of spring and fertility. ?I5 The present reconceptualization physics goes far beyond academic discussions. It may inspire new plans for action to a new dialogue between man and man, as well as between man and nature. The questions which Kant asked, “What may I know, what must I do, what may I hope for?“, are still with us. To these perennial questions each period has to spell out its specific answers. It is my conviction that the reconceptualization of physics, the discovery of a new world of irreversib~ity, of intrinsic randomness and complexity, may help us to make more precise the answers which our time may conceive.

FUTURES August 1996

Science, civilizationand democracy 507

Notes

and references

1. J. Monod, Le hasard et la n&ssiti (Paris, Seuil, 1970), translated as Chance and Necessity (New York, Vintage Books, 1972), pages 172-173. 2. W. A. Weisskopf, “Reflections on uncertainty in economics”, The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, 9 (33), 1984, pages 335-360. 3. La Science et la diver& des cultures (Paris, PUF and UNESCO, 1974). 4. Karl Popper, preface to the 1959 edition of The Logic of Scien~ifi Discovery (London, Hutchinson). 5. For these and other (more technical) considerations see I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, La nouvelle alliance (Paris, Gallimard, 1979), translated as Order out of Chaos (New York, Bantam, London, Heinemann, 1984); I. Prigogine, From Being to Becoming (San Francisco, Freeman, 1979); G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine, Exploring Complexily (Piper Verlag, 1986). Nature, 311, 1984, pages 529-532. 6. C. and G. Nicolis, “Is there a climatic attractor?“, of chaotic dynamics of brain 7. A. Babloyantz, J. M. Salazar and C. Nicolis, “Evidence activity during the sleep cycle”, Working Paper, Dpt Chimie Physique II, Universitt Libre de Bruxelles, 1985. 8. Herbert Simon, Models ofMan (New York, J. Wiley, 1957), page 198. 9. P. M. Allen, G. Engelen and M. Sanglier, “New methods for policy exploration in complex systems”, comm to a UNU conference at Montpelier, France, 1984, under the theme See also special issue of Environment and Planning, “Praxis and Management of Complexity”. series B 12, 1985, 1, pages 1-138. 10. P. M. Allen and J. M. McGlade, “The dynamics of discovery and exploitation: the case of the Scotian Shelf fisheries”, Working Paper, Dpt Chimie Physique II, Universitt Libre de Bruxelles, 1985. 11. E. Laszlo, “The crucial epoch”, Futures, 17 (l), 1985, pages 2-23. 12. J. Salk, The Survival of the Wisest (New York, Harper and Row, 1973). 13. J. Charney and J. Devore, JAtmos SC, 36, page 1205; A. Sutera, Adv in Geophys, in press. 14. See. T. F. Malone and J. G. Roederer, eds, Global Change, Proceedings of a Symposium held in Ottawa (September 1984), sponsored by ICSU (C ambridge University Press, 1985). 15. This name was suggested by the author in an address to an EEC meeting: “Science et Socie’tt dans I’Europe en Mutation”, La Recherche-DtGeloppement dans la Communauti konomique europinne: uer~ une nouvelle phare de la politique commune, Strasbourg, 20-22 October 1980.

FUTURES August 1999