The paradox of complexity — confronting the idea of progress PT.2
Criticality, uncertainty, praise for creativity and the irreducible human vulnerability
The certainty of uncertainty
The awakening we are experiencing is that of a human world apparently in delirium, incapable and surprised by its inability to contain the effects of its own actions. The dream of some hiding in economic consumerism dissolves in the face of the current geopolitical and ecological disorder. History is far from over. In fact, quite the opposite. Nor even an end to the Earth, nature has never been more of a protagonist than today. Instead, we are witnessing the epilogue of a model of the World, universalistic and continuous, formatted from a single point of view. The abstractness of this modernist design is revealed in its obtuseness, insensitive to the plurality of experience and incapable of managing an unprecedentedly globalized planet. A hyperobject of Mortonian memory, made instead of interdependencies. The terrestrial turmoil is global but not globalized. Thus, as Mauro Ceruti says, the question that haunts us is still valid: “Is there progress towards the better?”
In the first part of this reflection, it was found that the very effects of our will to power undermine its own path. Alert. Here, we discover a more genuine level of reality: non-linearity and exponential emergences. Uncertainty and complexity. That is an irreducible condition that cannot be overcome once and for all but with whom we can only learn to interact. Here, the paradox of greatness emerges and bends our cultural constructs with heatwaves and floods to death. Wars and populist scepticism. No modern technique — or postmodern interpretation, has been able to truly predict and govern these events. Now, the paradox of complexity is born. An invitation that whispers to us to remain open. Open to systematically discovering what we thought we already knew, even what we deluded ourselves into thinking we could dominate.
A call for a new being
Reimagining the concept and process of progress means taking a leap in awareness. Reconnecting with History and breaking with the past. Grand strategy par excellence. This reality first suggests clearing the ground from obsolete linear, mechanistic and hegemonic models. Accepting the indeterminacy of the future — today colonised by the irresistible technological branding that beats it to the punch, is essential to intertwining humanity with the flourishing of the Earth, and vice versa. A radical, exposed, restless Heideggerian dasein aims at a new anthropological figure. New project, new politics of things. New visions that also build our volksgeist. The Hegelian collective spirit. Recognizing that progress is not the result of a single and rigid vision, self-celebration of one’s own, or others’, greatness, but a complex balance of relationships to be continually built.
Paraphrasing Sloterdijk, there will be no final salvation. Neither from technology, from religion nor from some new rampant ideology. No waiting for a sudden elite or enlightened leader — awkward initiatives roam across continents. We will be all scattered but interconnected — an actual “net”, “work” — to find a new measure to deal with the terrestrial imperative. A new measure that does not mean limitations or decreases — a leitmotif that is anything but “happy”, indeed futile in function of turbulent and irreversible physical properties. A new measure demands more technique. An official entry into the science of complexity. New solutions capable of balancing resources and creating systems that authentically interact with the indeterminable rather than making yet another mistake about its elimination.
Creative class, where are you at?
Creativity, then. Activity that discovers and knows in a new way. The cornerstone of change, yet long absent. The creative class itself has its origins in this simple equation. As the sociologist Perulli recalls, creative thinking is synonymous with learning how to learn — drawing on the final writings of Simone Weil. Power to think of new worlds. This happened in Paris in the 19th century, New York in the 20th century, and today’s Silicon Valley. Three capitals of innovation, three radical historical moments that have given birth to new ways of thinking and existing. However, this creativity — although ‘digital, urban and tolerant’, as Florida says — today seems fragmented, dispersed, and diluted in globalization. The challenge is to reassemble it and make it more aware of its position and power within the planet’s transformation or destruction process, depending on sensitivity.
The creativity of the future must go beyond the focus on technological innovation and embrace a role, as Latour underpinned, as an ‘ecological class’, equipped with a more systemic thought capable of facilitating cultural dialogues that seem irreconcilable. The challenge, badly losted by modern promises, lies here. Easterling’s medium design reminds us of the importance of designing environments that consider the emergence of conditions for transformation — an approach far superior to hastily simplistic solutions. It is no longer about an abstract ‘being-in-the-world’, but, as Ferraris suggests, a reskilled ‘being-in-the-earth’.
In the end, human existence and growth is a delicate balance. In other words, civilisation is a trade-off between the paradox of greatness and the paradox of complexity. We are forever drawn to the allure of expansion, control, and mastery. Yet, we are confronted by the irreducible reality of complexity: a world that defies simplicity and certainty, where interdependence and unpredictability reign. As we move forward, the question is not whether we can conquer complexity or abandon greatness, but how we can navigate the space between them being sustainable and fair. Only by embracing this trade-off can we act as true catalysts of humanity, or spreading dignity and happiness — the only form of empowerment that can sustain us and our shared future.
Approach:
This second and final part is also clearly critical — as we are used to doing on the Continent, where self-analysis is an embodied trait. A complex between Faust, Prometheus and Freud. Typical of senescence. And yet, on the contrary, would it really be possible to continue reiterating the same pattern? Without any reflection? Silence and autopilot. And why do we continually talk about change and innovation? A dreamlike stew between self-torture and logorrhea.
Finally, it is merely the writer’s opinion that questions and ethical reflection make man what he is in the scale of intelligence. Acknowledging from the start, humanity is built outside, not in animalistic nudity. It is outside of us that we have the ability to outline controversies, problematise, and consequently find a new balance with the environment through objects. The entire environment, human and non-human. Planet! Without perpetrating the useless separation of Earth-World (sic!)
Main references:
- Castoriadis, C. La rivoluzione democratica. teoria e progetto dell’autogoverno. 2022, Eleuthera.
- Ceruti, M. Bellusci, F. Umanizzare la modernità. Un modo nuovo di pensare il futuro. 2023, Milano, Raffello Cortina Editore.
- De Grazia, V. Irresistible Empire. America’s Advance through 20th Century Europe. 2006, Harvard University Press.
- Easterling, K. Medium design. Knowing How to Work on The World. 2021, Verso Book.
- Florida, R. The Rise of Creative Class, 2019. New York, Basic Books.
- Hegel, G.W.F. Lectures on the Philosophy of History. 2011, Wordbridge Pub.
- Heidegger, M. Being and Time. 2008, Harper Collins.
- Latour, B. Down to Earth. Politics in the New Climate Regime. 2018, John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
- Morton, T. Hyperobject. Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. 2013, University of Minnesota Press.
- Perulli, P. Anime creative. Da Prometeo a Steve Jobs. 2024. Il Mulino.
- Simondon, G. On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects. 2017, University of Minnesota Press.
- Sloterdijk, P. Prometheus’s Remorse: From the Gift of Fire to Global Arson. 2024. MIT Press.
- Sloterdijk, P. Not Saved: Essays After Heidegger. 2016, Polity.
