A fragile world in the optics of simplicity and complexity

Why do we call the world fragile? How did it turn out that scientific discoveries and the rapid development of technology did not at all rid us of the «black swans»? What happened to us in these spring months of 2020 clearly encroaches on our ideas about the stability, reliability and predictability of the world in which we live. Everything that was designed to guarantee sustainable development — public institutions, economics, education, science,
medicine — at some point demonstrate powerlessness or, even worse, turn into a kind of threat.
Today, few people doubt that our and future generations will have to live in an increasingly complex and increasingly unpredictable world. This article proposes to cast a glance at the situation of growth of uncertainties from two «hills’ — classical simplicity and non-classical complexity (complicacy). The author
makes a choice in favor of «parting with simplicity». But what does this mean? — We must turn our face to those ways of understanding the phenomena of fragility and uncertainty, which were rebuilt by intellectuals from different angles at the turn of the century, leaving the twentieth and coming into its own on the
twenty-first

1. Аrshinov, V. I. (2011). Synergetics meets complexity. Synergetics of innovative

2. complexity (pp. 47–65). Мoscow. (In Russian).

3. Аrshinov, V. I., & Budanov, V. G. (2016). Paradigm of Complexity and Socio-Humanitarian Projections of Convergent Technologies. Voprisy Filosofii, 1,

4. pp. 59–70. (In Russian).

5. Аrshinov, V. I., & Svirskiy, Ya. I. (2019). Something about the complexity. The

6. translator’s and the editor’s epilog. About the complexity (pp. 60–282).

7. Мoscow. (In Russian).

8. Bateson, G. (2005). Redunancy and Coding. Steps to an Ecology of Mind:

9. Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology.

10. Мoscow: КоmКniga. (In Russian).

11. Berlin, I. (2001). Two Concepts of Liberty. In I. Berlin (Ed.). Philosophy of Liberty. Europe (pp. 122–185). Мoscow. (In Russian).

12. Budanov, V., Arshinov, V., Lepskiy, V., & Svirskiy, Ya. (2018). Complexity of the

13. problem of integrity of knowledge. To strategies of cognition of complexity (No. 1). Moscow: The Institute of Philosophy of Russian Academy

14. of Sciences. (In Russian).

15. Burton, C. (2011). Sustaining Change in Universities. Мoscow: HSE Publishing

16. House. (In Russian).

17. Chernavskiy, D. S. (2009). Synergy and Information. Dynamic theory of Information (3th ed.). Мoscow: URSS. (In Russian).

18. Descartes, R. (1989a). Discourse of the Method. Collected whritings (Vol. 1,

19. pp. 153). Мoscow (In Russian).

20. Descartes, R. (1989b). Passions of the Soul. Collected whritings (Vol. 1,

21. pp. 481–572). Мoscow (In Russian).

22. Engels, F. (1961). Anti-Dühring. Collected writings (2th ed., Vol. 20, p. 21).

23. Мoscow. (In Russian).

24. Foucault, P-М. (1996). The Archaeology of Knowledge. In B. Levchenko (Ed.).

25. Kiev: Nika-Center. (In Russian).

26. Haken, H. (2001). Principles of Brain Functioning. Мoscow: Smysl. (In Russian).

27. Ivakhnenko, Е. N. (2013). Sociology meets complexity. RSUH/PGGUbulletin.

28. Series: Philosophy, 11, 90–101. (In Russian).

29. Кlimontovich, Yu. L. (1996). Relative ordering criteria in open systems.

30. Advances in Physical Sciences (Physics-Uspekhi), 166(2), 1231–1244.

31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNr.0166.199611f.1231. (In Russian).

32. Lenin, V. I. (1969). Collected whritings (5th ed., Vol. 38, p. 97). Moscow. (In Russian).

33. Lepskiy, V. Е. (2019). The creators aspiring for the future of mankind: N. N. Moiseev and V. S. Stepin. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, 62(4).

34. DOI: 10.30727/0235-1188-2019-62-4-63-75. (In Russian).

35. Моrin, E. (2019). About Complexity. Мoscow. (In Russian).

36. Nowotny, H. (2005). The increase of complexity and it’s reduction: emergent

37. interfaces between the natural sciences, humanities and social sciences.

38. Theory, culture and society, 22(5), 15–31.

39. Pogonyailo, А. G. (1998). Philosophy of clock-work toys or the apology of mechanicalism. Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg University. (In Russian).

40. Polanyi, М. (1998). Perconal Knowledge. Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy.

41. In V. А. Lektorskiy & V. A. Аrshinov (Eds.). Russia, Blagoveshchensk.

42. (In Russian).

43. Prigogine, I. (1985). From Existing to the Arising. In Yu. L. Кlimontivitch (Ed.).

44. Мoscow: Nauka. (In Russian).

45. Prigogine, I., & Nikolis, G. (2008). Exploring complexity: An introduction.

46. Moscow. (In Russian).

47. Schlick, М. (1993). The turning point in philosophy. Analytic philosophy. Selected writings (pp. 28–33). Мoscow: Moscow State University Publishing

48. House. (In Russian).

49. Таleb, N. (2016). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Мoscow: Аzbuka. (In Russian).