Sublime

Complex systems science is different. It seeks order by understanding how simple parts, interacting together and perhaps adapting to one another, create an entirely new whole. The

But for our commonsense notions of human agency and morality to hold, it seems that our actions cannot be merely lawful products of our biology, our conditioning, or anything else that might lead others to predict them.

Instead of assuming agents were perfectly rational, we allowed there were limits to how smart they were. Instead of assuming the economy displayed diminishing returns (negative feedbacks), we allowed that it might also contain increasing returns (positive feedbacks). Instead of assuming the economy was a mechanistic system operating at equilibrium,

Darwinian evolution cannot produce truly objective morality.

As a new point of view we turn to bounded rationality, a departure from the mainstream tradition. We no longer can assume that every agent is a perfect calculator. This point of view is given a great deal of emphasis by Herbert Simon. Simon argued that people do not maximize. When they’re forecasting the future, they do not perform the task of rati

high-entropy macrostates have more equivalent microstates,

This is usually referred to as “complexity” or “chaos theory” (the Teal equivalent to Orange’s Newtonian science).

Daniel echoed the statement Core had made during their visit. “Nothing is certain. Outcomes follow probabilities.”