Karim Knio & Margaux Schulz
Published online: 13 Dec 2023
https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2024.2278936
This Special Issue of Journal of Critical Realism (JCR) is dedicated to the 2022 International Association for Critical Realism (IACR) Conference, which was hosted by the International Institute of Social Sciences (ISS) in the Hague (Netherlands), part of the Erasmus University of Rotterdam. Its theme was ‘Realist Complexity, between Causal and Complex Systems’, although it also engaged with other pertinent subjects within critical realism research, including ecology, social work, health, ethics, and the interconnections between critical realism and other schools of thought like pragmatism and realist evaluation. The conference, along with the pre-conference, attracted over 120 participants from diverse backgrounds across 31 countries, indicating a growing interest in critical realism. Notably, about half of the attendees were PhD students, indicating the significance of the event in academic circles.
This special issue aims to showcase selected presentations from the conference, providing a diverse representation of the topics discussed across different panels, although it is not intended to be comprehensive. The conference theme sought to explore the potential contributions of critical realism to the study of complexity, as well as to address the criticisms faced by ‘complex realism’, a concept introduced in the 1990s (Byrne Citation1998, Citation2021; Reed and Harvey Citation1992). Complex realism aims to identify parallels between critical realism and complexity theory, but it has encountered criticism from within critical realism due to concerns that it conflates ontological levels (Holland Citation2014). To reinvigorate the discussion and develop a critical realist research agenda informed by complexity, the conference revisited the debates between complexity theory and critical realism, with a focus on three main thematic questions: ontological and epistemological domains, causality, and open/closed complex systems.
To represent the theoretical discussions that took place on complexity and complex systems, you will find in this issue two articles. The first article is by Leigh Price, and it sets the stage for the discussion by including a brief introduction to the field of systems theory. It argues that critical realism allows us to move beyond first generation (positivist) and second generation (hermeneuticist) approaches to systems theory towards a third-generation approach based on Bhaskar’s layered ontology. In third generation systems theory, the resolution of wicked (complex) problems, such as the socioecological crisis, involves correcting the method of homeostasis which in the context of society is our social method of finding knowledge about the best – most ethical – way to act. This homeostatic version of ethics assumes that, in the event of a problem that threatens our wellbeing, rather than correcting the consequences of the failure of homeostasis (the misguided action/behaviour based on misguided ethics), it is better to deal with the failure of the homeostatic mechanism itself (the mechanism by which we find truthful knowledge about the best way to act). This is a non-teleological approach to emancipation from ills and ‘it releases activists from having to be keepers of the moral high-ground or having to try to change people’s behaviour’.
The second article, titled ‘Complexity, trans-immanent systems and morphogenetic régulation: towards a problématique of calibration’ by Karim Knio, studies the intersection between critical realism and complexity theory via the philosophies of substance and persistence. Knio’s focus lies on Luhmann’s concept of autopoiesis, which refers to systems that self-reproduce. He argues that such systems are founded on a transcendental understanding of substance and a perduration account of persistence, implying that objects persist over time independently of their changing forms across different temporalities. In contrast, Knio introduces the immanent account of substance and exdurantist account of persistence through allopoiesis, where unanimated systems are defined by their qualities and only exist in time. However, to analyse complex systems comprehensively, both allopoietic and autopoietic systems must be considered. As such, and to overcome the paradox of substance, the development of a trans-immanent account of substance appears necessary. To achieve this, Knio employs Spinoza’s doctrine of parallelism and exemplifies its application through the Immanent Causality Morphogenetic Approach (ICMA) – French Régulation (FR) (Morphogenetic Régulation) model. In this article, Knio demonstrates how a trans-immanent system fits with CR via the Morphogenetic Régulation framework by exploring the theme of crisis in terms of the movement from inadequate to adequate understanding of objects in systemic environments (problématique of calibration).
During the conference, many academics also spoke of the intersection between critical realism and complex systems, taking a more practical, rather than theoretical, approach to the conference theme. Andrew Dryhurst, Yazid Zahda, and Zach Sloman, all working on applications of ICMA model, jointly contributed to a presentation titled ‘Morphogenetic Régulation In Action: Understanding Inclusive Governance, Neoliberalizing Processes in Palestine, and the Political Economy of the Contemporary Internet’. The authors advocate the use of ICMA(FR) (Morphogenetic Régulation) to analyse intricate social issues and engage with the complexities of systemic continuity within and between morphogenetic cycles. They demonstrate its versatility in tackling various themes by presenting three distinct case studies. Sloman exemplifies the use of the concept of ideas as self-explication in examining adversely inclusive governance. Zahda elaborates on ICMA(FR) (Morphogenetic Régulation) incorporating the Variegated Neoliberalization Thesis (VNLT) to analyse the triple morphogenesis and ideas as adequacy in the context of neoliberalization in Palestine. Meanwhile, Dryhurst highlights the significance of defining morphogenetic cycles and addresses the question of systemic persistence. Specifically, he raises the question of whether the transition from Web2 to Web3 should be regarded as an immanent transformation within the same cycle or as two separate cycles. In this interdisciplinary endeavour, the researchers effectively demonstrate the applicability of ICMA(FR) (Morphogenetic Régulation) in understanding complex social dynamics and causality across diverse socio-political contexts, shedding light on its potential to contribute to the study of social change and governance.
Representing the panel on CR, complexity, health and tourism, Priya Khanna and her colleagues submitted a research paper entitled ‘Unpacking the Impacts of a Programmatic Approach to Assessment System in a Medical Program Using a Critical Realist Perspective.’ In their study, the authors delve into the application of programmatic assessment, which is defined as the ‘longitudinal aggregation of carefully selected data points’, within medical educational settings, encompassing both medical staff and students. Employing the Critical Realist methodology, the authors engage in an inductive analysis, alongside abduction and retroduction techniques, to gain insights into the implementation of programmatic assessment. Additionally, they identify and explore the stages within the corresponding morphogenetic cycle. By doing so, Khanna et al. bring to light the inherent tensions and contradictions that emerge during the adoption and execution of programmatic assessment practices in the medical context.
The intersection between critical realism and complex systems was also analysed by Juan David Parra. His article titled ‘A Defence of Realist Evaluation and Its Role in the Stages of Explanatory Research Based on Critical Realism’ critically examines the primary objections raised by critical realist scholars (Porter Citation2015) concerning realist evaluation (RE). The article contends in favour of employing realist evaluation in the realm of applied evaluation research. Parra argues that criticisms concerning the ontological foundations of realist evaluation are predicated upon misinterpretations of RE’s existing literature and misconceptions regarding the terminology they use. Contrarily, Parra posits that realist evaluation’s methodological tenets align harmoniously with those esteemed by Bhaskar, thereby affirming RE’s efficacy as a valuable methodological instrument for investigating micro-political processes. This claim is substantiated through the presentation of a case-study conducted in Colombian schools, illustrating how realist evaluation can effectively illuminate pertinent dynamics within such contexts.
Finally, we present another approach to complex systems from a critical realist perspective, specifically one that is focused on democratic systems. Carl Auerbach in his article ‘Democracy and human nature: a layered system analysis’, undertakes a comprehensive examination of the multifaceted relationship between democracy and human nature, delving into the intricate dynamics that contribute to either promoting democracy or instigating democratic backsliding. Auerbach’s study revolves around a layered system approach, wherein democracy is understood as comprising three interconnected levels: the political/institutional level, the social/interactional level, and the psychological/interpsychic level. On the political/institutional level, Auerbach explores the darker aspects of human nature, particularly the propensity towards proactive aggression against rival groups. Such behaviour, he argues, emanates from the manifestations of outgroup discrimination and ingroup favouritism that occur at the social/interactional level. Delving further into the analysis, Auerbach turns to psychoanalytic reasoning to probe the roots of this dark side of human nature. He draws inspiration from authors associated with the Frankfurt School, as well as Klein and Benjamin, and posits that the origins of these negative tendencies can be traced back to the early relationship between an infant and its primary caregiver. The infants that cannot outgrow the paranoid-schizoid position are more likely to prove unable to consider themselves as part of a complex but unitary group, a foundation of democracy.
Considering that the conference also gave room for other presentations, which did not focus on the theme per se, a final article has been selected to give a sense of the variety of topics that were discussed at the conference. In his paper entitled ‘Crime and the Metaphysical Animal,’ Alan Norrie undertakes an in-depth analysis of crime narratives by employing the lens of moral psychology, with particular focus on the concepts of vindictive, vindicative, and validatory. By delving into the cognitive and emotional processes experienced by readers of crime stories, Norrie endeavours to unveil profound insights into the human psyche. He further contends that existing judicial systems fail to facilitate reconciliation and healing, instead predominantly reflecting vindictive and vindicative tendencies. According to Norrie, this situation poses a significant predicament, as human beings, referred to here as ‘the metaphysical animal,’ inherently seek unity and wholeness as integral components of their existential conditions. To support this notion, Norrie draws upon psychoanalysis, highlighting arguments that posit some individuals may not transcend their ‘paranoid-schizoid’ developmental phase, wherein objects are perceived as either entirely good or completely bad. This phenomenon of splitting the inherent wholeness of objects during early developmental stages can later manifest in authoritarian political responses. By drawing on moral psychology and psychoanalytic concepts, Norrie contributes to a nuanced understanding of crime narratives and their connections to human psychology, exploring the intricate interplay between individual cognition, societal structures, and judicial processes. His work calls for a comprehensive examination of judicial practices to better align them with the inherent human need for unity and wholeness, fostering potential pathways toward reconciliation and societal healing.
We hope that you enjoy reading this selection of papers from the 2022 conference. We believe that they make a significant contribution towards establishing critical realism as a powerful underlabourer for systems theory and complexity science.
Systems Community of Inquiry 