. . . a big reason why complex societies stick with their strategy long past the point of diminishing returns.  They become so committed to their way of life that changing ends up being very difficult and painful.

"Being committed to their way of life" implies volition and perhaps even a measure of obstinacy. An alternative perspective would view the society as having become embedded in a certain set of memes that permits one course of action and forecloses many others.


There are those of us who remember life before suburbia. There are a far larger number who know nothing but suburbia and cannot conceive of an alternative, or perceive any need for change. This ignorance is very different from committment. A high level of Tainter Complexity would promote this ignorance; milk comes from the corner store not from a cow.

Not to get into a long discussion, but this exactly what I mean by complexity definitions - more/quantifiable means more complex?

An example could be made of something like aircraft motors - the original models had a fair number of moving parts, as time went one various improvements were made adding more moving parts, and as more time went on, the number of moving parts was reduced, until, at least in theory/practice, something like a SCRAM 'motor' has essentially no moving parts, except for the fuel pumping system.

But the SCRAM 'motor' is much more complex, even if it has many fewer moving parts - but here, complexity comes in the design and development of materials (and airframe), not in the number of parts. Further, after the design and material development phase is over, it is also quite conceivable that the infrastructure to construct and maintain such motors would be considerably less quantifiably complex than that required for the first Boeing 707s in terms of tools, parts, etc.

Complexity and simplicity are often in the eyes of the viewer, and that is what I find difficult when engaging in such discussions.

I haven't even begun to engage the idea of 'simple' or 'complex' language, except to note that most 'older' languages are actually considered more complex in grammar than English.

Or the idea of social roles - personally, I think the entire advertising/marketing branch of our society could go away without any loss of complexity, since in my eyes, that complexity is merely manufactured.

In a sense, whether the solution to a manufactured problem is part of a measure of complexity is the sort of question which would need to be addressed.

I could even further add that this idea of complexity could also be seen as the rise of parasites, with the parasites being considered the measure of the host.

And on, and on. Endless discussion.