COMPLEXITY REFERENCES
BOOK REVIEW

The web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems, by Fritjof Capra, 1996. New York: Anchor/Doubleday Books, 347pp. ISBN 0385476752

May God us keep
From single vision
And Newton’s sleep

— Blake, as cited in Capra, 1996, p. 21

Fritjof Capra is a physicist and founding director for the Center for Ecoliteracy in Berkeley, California. In his book, The web of life, Capra presents a comprehensive overview of emergent scientific theories that posit the need for a critical re-examination of the question “What is life?” Capra develops this question as his central thesis to explore how complexity science might inform and influence contemporary scientific discourses that rely upon unquestioned Cartesian dualisms (For example, mind/body, self/other).

Capra emphasizes the need for a paradigm shift from a traditional scientific/industrial (mechanistic/shallow ecology) centered way of life to a more complex and holistic perspective that promotes earth-centered values. This deep ecological philosophy critiques anthropocentric approaches that attempt to distinguish human beings as separate from or superior to the natural environment. Moreover, deep ecology embraces an understanding of radical embeddedness that recognizes “the intrinsic value of all living beings and views human beings as just one particular strand in the web of life” (p. 7).

Drawing upon the works of Varela and Maturana, Capra extends his approach to life science to explore how cognition should not be considered a thing, but a process. This process of knowing is more than simply thinking, it is the very “breath of life” itself (p. 264). This radical perspective holds that we should view all living things as cognitive entities that form an integral part of the web of life. Accordingly, Capra proposes that we shift our attention from strictly the study of objects to the study of relationships (p. 298). To underscore the call for for this radical paradigm shift Capra asserts that there is a need to answer three interrelated questions: (1) What is the structure of a living system? (2) What is the pattern of organization?, and (3) What is the process of life (p. 161)? By exploring these questions Capra encourages scientists and non-scientists alike to engage in a new conceptual language that views the earth as an emerging, interdependent, cognitive, and living system.

By guiding readers through a diverse exploration of contemporary scientific theories in the fields of biology (Lovelock, Margulis, Maturana, Valera) and physics (Eigen, Haken, Prigogine) Capra effectively develops his thesis by tracing the development of complexity science through the historical emergence of systems thinking, self-organization, and self-making, which comprise three of the most influential conceptual discourses in the field of complexity theory (p. 85). Capra describes complexity science as an attempt to weave together mind, matter, and life as interconnected processes. An early focus on systems thinking promoted a shift from the traditional scientific analytical model to a more relational and contextual approach. Systems theory believes that individual or intrinsic properties are enmeshed in other systems and correspondingly cannot be fully understood when they are studied on their own. Moreover, they need to be considered as one context of the larger whole. Capra suggests a shift to organismic biology, which believes that “patterns of relationships are immanent in the physical structure of organisms” (p. 25). These organicists posit that wherever we see life, we see networks and relationships. From this perspective, the whole is more than the sum of its parts, it is relational, self-making, and self-regulating.

This organistic systems thinking gave rise to a new strand of research that branched away from a strictly quantitative process orientation to a new qualitative understanding that began to explore the relationship and complexity of patterns. The disciplines of systems theory and cybernetics emphasized both contextual and process thinking. Cybernetics studied feedback loops and self-regulation, while systems theory focused on the concept of open systems that were constantly in a state of fluctuation that was necessary to keep them “alive”. It was discovered that these open systems operated at a state far from equilibrium (p. 86). These perspectives led to the belief in living systems as self-organizing and self-regulating networks. Capra builds on this “systems thinking” to outline Maturana and Varela’s notion of autopoiesis (the self-making organization or pattern of life) and Lovelock’s popular metaphor of Gaia (the living earth).

With the introduction of increasingly more powerful computers, scientists and mathematicians were now able to model the nonlinear interconnectedness that is foundational to systems theory. Complexity mathematics led to the creation of chaos theory and fractal geometry, which in turn led to the startling discovery of dynamic qualitative patterns that were nested within complex, nonlinear systems. An astonishing breakthrough was made – order and structure could exist in chaos. Building on these new discoveries Capra suggests that a true post-Cartesian understanding of life can now more fully emerge (p. 157). Capra identifies one aspect of this postmodern approach as Ecoliteracy.

In the book’s conclusion Capra promotes the need for a new scientific and social vision that would see a renewed emphasis placed on the creation of ecologically literate communities that understand how “all members of an ecological community [which includes humans, plants, animals, and microorganisms] are interconnected in the vast and intricate network of relationships, the web of life” (p. 298). Capra insists that building and supporting these sustainable communities will be the greatest challenge of our time. However, Capra is also hopeful that we can meet this challenge when he suggests that the very answers lie within the language of nature itself. These critical answers can be uncovered, but only if we are willing to embrace an ecophilosophical approach and reconnect with the web of life. In order to achieve this radical shift we will need to learn how to more fully attend to the Earth as a living and breathing system that requires move than mere environmental stewardship. This Ecoliteracy requires all humans to acknowledge their interconnectedness and act ethically on behalf of both the human and non-human inhabitants of our world.

While Capra provides an excellent synthesis of the historical emergence of the field of complexity science his book fails to reflect an in depth critique of these discourses. Capra’s statements suggest to the reader that they could and in fact should, rather unproblematically, take up this ecosophy as a simple choice of will. The lack of critical attention to moral, political, social, and cultural influences trivializes the author’s own understandings of radical embeddedness and interconnection. These political, cultural, and social systems can also be considered living and emergent systems that deserve further analysis and discussion. Another significant absence in Capra’s book reflects the sparse attention paid to concrete or practical applications. Translating these dense scientific concepts into everyday practice may present an obstacle for some readers.

Nevertheless, Capra’s book is a brave and brilliant challenge to modernist scientific paradigms. This book provides for a solid historical and theoretical base from which scientists, educators, and every day citizens can begin to question their own epistemological perspectives and ethical practices as they find their own answers to Capra’s enduring question, “What is life?”

Kristopher Wells
University of Alberta