On Complexity in the Social Sciences

        Thus an important property of these three types of econometric approaches cannot be arbitrary in a general convention regarding the forms of the grammar. In the discussion of Chomskian hierarchies given above, the descriptive power of the base component can be defined in such a way as to impose the strong generative capacity of the theory. For any transformation which is sufficiently diversified in application to be of any interest, the philosophical bounds of the hypothetical-deductive method is to be regarded as a stipulation to place the constructions into these various categories. Comparing these examples with their socio-ecological counterparts, we see that relational information does not readily tolerate a resource-poor landscape upon which functionality has been defined by the interactions between agents. We have already seen that this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is not subject to an abstract underlying order.

        Of course, a subset of all possible reflexively definable class structures suffices to account for an important distinction in language use. This suggests that the notion of linguistic complexity is necessary to impose an interpretation on the emergent system of "understanding" described previously (34). However, this assumption is not correct, since the earlier discussion of statehood may remedy and, at the same time, eliminate the ultimate standard that determines the socio-political realism of any proposed model. With this clarification, the vast literature of the social and political sciences is, apparently, determined by irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional rules. Let us continue to suppose that any associated supporting element is not to be considered in determining the requirement that shared memory is not permitted within the scope of any such model.

Next paragraph            What is this all about?            How does it work?