American society is operating at the edge of chaos

I read an article recently about how the brain works. Apparently, our minds continuously operate at the “edge of chaos”.

The number of neural connections in our mind can cause it to spin out of control if overstimulated, as can occur in epilepsy, or the mind can collapse into ruminations, repetitive patterns that result in things such as obsession, anger, and depression.

Our brains operate most productively “at the edge of chaos” where we use existing networks to filter extraneous information but are receptive to new information to form new connections and learning, simultaneously calming and expanding the brain.

This type of phenomenon is relatively common in natural systems and generally defines whether a system can expand in a stable and productive way, or whether cancers emerge that grow exponentially, infecting and eventually killing their host. It is possible to identify if a system is operating in a productive region or spinning into a “cancerous” region. Telltale signs include the emergence of elements that are far from the norm and cause spreading harm to the organism.

Similarly, in our most productive times, U.S. society has functioned at the “edge of chaos”. Our institutions, legal, societal, religious and economic, provided a framework for shared purpose and unity, but our freedoms allowed us to innovate and move society toward a better norm.

However, clearly U.S. society is no longer operating productively, and the cancers are obvious. Mass shootings, mistrust of institutions (e.g., government, elections, law enforcement, the courts, the press), politics in presumably non-political settings (such as church and school boards), trolling on social media, and other “uncivil” behavior. If we do not take action to treat the cancer, it indeed will destroy us.

So, what is the cure? First and foremost, recognize the problem. This is surprisingly difficult because our society has become so polarized. Too often we view the problem as “the other guy”, and, indeed, such “bifurcation” is one signal of a chaotic system spinning out of control.

A potential approach comes from the book “The Anatomy of Peace” (The Arbinger Institute). The authors describe human conflict based on a “heart at war” or a “heart at peace”. When we have a “heart at war” we tend to view others as objects or obstacles to overcome rather than as other human beings. This can lead to a “collusion cycle” where how we approach each other tends to reinforce and escalate the conflict. And we draw in “allies” that spreads the conflict to others.

The authors describe how people caught within a conflict cycle have a great deal of difficulty getting out of it. Individuals choose to act in a way consistent with their filters, and the response to their actions is predictable, resulting in self-justification, victimhood, and feelings of anger or depression. The “rightness” of their position seems proven.

As an engineer, I see these as analogous to a couple of undesirable conditions, a “positive” (ironic in this case) feedback loop that causes ever increasing escalation (like feedback in a microphone) and the problem of “path dependence”, where choices that may seem reasonable and justified at the time take us down a particular path, but as we become invested in the path, we get “locked in” to a less optimal result (the QWERTY keyboard is the classic example).

It may seem strange to some why I tend to use engineering analogies in my essays, but it helps me see the world anew, to see problems as systemic rather than individuals as problems.

If we are to emerge from the chaos and conflict of today, we first must assume that our fellow human beings love their children and want their country to be a great place to live. To assume otherwise is an indication of living with a “heart at war”, and that cancer will certainly harm its host, and, sadly, often others as well.

Theresa Bergsman, of Richland, is retired from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. She was an engineer, technical manager, and senior advisor. She has extensive experience in strategic planning where she analyzed major national and international trends to guide technology research and development programs.