The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Complexity, Deconstruction and Relativism
Abstract
The acknowledgement that something is complex, it is argued, implies that our knowledge of it will always be limited. We cannot make complete, absolute or final claims about complex systems. Post-structuralism, and specifically deconstruction, make similar claims about knowledge in general. Arguments against deconstruction can, therefore, also be held against a critical form of complexity thinking and a defence of the view from complexity (as presented here) should take account of them. Three of these arguments are investigated: that deconstruction and complexity-thinking lead to relativism, that they are subject to the performative contradiction and that their claims are vague. It is shown that these critiques are not really effective and it is suggested that a responsible approach to complexity has to be provisional, i.e. modest, without being vague or relativistic.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Holland, J. H. (1998) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198504092.001.0001 · Cited by 2,410
Complexity and post-modernism: understanding complex systems
Cilliers, P., & Spurrett, D. (1999) · South African Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1080/02580136.1999.10878187 · Cited by 1,913
Self-citationThe Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures.
Benhabib, S., Habermas, J., & Lawrence, F. G. (1987) · The Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.2307/2026591 · Cited by 1,246
The Moment of Complexity: Emerging Network Culture
Taylor, M. C. (2001) · Cited by 388
BOUNDARIES, HIERARCHIES AND NETWORKS IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS
CILLIERS, P. (2001) · International Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1142/s1363919601000312 · Cited by 320
Self-citationBoundaries, Hierarchies and Networks in Complex Systems
Cilliers, P. (2001) · International Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1016/s1363-9196(01)00031-2 · Cited by 277
Self-citationImpossibility : the limits of science and the science of limits
Barrow, J. D. (1998) · Cited by 216
Special Editors' Introduction: What Is Complexity Science? A View from Different Directions
(2001) · Emergence · doi:10.1207/s15327000em0301_02 · Cited by 172
Why We Cannot Know Complex Things Completely
Cilliers, P. (2002) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1080/15213250.2002.9687736 · Cited by 144
Self-citationArticulation of Parts Explanation in Biology and the Rational Search for them
Kauffman, S. A. (1971) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-3142-4_18 · Cited by 128
Cited by
Complexity thinking and evolutionary economic geography
Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2007) · Journal of Economic Geography · doi:10.1093/jeg/lbm019 · Cited by 490
Adaptiveness to enhance the sustainability of farming systems. A review
Darnhofer, I., Bellon, S., Dedieu, B., & Milestad, R. (2010) · Agronomy for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1051/agro/2009053 · Cited by 420
Elliott, K., Price, R., Shaw, P., Spiliotopoulos, T., Ng, M., Coopamootoo, K., & van Moorsel, A. (2021) · Society · doi:10.1007/s12115-021-00594-8 · Cited by 184
Religion as a Complex and Dynamic System
Cho, F., & Squier, R. K. (2013) · Journal of the American Academy of Religion · doi:10.1093/jaarel/lft016 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Cilliers, P.
- Venue
- Theory, Culture & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 255-267
- ISSN
- 0263-2764 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3616
- OpenAlex
- W2053812228
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 16
- FWCI
- 7.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Complexity, Deconstruction and Relativism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0263276405058052
- The paper
- Cilliers, P. (2005). Complexity, Deconstruction and Relativism. Theory, Culture & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276405058052
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
