The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Complementary Nature
Abstract
Why do we divide our world into contraries? Why do we perceive and interpret so many of life's contraries as mutually exclusive, either/or dichotomies such as individual~collective, self~other, body~mind, nature~nurture, cooperation~competition? Throughout history, many have recognized that truth may well lie in between such polar opposites. In The Complementary Nature, Scott Kelso and David Engstrøm contend that ubiquitous contraries are complementary and propose a comprehensive, empirically based scientific theory of how the polarized world and the world in between can be reconciled. They nominate the tilde, or squiggle (~), as the symbolic punctuation for reconciled complementary pairs. Experiments show that the human brain is capable of displaying two apparently contradictory, mutually exclusive behaviors at the same time. Coordination dynamics—a mathematically expressed theory that reconciles the scientific language of "states" with the novel dynamical language of "tendencies"—attests to the complementary nature inherent in human brains and behavior. It may explain, Kelso and Engstrøm argue, why we (and nature) appear to partition things, events, and ideas into pairs. Kelso and Engstrøm's account is not just metaphorical; the reconciliations they describe are grounded in the principles and mathematical language of the theory of coordination dynamics. The Complementary Nature provides a clear-cut methodology for this evolving theory of brain and behavior that can also be applied to areas and developments outside the neurosciences, hence aiding reconciliations within and between disparate fields. Bradford Books imprint
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
Cited by
Tognoli, E., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2014) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.12.022 · Cited by 718
Self-citationSocial coordination dynamics: measuring human bonding.
Oullier, O., de Guzman, G. C., Jantzen, K. J., Lagarde, J., & Scott Kelso, J. A. (2008) · Social Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/17470910701563392 · Cited by 404
Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change
Wilson, D. S., Hayes, S. C., Biglan, A., & Embry, D. D. (2014) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x13001593 · Cited by 255
Loops, constitution, and cognitive extension
Orestis Palermos, S. (2014) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.04.002 · Cited by 155
DeSci based on Web3 and DAO: a comprehensive overview and reference model
Ding, W., Hou, J., Li, J., Guo, C., Qin, J., Kozma, R., & Wang, F.-Y. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2022.3204745 · Cited by 98
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelso, J. A. S., & Engstrom, D. A.
- Venue
- The MIT Press eBooks
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 2006-05-05
- OpenAlex
- W1788203499
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.79
- Type
- book
- 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: The Complementary Nature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7551/mitpress/1988.001.0001
- The paper
- Kelso, J. A. S., & Engstrom, D. A. (2006). The Complementary Nature. The MIT Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1988.001.0001
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.