Applying chaos theory to population dynamics and migration

Chaos is not hard to see. It's everywhere in nature.

History can provide valuable reference points, but we must always interpret history knowing how these events unfolded within the context of chaotic systems. [B]Remember, human systems are [U]NON-LINEAR[/U], whereas history is written linearly because it's easy for the human mind to consume.[/B]

The butterfly effect shows us that making predictions about chaotic systems in a [B]linear way[/B] is severely unreliable. Something small can have profound effects on the evolution of a chaotic system despite being hidden from view.

For example, it could have been one person in Japan that set off the events that led to the Meiji Restoration. If that person didn't exist, the entire history of East Asia could have been tremendously different. Or if the inventor of a disruptive new technology was never born and how that could reshape entire cultural landscapes.

Given this logic, we can see how many supposedly insignificant and undocumented events could have led to huge changes to the evolution of Asia. This is why we must be very careful when we make historical statements that describe the chaotic system in a linear way. Those who wrote the history books were NOT omnipotent nor did they see all information about the chaotic system in which they lived. [B]Historians usually have make [U]predictions[/U] to fill in the gaps of their understanding.[/B]

Again, [B]human systems have tremendous [U]statistical variation[/U] as well as [U]non-linear feedback[/U] loops that make them tremendously unpredictable[/B], so you can see how ludicrous it sounds when people present their biased perspectives as fact.

Here's a book called "On the Order of Chaos" written by leading anthropologists:

Over the past two decades, “chaos theory” – the perception of order previously hidden in phenomena of apparent randomness and disorder – has fundamentally transformed the natural sciences. In recent years, numerous scholars in the social sciences and humanities have attempted to adapt the insights of chaos theory to their studies of human cultural and social systems. Several of the world’s leading anthropologists, such as Roy Wagner, Marshall Sahlins, Marilyn Strathern, and Arjun Appadurai – have similarly drawn upon particular elements of chaos theory for their inspiration, but as yet there is no focused, comprehensive treatment of the applicability of chaos theory to anthropology’s distinctive ethnographic and cross-cultural materials. This edited volume fills the gap, with both accessible theoretical discussions of chaos theory applications in anthropology and detailed ethnographic and historical illustrations from Africa and Melanesia.

[url] http://books.google.ca/books/about/On_the_Order_of_Chaos.html?id=cnNksESFilkC&redir_esc=y [/url]

I'm not saying that history has no truth value whatsoever. What I am saying is that history should be used more like a [B]reference point[/B] rather than an all-encompassing description of events occurring in a chaotic system. [U]History gives clues, but one must never take it as a literal description of the whole system.[/U]

[B]While you can use history to understand some context, you should still use [U]chaos theory[/U] as the [U]theoretical framework[/U] for how human systems [U]behave and evolve.[/U][/B]

[U][B]Just like how scientists use fossil records as reference points for the theoretical framework called evolution!![/B][/U]

For example, saying that "human migration only goes in one direction" because of historical accounts is absolutely stupid. Yes, it may be the case that there was a Chinese mass migration from North to South due to some political events in the North. But that still doesn't exclude the fact that [B][U]UNDOCUMENTED[/U][/B] migrations were already occurring in both directions as a natural consequence of chaotic movement.

[B][U]This natural movement occurs continuously over time and the aggregate sum of these movements adds up to much more than any one-time mass migration.[/U][/B]

People like to make [B]oversimplified[/B] interpretations of history by saying that ALL migrations went from "North to South", but what we understand from the properties of chaotic systems is that migrations ALWAYS went in both directions. Thus, those who take "historical stories" literally are making false statements about the actual nature of migrations in China by over-emphasizing the [B]RECORDED[/B] mass migration and under-emphasizing the countless [B]UNDOCUMENTED[/B] migrations that also occurred.

Take a look at the migrations of Polynesia:

[IMG] [/IMG]

Without any historical pressures, people naturally traveled across great distances to seek new opportunities. Human movements are dynamic, constant, and absolutely chaotic. We've conquered every continent in the planet. Even within China now, people are migrating across provinces constantly and mixing together. This chaotic movement is occurring now as it always occurred in the past.

[B]These universal truths about chaotic systems can provide more information about the past than historical "sources" alone. [/B]

I hope this theoretical framework can bring the discussion about history and anthropology to a higher level on Eastbound88. -hatguy

[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

[B]Chaos produces patterns on a [U]GEOGRAPHIC CLINE.[/U][/B]

[IMG] [/IMG]

Please tell me about the "history" of this pendulum?

[IMG] [/IMG]

Can you make a prediction that people are going to be crossing in both directions?

People who think that "historical records" are omnipotent and not tinged with bias and revisionism are completely blinded from the truth.

Historical accounts can only provide so much information... everything else should be held up to the light of scrutiny from an [B][U]AGNOSTIC[/U][/B] perspective.

Even in a time with unprecedented information at our disposal, you still see rampant bias and revisionism in the way history is taught. Just look at Japan's current attempts at historical revisionism for example.

Those who blindly believe their nationality's historical narrative as fact are perpetuating their own ignorance of potentially greater truths.

But you know, when given a choice between truth or a self-indulging fantasy of historical superiority, most would choose the latter.

[IMG] [/IMG]