-Considering
Chaos-
Some papers are more
influential than what they may first appear just by the final product.
This is one of those papers in which my eyes were opened to different ways of
thinking, ways which has later influenced my theology in a myriad of ways.
It also is an example why Theology is a subject which is limited by only taking
theology or philosophy classes. I wrote this for my meteorology class my
senior year, age 21. Obviously, Wheaton is a Christian school. Ah,
the integration of faith and learning in action...
As
I gaze out of my window I see before me two prominent structures. The first, and largest, is rectangular shaped, with sharp defined angles
and straight, uncurving lines. The
second seems to follow no distinct pattern, with its central support branching
out seemingly randomly, becoming smaller and smaller as it goes. The first structure, a building, was designed by architects working with
centuries of accumulated knowledge from a great variety of scientific fields. The second structure is a tree. A
tree with no great inherent merit, or attributes. Simply a tree like any other tree. Upon
initial examination, one might say that the building is the marvel. It is the product of an advanced species, who over the course of their
existence have developed ingenious places to live and work, far beyond that
which was initially provided to them in nature. The tree is just a tree. This was the dominant view of the Enlightenment, marveling at human
ability to understand and conceive, to build and create. Nature was seen as something to dominate, to conquer, to control.
Yet,
in the past few decades scientists are re-examining this view. After moving past seemingly simple structures such as trees in pursuit of
increasingly complex phenomena, they are beginning once again to consider the
trees, the clouds, and the commonplace. For
despite their seeming simplicity, these structures contain a complexity that is
almost beyond understanding. The
tree is not a random structure, but rather one that is absolutely full of order,
though vastly beyond the ability of
prior science to determine what kind of order it is. This order and complexity is on a scale that makes the building behind it
amazingly simplistic and not even worthy of consideration. This new science, this study of overwhelming complex structures
underlying seemingly simple systems is called chaos, and it has revolutionized
the scientific world.
I come to this topic without any of the necessary qualifications needed
to satisfiably examine the richness of chaos. My mathematical and scientific training essentially ended five years ago
when I graduated from high school. My
years at Wheaton have been spent engaged in the study of history and the Bible,
in Blanchard and BGC rather than in Armerding. I do not, however, come to this topic without interest or concern. It is the way of things that science is considered the elite of all
fields of study, the area in which human logic and understanding are most
emphasized and highlighted. For most of human history philosophy and religion have
influenced how society studied the scientific world. Since the dawning of the Enlightenment, however, this trend has shifted. All fields began to try to model their study on the methodology of the
scientists, raising the Heroic Model of Science to a supreme role. Just as one could discover the laws of physics and know the internal
workings of living things, so too could educated men discover the "laws of
society" and truly know that which had happened and that which will happen. As science adjusts itself and its views, other fields make similar
adjustments, though often lagging years behind. It is with this thought in mind that I come to the study of chaos.
In his book Chaos, James Gleick examines the formational history of the
study of chaos. He looks at the
major figures and the major forms of thought that went into developing the idea
of chaos into a major factor of modern scientific thought. It all began with a meteorologist who was working with a primitive
computer on weather patterns. Seeking
to simulate a weather system over a period of time Edward Lorenz formulated
weather patterns into numerical data which the computer would develop into
continuous weather systems that fairly accurately reflected actual conditions. Seeking to examine a specific sequence one day, Lorenz began a simulation
in the middle of a run of equations, using numbers from an earlier printout. After letting this pattern run its course for a while, Lorenz returned to
find that the new printout was vastly different from the earlier one. Although the pattern began the same, it quickly began to diverge and then
became something totally different. He
soon realized what had happened. When
he re-entered the numbers, he only entered three decimal places, while the
original sequence used six decimal places. Lorenz was amazed at the fact that seemingly inconsequential numbers had
such a influential impact on the system as a whole. The complexity and sensitivity of the weather system was greater than
anyone had ever imagined. Using
this newfound knowledge, scientists now realized that, theoretically, the
flapping of a butterfly's wings in Peking could transform future storm systems
in New York. As Lorenz, and others,
began to examine nonlinear systems they discovered that seemingly random systems
of all types, including trees and clouds, followed an intricate pattern which
was not random, but beautifully full of order and pattern.
This discovery of sensitive dependence on initial conditions began a
movement in the scientific realm that Thomas Kuhn of Harvard describes as a
paradigm shift. Occurring very rarely, and with great resistance, these
shifts enact a total change in how scientists view their fields of study. Old presuppositions and assumptions are thrown out, and past data is
re-examined in light of the new underlying concept. These shifts come when new discoveries break down old systems of thought,
and the allowances and rationalizations that come with the old systems. Suddenly, the inconsequential became vital, and the nonlinear became a
field of study of its own.
In the twentieth century a new understanding of humanity developed. No longer could humanity be seen as a creature of progression or inherent
goodness. World War I burst the
bubble of thought that proclaimed that all of our social ills could be solved as
we progressed in our knowledge. Historians,
philosophers, and theologians found an inherent unpredictability in the human
species that defied understanding. With
this came a breakdown in the pursuit of accumulated knowledge. Neither God nor history could be known. Belief was separated from fact as all positions became
relative to one another. The Heroic
Model of Science broke down, and academics had nothing to replace it which could
put order and veracity back into their study. Relativistic thinking ruled the middle decades of the twentieth century. As science became increasingly specialized, the humanities had no where
to turn to for an encompassing model of study. The question now before us is whether or not Chaos could be this new
overarching theory which reaches beyond the scientific realm and into all fields
of academia.
Christianity has not always been receptive to scientific understanding.
Oftentimes, particular Christian presuppositions have opposed and debated with
what science proclaims, feeling threatened by the new discoveries. The theory of evolution stands out in this regard. Yet, in a conflict with science Christianity can lose a great deal. What is science but the quest of humanity to discover the nature of
creation? Although many would not
acknowledge the work of the Creator God, that does not take anything away from
the fact that God did indeed create. The
idea of chaos, in my mind, glorifies the omniscient Creator. We find that even simple systems are complex beyond understanding, that
random events are actually bound to order, and that nature is imbued with a
beauty and wonder that defies description even on the most basic levels. This is not a random world where trees and streams form as they will, but
one in which detail and intricacy abound.
Whether it be the elaborate beauty of mapped magnetic attraction, or the
accumulation of water molecules on an ice crystal, we find that nature is part
of an intricate interaction with itself, a dance in which every aspect plays an
important and decisive role. We
exist only because of this crucial and supersensitive interaction. This complexity is not formed according to chance or randomness, but
exists because of the intricate and complex mind of the one who created it. The basic structures of the universe are, as Behe proclaims, irreducibly
complex, and only an intelligent designer could have created such a marvel.
There are few systems more inherently complex and unpredictable than
humanity. Thus, those who try to study human behavior and interaction
face an almost impossible task if they try to predict or fully explain behavior. The vast amounts of variables that go into human thought and actions is
immense. People seem to diverge
from predicted models on a seemingly random basis. A method of therapy can do wonders for one person, and have no effect on
a seemingly similar person. How
does one explain a Hitler or a Ghandi? What
made these two so strikingly different not only from each other but also from
those who came out of identical backgrounds? Could it be the inconsequentials that had a major effect on their lives? Past historians sought to explain their actions by looking at major
influences and strong formational events. Can
it be said that the major differences were not noticed even by those involved? A smile, a reproach, or any other numerous, minor events could have
created a shift which resulted in their final form. It seems that the idea of chaos is completely apropos to the
study of the human system.
With this in mind, the lessons that Christ had to teach us become even
more vital. Jesus knew the
intricacy and sensitivity of the system. He
knew that small interactions and decisions could have determinative influences
in our lives. Just looking at his
own interactions, and the way he changed people's lives, shows us how a simple
touch or a few words could impact the world as a whole. Minor changes in thought, or minor decisions on actions could vitally
influence a life. In this way God
can interact and influence us and our lives in imperceptible ways. A miracle need not be grand to be great. In the same way moral decisions become ever more important. God did not dictate random morality that could be individually decided
upon. He knew that moral actions
have consequences, and that these consequences can impact not just the
individual but whole societies.
In the popular book and movie Jurassic
Park mathematician Ian Malcolm uses the idea of chaos to predict the restoration
of dinosaurs from an artificial state to a natural state. The minor manipulations of the scientists in that movie were
inconsequential in comparison to the myriad of other variables that guided the
system as a whole. They could not
control the behavior because they did not have control over all the influencing
factors. God does have control, and
he is fully aware of how the system should be acting in order to maximize its
great potential. When sin entered
humanity, the system began to stray toward destruction. Sin causes death and spirals humanity into eventual ruin. Knowing the variables involved God interacted with the system in order to
show the proper methods of correcting the system as it continues. He gave us his law. These
are the laws that guide humanity toward what God intended his system to be. The ornate and complex set of morality that he gave us seems
inconsequential and irrelevant, but in fact is crucial to our survival.
The idea of chaos gave order to what was
dismissed as unknowable and inconsequential. When minute data was found to be crucial to the systems as a whole a
shift took place in which all fields of science were affected. Men such as Lorenz and Mandelbrot showed the intricacy and sensitivity
inherent in the created world. No
longer could words such as random and chance be used to describe what was going
on in this world. This paradigm
shift has only recently taken hold of the scientific world. As other fields of study follow, people will begin to realize the order
and sensitivity inherent in all of creation, including humanity. What we do affects this world. We
are not isolated beings uninfluenced and uninfluential. We are responsible to each other and to our creator for our actions, no
matter how seemingly insignificant. This
world is a system of unimaginable complexity, a fact which we are only beginning
to discover. As we face life
knowing that even the smallest decisions could have significant impact it would
behoove us to go to the Creator continuously in order to gain His perspective
and wisdom. In the face of chaos we
can find guidance and salvation only in Christ, the Creator of the intricate and
complex.
