📓On Literature: On Prediction (From Fiction to Science Fiction)

"[…] anybody with a genuine system of prediction would be using it, not selling it." (Philip K Dick, "Solar Lottery", 1955) 

"We cannot predict the new forces, powers, and discoveries that will be disclosed to us when we reach the other planets and set up new laboratories in space. They are as much beyond our vision today as fire or electricity would be beyond the imagination of a fish." (Arthur C Clarke, "Space and the Spirit of Man", 1965)

"You could not predict what would happen in a single instance, a single throw of the dice, a single pitch in the seventh inning, a single toss of the coin. But you could predict three out of five, four out of ten, seven out of sixteen, and to that extent chance governed everyone, all the time. Just as surely as two equals two." (Michael Crichton,"Odds On", 1966)

"When one culture has the big guns and the other has none, there is a certain predictability about the outcome." (Joanna Russ, ‘"When It Changed", 1972)

"All reality is a game. Physics at its most fundamental, the very fabric of our universe, results directly from the interaction of certain fairly simple rules, and chance; the same description may be applied to the best, most elegant and both intellectually and aesthetically satisfying games. By being unknowable, by resulting from events which, at the sub-atomic level, cannot be fully predicted, the future remains malleable, and retains the possibility of change, the hope of coming to prevail; victory, to use an unfashionable word. In this, the future is a game; time is one of its rules." (Iain Banks, "The Player of Games", 1988)

"Things rarely happen for a single reason. Even the cleverest and most skilled manipulators recognize that their real art lies in making use of that which they cannot predict." (Tom Clancy, "Debt of Honor", 1994)

"[...] you can’t stay committed to one pattern. It makes you too easy to predict." (Orson Scott Card, "First Meetings in Ender's Universe", 2002)

"Averages might mean something to bureaucrats and engineers, but the sea had no struck with statistics: it was a succession of unpredictable circumstances and extremes." (Frank Schätzing, "The Swarm", 2004)

On Prediction XV: Systems III

"The state of a system at a given moment depends on two things - its initial state, and the law according to which that state varies. If we know both this law and this initial state, we have a simple mathematical problem to solve, and we fall back upon our first degree of ignorance. Then it often happens that we know the law and do not know the initial state. It may be asked, for instance, what is the present distribution of the minor planets? We know that from all time they have obeyed the laws of Kepler, but we do not know what was their initial distribution. In the kinetic theory of gases we assume that the gaseous molecules follow rectilinear paths and obey the laws of impact and elastic bodies; yet as we know nothing of their initial velocities, we know nothing of their present velocities. The calculus of probabilities alone enables us to predict the mean phenomena which will result from a combination of these velocities. This is the second degree of ignorance. Finally it is possible, that not only the initial conditions but the laws themselves are unknown. We then reach the third degree of ignorance, and in general we can no longer affirm anything at all as to the probability of a phenomenon. It often happens that instead of trying to discover an event by means of a more or less imperfect knowledge of the law, the events may be known, and we want to find the law; or that, instead of deducing effects from causes, we wish to deduce the causes." (Henri Poincaré, "Science and Hypothesis", 1902)

"Although a system may exhibit sensitive dependence on initial conditions, this does not mean that everything is unpredictable about it. In fact, finding what is predictable in a background of chaos is a deep and important problem. (Which means that, regrettably, it is unsolved.) In dealing with this deep and important problem, and for want of a better approach, we shall use common sense." (David Ruelle, "Chance and Chaos", 1991)

"Although the detailed moment-to-moment behavior of a chaotic system cannot be predicted, the overall pattern of its 'random' fluctuations may be similar from scale to scale. Likewise, while the fine details of a chaotic system cannot be predicted one can know a little bit about the range of its 'random' fluctuation." (F David Peat, "From Certainty to Uncertainty", 2002)

"[…] while chaos theory deals in regions of randomness and chance, its equations are entirely deterministic. Plug in the relevant numbers and out comes the answer. In principle at least, dealing with a chaotic system is no different from predicting the fall of an apple or sending a rocket to the moon. In each case deterministic laws govern the system. This is where the chance of chaos differs from the chance that is inherent in quantum theory." (F David Peat, "From Certainty to Uncertainty", 2002)

"Chaos is a phenomenon encountered in science and mathematics wherein a deterministic (rule-based) system behaves unpredictably. That is, a system which is governed by fixed, precise rules, nevertheless behaves in a way which is, for all practical purposes, unpredictable in the long run. The mathematical use of the word 'chaos' does not align well with its more common usage to indicate lawlessness or the complete absence of order. On the contrary, mathematically chaotic systems are, in a sense, perfectly ordered, despite their apparent randomness. This seems like nonsense, but it is not." (David P Feldman, "Chaos and Fractals: An Elementary Introduction", 2012)

On Linearity II

"Why are nonlinear systems so much harder to analyze than linear ones? The essential difference is that linear systems can be broken down into parts. Then each part can be solved separately and finally recombined to get the answer. This idea allows a fantastic simplification of complex problems, and underlies such methods as normal modes, Laplace transforms, superposition arguments, and Fourier analysis. In this sense, a linear system is precisely equal to the sum of its parts." (Steven H Strogatz, "Non-Linear Dynamics and Chaos, 1994)

"When we examine the modeling literature, its most striking aspect is the predominance of 'flat' linear models. Why is this the case? After all, from a singularity theory viewpoint these linear objects are mathematical rarities. On mathematical grounds we should certainly not expect to see them put forth as credible representations of reality. Yet they are. And the reason is simple: linearity is a neutral assumption that leads to mathematically tractable models. So unless there is good reason to do otherwise, why not use a linear model?"  (John L Casti, "Five Golden Rules", 1995)

"In a linear system a tiny push produces a small effect, so that cause and effect are always proportional to each other. If one plotted on a graph the cause against the effect, the result would be a straight line. In nonlinear systems, however, a small push may produce a small effect, a slightly larger push produces a proportionately larger effect, but increase that push by a hair’s breadth and suddenly the system does something radically different." (F David Peat, "From Certainty to Uncertainty", 2002)

"Linearity means that the rule that determines what a piece of a system is going to do next is not influenced by what it is doing now. More precisely, this is intended in a differential or incremental sense: For a linear spring, the increase of its tension is proportional to the increment whereby it is stretched, with the ratio of these increments exactly independent of how much it has already been stretched. Such a spring can be stretched arbitrarily far, and in particular will never snap or break. Accordingly, no real spring is linear." (Heinz-Otto Peitgen et al, "Chaos and Fractals: New Frontiers of Science" 2nd Ed., 2004) 

"Most long-range forecasts of what is technically feasible in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future developments because they are based on what I call the 'intuitive linear' view of history rather than the 'historical exponential' view." (Ray Kurzweil, "The Singularity is Near", 2005)

"Linear systems do not benefit from noise because the output of a linear system is just a simple scaled version of the input [...] Put noise in a linear system and you get out noise. Sometimes you get out a lot more noise than you put in. This can produce explosive effects in feedback systems that take their own outputs as inputs." (Bart Kosko, "Noise", 2006)

"On a linear system like a scale, the whole is equal to the sum of the parts. That’s the first key property of linearity. The second is that causes are proportional to effects. […] These two properties - the proportionality between cause and effect, and the equality of the whole to the sum of the parts - are the essence of what it means to be linear. […] The great advantage of linearity is that it allows for reductionist thinking. To solve a linear problem, we can break it down to its simplest parts, solve each part separately, and put the parts back together to get the answer." (Steven H Strogatz, "Infinite Powers: The Story of Calculus - The Most Important Discovery in Mathematics", 2019)

"[...] perhaps one of the most important features of complex systems, which is a key differentiator when comparing with chaotic systems, is the concept of emergence. Emergence 'breaks' the notion of determinism and linearity because it means that the outcome of these interactions is naturally unpredictable. In large systems, macro features often emerge in ways that cannot be traced back to any particular event or agent. Therefore, complexity theory is based on interaction, emergence and iterations." (Luis Tomé & Şuay Nilhan Açıkalın, "Complexity Theory as a New Lens in IR: System and Change" [in "Chaos, Complexity and Leadership 2017", Şefika Şule Erçetin & Nihan Potas], 2019)

"With a linear growth of errors, improving the measurements could always keep pace with the desire for longer prediction. But when errors grow exponentially fast, a system is said to have sensitive dependence on its initial conditions. Then long-term prediction becomes impossible. This is the philosophically disturbing message of chaos." (Steven H Strogatz, "Infinite Powers: The Story of Calculus - The Most Important Discovery in Mathematics", 2019)

John D Kelleher - Collected Quotes

"A predictive model overfits the training set when at least some of the predictions it returns are based on spurious patterns present in the training data used to induce the model. Overfitting happens for a number of reasons, including sampling variance and noise in the training set. The problem of overfitting can affect any machine learning algorithm; however, the fact that decision tree induction algorithms work by recursively splitting the training data means that they have a natural tendency to segregate noisy instances and to create leaf nodes around these instances. Consequently, decision trees overfit by splitting the data on irrelevant features that only appear relevant due to noise or sampling variance in the training data. The likelihood of overfitting occurring increases as a tree gets deeper because the resulting predictions are based on smaller and smaller subsets as the dataset is partitioned after each feature test in the path." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"Decision trees are also discriminative models. Decision trees are induced by recursively partitioning the feature space into regions belonging to the different classes, and consequently they define a decision boundary by aggregating the neighboring regions belonging to the same class. Decision tree model ensembles based on bagging and boosting are also discriminative models." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"Decision trees are also considered nonparametric models. The reason for this is that when we train a decision tree from data, we do not assume a fixed set of parameters prior to training that define the tree. Instead, the tree branching and the depth of the tree are related to the complexity of the dataset it is trained on. If new instances were added to the dataset and we rebuilt the tree, it is likely that we would end up with a (potentially very) different tree." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"It is important to remember that predictive data analytics models built using machine learning techniques are tools that we can use to help make better decisions within an organization and are not an end in themselves. It is paramount that, when tasked with creating a predictive model, we fully understand the business problem that this model is being constructed to address and ensure that it does address it." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, worked examples, and case studies", 2015)

"The main advantage of decision tree models is that they are interpretable. It is relatively easy to understand the sequences of tests a decision tree carried out in order to make a prediction. This interpretability is very important in some domains. [...] Decision tree models can be used for datasets that contain both categorical and continuous descriptive features. A real advantage of the decision tree approach is that it has the ability to model the interactions between descriptive features. This arises from the fact that the tests carried out at each node in the tree are performed in the context of the results of the tests on the other descriptive features that were tested at the preceding nodes on the path from the root. Consequently, if there is an interaction effect between two or more descriptive features, a decision tree can model this."  (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"There are two kinds of mistakes that an inappropriate inductive bias can lead to: underfitting and overfitting. Underfitting occurs when the prediction model selected by the algorithm is too simplistic to represent the underlying relationship in the dataset between the descriptive features and the target feature. Overfitting, by contrast, occurs when the prediction model selected by the algorithm is so complex that the model fits to the dataset too closely and becomes sensitive to noise in the data."(John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"Tree pruning identifies and removes subtrees within a decision tree that are likely to be due to noise and sample variance in the training set used to induce it. In cases where a subtree is deemed to be overfitting, pruning the subtree means replacing the subtree with a leaf node that makes a prediction based on the majority target feature level (or average target feature value) of the dataset created by merging the instances from all the leaf nodes in the subtree. Obviously, pruning will result in decision trees being created that are not consistent with the training set used to build them. In general, however, we are more interested in creating prediction models that generalize well to new data rather than that are strictly consistent with training data, so it is common to sacrifice consistency for generalization capacity." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"When datasets are small, a parametric model may perform well because the strong assumptions made by the model - if correct - can help the model to avoid overfitting. However, as the size of the dataset grows, particularly if the decision boundary between the classes is very complex, it may make more sense to allow the data to inform the predictions more directly. Obviously the computational costs associated with nonparametric models and large datasets cannot be ignored. However, support vector machines are an example of a nonparametric model that, to a large extent, avoids this problem. As such, support vector machines are often a good choice in complex domains with lots of data." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, Worked Examples, and Case Studies", 2015)

"When we find data quality issues due to valid data during data exploration, we should note these issues in a data quality plan for potential handling later in the project. The most common issues in this regard are missing values and outliers, which are both examples of noise in the data." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, worked examples, and case studies", 2015)

"A neural network consists of a set of neurons that are connected together. A neuron takes a set of numeric values as input and maps them to a single output value. At its core, a neuron is simply a multi-input linear-regression function. The only significant difference between the two is that in a neuron the output of the multi-input linear-regression function is passed through another function that is called the activation function." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"Data scientists should have some domain expertise. Most data science projects begin with a real-world, domain-specific problem and the need to design a data-driven solution to this problem. As a result, it is important for a data scientist to have enough domain expertise that they understand the problem, why it is important, an dhow a data science solution to the problem might fit into an organization’s processes. This domain expertise guides the data scientist as she works toward identifying an optimized solution." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"One of the biggest myths is the belief that data science is an autonomous process that we can let loose on our data to find the answers to our problems. In reality, data science requires skilled human oversight throughout the different stages of the process. [...] The second big myth of data science is that every data science project needs big data and needs to use deep learning. In general, having more data helps, but having the right data is the more important requirement. [...] A third data science myth is that modern data science software is easy to use, and so data science is easy to do. [...] The last myth about data science [...] is the belief that data science pays for itself quickly. The truth of this belief depends on the context of the organization. Adopting data science can require significant investment in terms of developing data infrastructure and hiring staff with data science expertise. Furthermore, data science will not give positive results on every project." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"One of the most important skills for a data scientist is the ability to frame a real-world problem as a standard data science task." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"Presenting data in a graphical format makes it much easier to see and understand what is happening with the data. Data visualization applies to all phases of the data science process."  (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"The goal of data science is to improve decision making by basing decisions on insights extracted from large data sets. As a field of activity, data science encompasses a set of principles, problem definitions, algorithms, and processes for extracting nonobvious and useful patterns from large data sets. It is closely related to the fields of data mining and machine learning, but it is broader in scope." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"The patterns that we extract using data science are useful only if they give us insight into the problem that enables us to do something to help solve the problem." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"The promise of data science is that it provides a way to understand the world through data." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"Using data science, we can uncover the important patterns in a data set, and these patterns can reveal the important attributes in the domain. The reason why data science is used in so many domains is that it doesn’t matter what the problem domain is: if the right data are available and the problem can be clearly defined, then data science can help."  (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"We humans are reasonably good at defining rules that check one, two, or even three attributes (also commonly referred to as features or variables), but when we go higher than three attributes, we can start to struggle to handle the interactions between them. By contrast, data science is often applied in contexts where we want to look for patterns among tens, hundreds, thousands, and, in extreme cases, millions of attributes." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

On Randomness VI (Systems II)

"Systems, acting dynamically, produce (and incidentally, reproduce) their own boundaries, as structures which are complementary (necessarily so) to their motion and dynamics. They are liable, for all that, to instabilities chaos, as commonly interpreted of chaotic form, where nowadays, is remote from the random. Chaos is a peculiar situation in which the trajectories of a system, taken in the traditional sense, fail to converge as they approach their limit cycles or 'attractors' or 'equilibria'. Instead, they diverge, due to an increase, of indefinite magnitude, in amplification or gain." (Gordon Pask, "Different Kinds of Cybernetics", 1992)

"Entropy [...] is the amount of disorder or randomness present in any system. All non-living systems tend toward disorder; left alone they will eventually lose all motion and degenerate into an inert mass. When this permanent stage is reached and no events occur, maximum entropy is attained. A living system can, for a finite time, avert this unalterable process by importing energy from its environment. It is then said to create negentropy, something which is characteristic of all kinds of life." (Lars Skyttner, "General Systems Theory: Ideas and Applications", 2001)

"For the study of the topology of the interactions of a complex system it is of central importance to have proper random null models of networks, i.e., models of how a graph arises from a random process. Such models are needed for comparison with real world data. When analyzing the structure of real world networks, the null hypothesis shall always be that the link structure is due to chance alone. This null hypothesis may only be rejected if the link structure found differs significantly from an expectation value obtained from a random model. Any deviation from the random null model must be explained by non-random processes." (Jörg Reichardt, "Structure in Complex Networks", 2009)

"[...] a high degree of unpredictability is associated with erratic trajectories. This not only because they look random but mostly because infinitesimally small uncertainties on the initial state of the system grow very quickly - actually exponentially fast. In real world, this error amplification translates into our inability to predict the system behavior from the unavoidable imperfect knowledge of its initial state." (Massimo Cencini et al, "Chaos: From Simple Models to Complex Systems", 2010)

"Chaos is a phenomenon encountered in science and mathematics wherein a deterministic (rule-based) system behaves unpredictably. That is, a system which is governed by fixed, precise rules, nevertheless behaves in a way which is, for all practical purposes, unpredictable in the long run. The mathematical use of the word 'chaos' does not align well with its more common usage to indicate lawlessness or the complete absence of order. On the contrary, mathematically chaotic systems are, in a sense, perfectly ordered, despite their apparent randomness. This seems like nonsense, but it is not." (David P Feldman, "Chaos and Fractals: An Elementary Introduction", 2012)

"Systems subjected to randomness - and unpredictability - build a mechanism beyond the robust to opportunistically reinvent themselves each generation, with a continuous change of population and species." (Nassim N Taleb, "Antifragile: Things that gain from disorder", 2012)

"When some systems are stuck in a dangerous impasse, randomness and only randomness can unlock them and set them free. You can see here that absence of randomness equals guaranteed death. The idea of injecting random noise into a system to improve its functioning has been applied across fields. By a mechanism called stochastic resonance, adding random noise to the background makes you hear the sounds (say, music) with more accuracy." (Nassim N Taleb, "Antifragile: Things that gain from disorder", 2012)

"A system in which a few things interacting produce tremendously divergent behavior; deterministic chaos; it looks random but its not." (Christopher Langton)

On Randomness VIII (Events II)

"Our lives today are not conducted in linear terms. They are much more quantified; a stream of random events is taking place." (James G Ballard, [Conversation with George MacBeth on Third Programme - BBC], 1967)

"Events may appear to us to be random, but this could be attributed to human ignorance about the details of the processes involved." (Brain S Everitt, "Chance Rules", 1999)

"That randomness gives rise to innovation and diversity in nature is echoed by the notion that chance is also the source of invention in the arts and everyday affairs in which naturally occurring processes are balanced between tight organization, where redundancy is paramount, and volatility, in which little order is possible. One can argue that there is a difference in kind between the unconscious, and sometimes conscious, choices made by a writer or artist in creating a string of words or musical notes and the accidental succession of events taking place in the natural world. However, it is the perception of ambiguity in a string that matters, and not the process that generated it, whether it be man-made or from nature at large." (Edward Beltrami, "What is Random?: Chaos and Order in Mathematics and Life", 1999)

"The subject of probability begins by assuming that some mechanism of uncertainty is at work giving rise to what is called randomness, but it is not necessary to distinguish between chance that occurs because of some hidden order that may exist and chance that is the result of blind lawlessness. This mechanism, figuratively speaking, churns out a succession of events, each individually unpredictable, or it conspires to produce an unforeseeable outcome each time a large ensemble of possibilities is sampled."  (Edward Beltrami, "What is Random?: Chaos and Order in Mathematics and Life", 1999)

"Random events often come like the raisins in a box of cereal - in groups, streaks, and clusters. And although Fortune is fair in potentialities, she is not fair in outcomes." (Leonard Mlodinow, "The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"The outline of our lives, like the candles flame, is continuously coaxed in new directions by a variety of random events that, along with our responses to them, determine our fate." (Leonard Mlodinow, "The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"Why is the human need to be in control relevant to a discussion of random patterns? Because if events are random, we are not in control, and if we are in control of events, they are not random. There is therefore a fundamental clash between our need to feel we are in control and our ability to recognize randomness. That clash is one of the principal reasons we misinterpret random events."  (Leonard Mlodinow, "The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"Quantum physicists today are reconciled to randomness at the individual event level, but to expect causality to underlie statistical quantum phenomena is reasonable. Suppose a person shakes an ink pen such that ink spots are formed on a white wall, in what appears for all intents and purposes, randomly. Let us further suppose the random ink spots accumulate to form precise pictures of different known persons' faces every time. We will not regard the overall result to be a happenchance; we are apt to suspect there must be a 'method' to the person who is shaking the ink pen." (Ravi Gomatam) [response to Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg's article "Einstein's Mistakes", Physics Today Vol. 59 (4), 2005]

"We are hardwired to make sense of the world around us - to notice patterns and invent theories to explain these patterns. We underestimate how easily pat - terns can be created by inexplicable random events - by good luck and bad luck." (Gary Smith, "Standard Deviations", 2014)

On Randomness XXVI (Universe)

"Random chance was not a sufficient explanation of the Universe - in fact, random chance was not sufficient to explain random chance; the pot could not hold itself." (Robert A Heinlein, "Stranger in a Strange Land", 1961)

"The line between inner and outer landscapes is breaking down. Earthquakes can result from seismic upheavals within the human mind. The whole random universe of the industrial age is breaking down into cryptic fragments." (William S Burroughs, [preface] 1972)

"There is no reason to assume that the universe has the slightest interest in intelligence -  or even in life. Both may be random accidental by-products of its operations like the beautiful patterns on a butterfly's wings. The insect would fly just as well without them […]" (Arthur C Clarke, "The Lost Worlds of 2001", 1972)

"It is tempting to wonder if our present universe, large as it is and complex though it seems, might not be merely the result of a very slight random increase in order over a very small portion of an unbelievably colossal universe which is virtually entirely in heat-death." (Isaac Asimov, 1976)

"Perhaps randomness is not merely an adequate description for complex causes that we cannot specify. Perhaps the world really works this way, and many events are uncaused in any conventional sense of the word." (Stephen J Gould, "Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes", 1983)

"The world of science lives fairly comfortably with paradox. We know that light is a wave and also that light is a particle. The discoveries made in the infinitely small world of particle physics indicate randomness and chance, and I do not find it any more difficult to live with the paradox of a universe of randomness and chance and a universe of pattern and purpose than I do with light as a wave and light as a particle. Living with contradiction is nothing new to the human being." (Madeline L'Engle, "Two-Part Invention: The Story of a Marriage", 1988)

"Intriguingly, the mathematics of randomness, chaos, and order also furnishes what may be a vital escape from absolute certainty - an opportunity to exercise free will in a deterministic universe. Indeed, in the interplay of order and disorder that makes life interesting, we appear perpetually poised in a state of enticingly precarious perplexity. The universe is neither so crazy that we can’t understand it at all nor so predictable that there’s nothing left for us to discover." (Ivars Peterson, "The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari", 1997)

"Often, we use the word random loosely to describe something that is disordered, irregular, patternless, or unpredictable. We link it with chance, probability, luck, and coincidence. However, when we examine what we mean by random in various contexts, ambiguities and uncertainties inevitably arise. Tackling the subtleties of randomness allows us to go to the root of what we can understand of the universe we inhabit and helps us to define the limits of what we can know with certainty." (Ivars Peterson, "The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari", 1998)

"The first view of randomness is of clutter bred by complicated entanglements. Even though we know there are rules, the outcome is uncertain. Lotteries and card games are generally perceived to belong to this category. More troublesome is that nature's design itself is known imperfectly, and worse, the rules may be hidden from us, and therefore we cannot specify a cause or discern any pattern of order. When, for instance, an outcome takes place as the confluence of totally unrelated events, it may appear to be so surprising and bizarre that we say that it is due to blind chance." (Edward Beltrami. "What is Random?: Chance and Order in Mathematics and Life", 1999)

"The tissue of the world is built from necessities and randomness; the intellect of men places itself between both and can control them; it considers the necessity and the reason of its existence; it knows how randomness can be managed, controlled, and used." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)

📊On Statistics: On Statistical Tools - Coins

"Equiprobability in the physical world is purely a hypothesis. We may exercise the greatest care and the most accurate of scientific instruments to determine whether or not a penny is symmetrical. Even if we are satisfied that it is, and that our evidence on that point is conclusive, our knowledge, or rather our ignorance, about the vast number of other causes which affect the fall of the penny is so abysmal that the fact of the penny’s symmetry is a mere detail. Thus, the statement 'head and tail are equiprobable' is at best an assumption." (Edward Kasner & James R Newman, "Mathematics and the Imagination", 1940)

"The mathematical concept of chance, or probability, must not be confused with the psychological notion of likelihood. If a coin upon being tossed six times in succession has come up 'heads' each of the six times, we may be impelled to feel that upon the seventh toss it is 'more likely' to turn 'tails' in view of the six previous heads; but this is only an emotional reaction and not a mathematical probability. Mathematically [...] on any single throw, the chances are even for heads or tails, irrespective of what the previous trials may have been. In the long run, the greater the number of trials, the more nearly equal will become the number of heads and tails." (William L Schaaf, "Mathematics For Everyday Use", 1942)

"A misunderstanding of Bernoulli’s theorem is responsible for one of the commonest fallacies in the estimation of probabilities, the fallacy of the maturity of chances. When a coin has come down heads twice in succession, gamblers sometimes say that it is more likely to come down tails next time because ‘by the law of averages’ (whatever that may mean) the proportion of tails must be brought right some time." (William Kneale, "Probability and Induction", 1949)

"We must emphasize that such terms as 'select at random', 'choose at random', and the like, always mean that some mechanical device, such as coins, cards, dice, or tables of random numbers, is used." (Frederick Mosteller et al, "Principles of Sampling", Journal of the American Statistical Association Vol. 49 (265), 1954)

"And nobody can get [...] far without at least an acquaintance with the mathematics of probability, not to the extent of making its calculations and filling examination papers with typical equations, but enough to know when they can be trusted, and when they are cooked. For when their imaginary numbers correspond to exact quantities of hard coins unalterably stamped with heads and tails, they are safe within certain limits; for here we have solid certainty [...] but when the calculation is one of no constant and several very capricious variables, guesswork, personal bias, and pecuniary interests, come in so strong that those who began by ignorantly imagining that statistics cannot lie end by imagining equally ignorantly, that they never do anything else." (George B Shaw, "The World of Mathematics", 1956)

"[...] there can be such a thing as a simple probabilistic system. For example, consider the tossing of a penny. Here is a perfectly simple system, but one which is notoriously unpredictable. It maybe described in terms of a binary decision process, with a built-in even probability between the two possible outcomes." (Stafford Beer, "Cybernetics and Management", 1959)

"The shrewd guess, the fertile hypothesis, the courageous leap to a tentative conclusion - these are the most valuable coin of the thinker at work." (Jerome S Bruner, "The Process of Education", 1960)

"No Chancellor of the Exchequer could introduce his proposals for monetary and fiscal policy in the House of Commons by saying 'I have looked at all the forecasts, some go one way, some another; so I decided to toss a coin and assume inflationary tendencies if it came down heads and deflationary if it came down tails' [...] And statistics, however uncertain, can apparently provide some basis." (Ely Devons, "Essays in Economics", 1961)

"The equanimity of your average tosser of coins depends upon a law, or rather a tendency, or let us say a probability, or at any rate a mathematically calculable chance, which ensures that he will not upset himself by losing too much nor upset his opponent by winning too often." (Tom Stoppard, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead", 1967)

"A significant property of the value function, called loss aversion, is that the response to losses is more extreme than the response to gains. The common reluctance to accept a fair bet on the toss of a coin suggests that the displeasure of losing a sum of money exceeds the pleasure of winning the same amount. Thus the proposed value function is (i) defined on gains and losses, (ii) generally concave for gains and convex for losses, and (iii) steeper for losses than for gains." (Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions", The Journal of Business Vol. 59 (4), 1986)

"Here is the result of the horseshoe analysis that I found on that Copacabana beach. Consider all the points which, under the horseshoe mapping, stay in the square, i.e., don't drift out of our field of vision. These 'visual motions' correspond precisely to the set of all coin-flipping experiments! This discovery demonstrates the occurrence of unpredictability in fully non-linear motion and gives a mechanism of how determinism produces uncertainty."(Steven Smale, "What is chaos?", 1990)

"The laws of chance, with good reason, have traditionally been expressed in terms of flipping a coin. Guessing whether heads or tails is the outcome of a coin toss is the paradigm of pure chance. On the other hand it is a deterministic process that governs the whole motion of a real coin, and hence the result, heads or tails, depends only on very subtle factors of the initiation of the toss. This is 'sensitive dependence on initial conditions'." (Steven Smale, "What is chaos?", 1990)

"Flip a coin 100 times. Assume that 99 heads are obtained. If you ask a statistician, the response is likely to be: 'It is a biased coin'. But if you ask a probabilist, he may say: 'Wooow, what a rare event'." (Chamont Wang, "Sense and Nonsense of Statistical Inference", 1993)

"The coin is an example of complete randomness. It is the sort of randomness that one commonly has in mind when thinking of random numbers, or deciding to use a random-number generator." (Edward N Lorenz, "The Essence of Chaos", 1993)

"Losing streaks and winning streaks occur frequently in games of chance, as they do in real life. Gamblers respond to these events in asymmetric fashion: they appeal to the law of averages to bring losing streaks to a speedy end. And they appeal to that same law of averages to suspend itself so that winning streaks will go on and on. The law of averages hears neither appeal. The last sequence of throws of the dice conveys absolutely no information about what the next throw will bring. Cards, coins, dice, and roulette wheels have no memory." (Peter L Bernstein, "Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk", 1996)

"The dice and the roulette wheel, along with the stock market and the bond market, are natural laboratories for the study of risk because they lend themselves so readily to quantification; their language is the language of numbers." (Peter L Bernstein, "Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk", 1996)

"However, random walk theory also tells us that the chance that the balance never returns to zero - that is, that H stays in the lead for ever - is 0. This is the sense in which the 'law of averages' is true. If you wait long enough, then almost surely the numbers of heads and tails will even out. But this fact carries no implications about improving your chances of winning, if you're betting on whether H or T turns up. The probabilities are unchanged, and you don't know how long the 'long run' is going to be. Usually it is very long indeed." (Ian Stewart, The Magical Maze: Seeing the world through mathematical eyes", 1997)

"In everyday language, a fair coin is called random, but not a coin that shows head more often than tail. A coin that keeps a memory of its own record of heads and tails is viewed as even less random. This mental picture is present in the term random walk, especially as used in finance." (Benoit B Mandelbrot, "Fractals and Scaling in Finance: Discontinuity, concentration, risk", 1997)

"The basis of many misconceptions about probability is a belief in something usually referred to as 'the law of averages', which alleges that any unevenness in random events gets ironed out in the long run. For example, if a tossed coin keeps coming up heads, then it is widely believed that at some stage there will be a predominance of tails to balance things out." (Ian Stewart, The Magical Maze: Seeing the world through mathematical eyes", 1997)

"Sequences of random numbers also inevitably display certain regularities. […] The trouble is, just as no real die, coin, or roulette wheel is ever likely to be perfectly fair, no numerical recipe produces truly random numbers. The mere existence of a formula suggests some sort of predictability or pattern." (Ivars Peterson, "The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari", 1998)

"For several centuries that we know of, and probably for many centuries before that, flipping a coin (or rolling a die) has been the epitome of probability, the paradigm of randomness. You flip the coin (or roll the die), and nobody can accurately predict how it will fall. Nor can the most powerful computer predict correctly how it will fall, if it is flipped energetically enough. This is why cards, dice, and other gambling aids crop up so often in literature both directly and as metaphors. No doubt it is also the reason for the (perhaps excessive) popularity of gambling as entertainment. If anyone had any idea what numbers the lottery would show, or where the roulette ball will land, the whole industry would be a dead duck." (David Stirzaker, "Probability and Random Variables: A Beginner’s Guide", 1999)

"From the moment we first roll a die in a children’s board game, or pick a card (any card), we start to learn what probability is. But even as adults, it is not easy to tell what it is, in the general way." (David Stirzaker, "Probability and Random Variables: A Beginner’s Guide", 1999)

"[...] the chance of a head (or a double six) is just a chance. The whole point of probability is to discuss uncertain eventualities before they occur. After this event, things are completely different. As the simplest illustration of this, note that even though we agree that if we flip a coin and roll two dice then the chance of a head is greater than the chance of a double six, nevertheless it may turn out that the coin shows a tail when the dice show a double six." (David Stirzaker, "Probability and Random Variables: A Beginner’s Guide", 1999)

"We cannot really have a perfectly shuffled pack of perfect cards; this ‘collection of equally likely hands’ is actually a fiction. We create the idea, and then use the rules of arithmetic to calculate the required chances. This is characteristic of all mathematics, which concerns itself only with rules defining the behaviour of entities which are themselves undefined (such as ‘numbers’ or ‘points’)." (David Stirzaker, "Probability and Random Variables: A Beginner’s Guide", 1999)

"If sinks, sources, saddles, and limit cycles are coins landing heads or tails, then the exceptions are a coin landing on edge. Yes, it might happen, in theory; but no, it doesn't, in practice." (Ian Stewart, "Does God Play Dice: The New Mathematics of Chaos", 2002)

"It's a bit like having a theory about coins that move in space, but only being able to measure their state by interrupting them with a table. We hypothesize that the coin may be able to revolve in space, a state that is neither ‘heads’ nor ‘tails’ but a kind of mixture. Our experimental proof is that when you stick a table in, you get heads half the time and tails the other half - randomly. This is by no means a perfect analogy with standard quantum theory - a revolving coin is not exactly in a superposition of heads and tails - but it captures some of the flavour." (Ian Stewart, "Does God Play Dice: The New Mathematics of Chaos", 2002)

"The chance events due to deterministic chaos, on the other hand, occur even within a closed system determined by immutable laws. Our most cherished examples of chance - dice, roulette, coin-tossing – seem closer to chaos than to the whims of outside events. So, in this revised sense, dice are a good metaphor for chance after all. It's just that we've refined our concept of randomness. Indeed, the deterministic but possibly chaotic stripes of phase space may be the true source of probability." (Ian Stewart, "Does God Play Dice: The New Mathematics of Chaos", 2002)

"The possibility of translating uncertainties into risks is much more restricted in the propensity view. Propensities are properties of an object, such as the physical symmetry of a die. If a die is constructed to be perfectly symmetrical, then the probability of rolling a six is 1 in 6. The reference to a physical design, mechanism, or trait that determines the risk of an event is the essence of the propensity interpretation of probability. Note how propensity differs from the subjective interpretation: It is not sufficient that someone’s subjective probabilities about the outcomes of a die roll are coherent, that is, that they satisfy the laws of probability. What matters is the die’s design. If the design is not known, there are no probabilities." (Gerd Gigerenzer, "Calculated Risks: How to know when numbers deceive you", 2002)

"Randomness is a difficult notion for people to accept. When events come in clusters and streaks, people look for explanations and patterns. They refuse to believe that such patterns - which frequently occur in random data - could equally well be derived from tossing a coin. So it is in the stock market as well." (Didier Sornette, "Why Stock Markets Crash: Critical events in complex financial systems", 2003)

"Suppose that while flipping a coin, a small black hole passed by and ate the coin. As long as we got to see the coin, the probabilities of heads and tails would add to one, but the possibility of a coin disappearing altogether into a black hole would have to be included. Once the coin crosses the event horizon of the black hole, it simply does not meaningfully exist in our universe anymore. Can we simply adjust our probabilistic interpretation to accommodate this outcome? Will we ever encounter negative probabilities?" (Leon M Lederman & Christopher T Hill, "Symmetry and the Beautiful Universe", 2004)

"A bit involves both probability and an experiment that decides a binary or yes-no question. Consider flipping a coin. One bit of in-formation is what we learn from the flip of a fair coin. With an unfair or biased coin the odds are other than even because either heads or tails is more likely to appear after the flip. We learn less from flipping the biased coin because there is less surprise in the outcome on average. Shannon's bit-based concept of entropy is just the average information of the experiment. What we gain in information from the coin flip we lose in uncertainty or entropy." (Bart Kosko, "Noise", 2006)

"Random number generators do not always need to be symmetrical. This misconception of assuming equal likelihood for each outcome is fostered in a restricted learning environment, where learners see only such situations (that is, dice, coins and spinners). It is therefore very important for learners to be aware of situations where the different outcomes are not equally likely (as with the drawing-pins example)." (Alan Graham, "Developing Thinking in Statistics", 2006)

"The objectivist view is that probabilities are real aspects of the universe - propensities of objects to behave in certain ways - rather than being just descriptions of an observer’s degree of belief. For example, the fact that a fair coin comes up heads with probability 0.5 is a propensity of the coin itself. In this view, frequentist measurements are attempts to observe these propensities. Most physicists agree that quantum phenomena are objectively probabilistic, but uncertainty at the macroscopic scale - e.g., in coin tossing - usually arises from ignorance of initial conditions and does not seem consistent with the propensity view." (Stuart J Russell & Peter Norvig, "Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach", 2010)

"A very different - and very incorrect - argument is that successes must be balanced by failures (and failures by successes) so that things average out. Every coin flip that lands heads makes tails more likely. Every red at roulette makes black more likely. […] These beliefs are all incorrect. Good luck will certainly not continue indefinitely, but do not assume that good luck makes bad luck more likely, or vice versa." (Gary Smith, "Standard Deviations", 2014)

"Remember that even random coin flips can yield striking, even stunning, patterns that mean nothing at all. When someone shows you a pattern, no matter how impressive the person’s credentials, consider the possibility that the pattern is just a coincidence. Ask why, not what. No matter what the pattern, the question is: Why should we expect to find this pattern?" (Gary Smith, "Standard Deviations", 2014)

"We are seduced by patterns and we want explanations for these patterns. When we see a string of successes, we think that a hot hand has made success more likely. If we see a string of failures, we think a cold hand has made failure more likely. It is easy to dismiss such theories when they involve coin flips, but it is not so easy with humans. We surely have emotions and ailments that can cause our abilities to go up and down. The question is whether these fluctuations are important or trivial." (Gary Smith, "Standard Deviations", 2014)

"When statisticians, trained in math and probability theory, try to assess likely outcomes, they demand a plethora of data points. Even then, they recognize that unless it’s a very simple and controlled action such as flipping a coin, unforeseen variables can exert significant influence." (Zachary Karabell, "The Leading Indicators: A short history of the numbers that rule our world", 2014)

On Generalization (1920-1929)

"If we are not content with the dull accumulation of experimental facts, if we make any deductions or generalizations, if we seek for any theory to guide us, some degree of speculation cannot be avoided. Some will prefer to take the interpretation which seems to be most immediately indicated and at once adopted as an hypothesis; others will rather seek to explore and classify the widest possibilities which are not definitely inconsistent with the facts. Either choice has its dangers: the first may be too narrow a view and lead progress into a cul-de-sac; the second may be so broad that it is useless as a guide and diverge indefinitely from experimental knowledge." (Sir Arthur S Eddington, "The Internal Constitution of the Stars Observatory", Vol. 43, 1920)

"It is well to be explicit when a positive generalization is made from negative experimental evidence." (Arthur Eddington, "Space, Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity", 1920)

"Generalization is the golden thread which binds many facts into one simple description." (Joseph W Mellor, "A Comprehensive Treatise on Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry", 1922)

"[…] a history of mathematics is largely a history of discoveries which no longer exist as separate items, but are merged into some more modern generalization, these discoveries have not been forgotten or made valueless. They are not dead, but transmuted." (John W N Sullivan, "The History of Mathematics in Europe", 1925)

"Number knows no limitations, either from the side of the infinitely great or from the side of the infinitely small, and the facility it offers for generalization is too great for us not to be tempted by it." (Émile Borel, "Space and Time", 1926)

"[…] the statistical prediction of the future from the past cannot be generally valid, because whatever is future to any given past, is in tum past for some future. That is, whoever continually revises his judgment of the probability of a statistical generalization by its successively observed verifications and failures, cannot fail to make more successful predictions than if he should disregard the past in his anticipation of the future. This might be called the ‘Principle of statistical accumulation’." (Clarence I Lewis, "Mind and the World-Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge", 1929)

"The true method of discovery is like the flight of an aeroplane. It starts from the ground of particular observation; it makes a flight in the thin air of imaginative generalization; and it again lands for renewed observation rendered acute by rational interpretation." (Alfred N Whitehead, "Process and Reality", 1929)

"Without doubt, if we are to go back to that ultimate, integral experience, unwarped by the sophistications of theory, that experience whose elucidation is the final aim of philosophy, the flux of things is one ultimate generalization around which we must weave our philosophical system." (Alfred N Whitehead, "Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology", 1929)

On Generalization (1970-1979)

"Accordingly there are two main types of science, exact science [...] and empirical science [...] seeking laws which are generalizations from particular experiences and are verifiable (or, more strictly, 'probabilities') only by observation and experiment." (Errol E Harris, "Hypothesis and Perception: The Roots of Scientific Method", 1970)

"One often hears that successive theories grow ever closer to, or approximate more and more closely to, the truth. Apparently, generalizations like that refer not to the puzzle-solutions and the concrete predictions derived from a theory but rather to its ontology, to the match, that is, between the entities with which the theory populates nature and what is ‘really there’." (Thomas S Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", 1970)

"Science uses the senses but does not enjoy them; finally buries them under theory, abstraction, mathematical generalization." (Theodore Roszak, "Where the Wasteland Ends", 1972)

"A single observation that is inconsistent with some generalization points to the falsehood of the generalization, and thereby 'points to itself'." (Ian Hacking, "The Emergence Of Probability", 1975)

"The sciences have started to swell. Their philosophical basis has never been very strong. Starting as modest probing operations to unravel the works of God in the world, to follow its traces in nature, they were driven gradually to ever more gigantic generalizations. Since the pieces of the giant puzzle never seemed to fit together perfectly, subsets of smaller, more homogeneous puzzles had to be constructed, in each of which the fit was better." (Erwin Chargaff, "Voices in the Labyrinth", 1975)

"The word generalization in literature usually means covering too much territory too thinly to be persuasive, let alone convincing. In science, however, a generalization means a principle that has been found to hold true in every special case. [...] The principle of leverage is a scientific generalization." (Buckminster Fuller, "Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking", 1975)

"And when such claims are extraordinary, that is, revolutionary in their implications for established scientific generalizations already accumulated and verified, we must demand extraordinary proof." (Marcello Truzzi, Zetetic Scholar, Vol. 1 (1), 1976)

"If it is to be effective as a tool of thought, a notation must allow convenient expression not only of notions arising directly from a problem, but also of those arising in subsequent analysis, generalization, and specialization." (Kenneth E Iverson, "Notation as a Tool of Thought", 1979)

"Prediction can never be absolutely valid and therefore science can never prove some generalization or even test a single descriptive statement and in that way arrive at final truth." (Gregory Bateson, "Mind and Nature, A necessary unity", 1979)

On Generalization (1930-1949)

"It seems likely that this process of increasing abstraction will continue in the future and that advance in physics is to be associated with a condnual modification and generahsation of the axioms at the base of the mathematics rather than with a logical development of any one mathemafical scheme on a fixed foundadon." (Paul A M Dirac, "Quantities singularities in the electromagnetic field", Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1931)

"The steady progress of physics requires for its theoretical formulation a mathematics which get continually more advanced. […] it was expected that mathematics would get more and more complicated, but would rest on a permanent basis of axioms and definitions, while actually the modern physical developments have required a mathematics that continually shifts its foundation and gets more abstract. Non-Euclidean geometry and noncommutative algebra, which were at one time were considered to be purely fictions of the mind and pastimes of logical thinkers, have now been found to be very necessary for the description of general facts of the physical world. It seems likely that this process of increasing abstraction will continue in the future and the advance in physics is to be associated with continual modification and generalisation of the axioms at the base of mathematics rather than with a logical development of any one mathematical scheme on a fixed foundation." (Paul A M Dirac, "Quantities singularities in the electromagnetic field", Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 1931)

"It is time, therefore, to abandon the superstition that natural science cannot be regarded as logically respectable until philosophers have solved the problem of induction. The problem of induction is, roughly speaking, the problem of finding a way to prove that certain empirical generalizations which are derived from past experience will hold good also in the future." (Alfred J Ayer, "Language, Truth and Logic", 1936)

"The problem of induction is, roughly speaking, the problem of finding a way to prove that certain empirical generalizations which are derived from past experience will hold good also in the future. There are only two ways of approaching this problem on the assumption that it is a genuine problem, and it is easy to see that neither of them can lead to its solution." (Alfred J Ayer, "Language, Truth, and Logic", 1936)

"The ethos of science involves the functionally necessary demand that theories or generalizations be evaluated in [terms of] their logical consistency and consonance with facts." (Robert K Merton, "Science and the Social Order", Philosophy of Science Vol 5 (3), 1938)

"The former distrust of specialization has been supplanted by its opposite, a distrust of generalization. Not only has man become a specialist in practice, he is being taught that special facts represent the highest form of knowledge." (Richard Weaver, "Ideas have Consequences", 1948)

📡On Technology II

"The 'message' of any medium or technology is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs." (Marshall McLuhan, "Understanding Media", 1964)

"Our technology forces us to live mythically, but we continue to think fragmentarily, and on single, separate planes." (Marshall McLuhan, "The Medium is the Massage: An inventory of effects", 1967)

"Modern scientific principle has been drawn from the investigation of natural laws, technology has developed from the experience of doing, and the two have been combined by means of mathematical system to form what we call engineering." (George S Emmerson, "Engineering Education: A Social History", 1973)

"The system of nature, of which man is a part, tends to be self-balancing, self-adjusting, self-cleansing. Not so with technology." (Ernst F Schumacher, "Small is Beautiful", 1973)

"Technology has not advanced because people are starved for instruments to make a better civilization, but because they are starved for entertainment - technology is still mostly a toy factory for grown-ups." (Eugene J Martin, 1977-1978)

"People’s views of the world, of themselves, of their own capabilities, and of the tasks that they are asked to perform, or topics they are asked to learn, depend heavily on the conceptualizations that they bring to the task. In interacting with the environment, with others, and with the artifacts of technology, people form internal, mental models of themselves and of the things with which they are interacting. These models provide predictive and explanatory power for understanding the interaction." (Donald A Norman, "Some observations on Mental Models", 1983)

"With the changes in technological complexity, especially in information technology, the leadership task has changed. Leadership in a networked organization is a fundamentally different thing from leadership in a traditional hierarchy." (Edgar Schein, "Organizational Culture and Leadership", 1985)

"The new information technologies can be seen to drive societies toward increasingly dynamic high-energy regions further and further from thermodynamical equilibrium, characterized by decreasing specific entropy and increasingly dense free-energy flows, accessed and processed by more and more complex social, economic, and political structures." (Ervin László, "Information Technology and Social Change: An Evolutionary Systems Analysis", Behavioral Science 37, 1992) 

"Now that knowledge is taking the place of capital as the driving force in organizations worldwide, it is all too easy to confuse data with knowledge and information technology with information." (Peter Drucker, "Managing in a Time of Great Change", 1995)

"Commonly, the threats to strategy are seen to emanate from outside a company because of changes in technology or the behavior of competitors. Although external changes can be the problem, the greater threat to strategy often comes from within. A sound strategy is undermined by a misguided view of competition, by organizational failures, and, especially, by the desire to grow." (Michael E Porter, "What is Strategy?", Harvard Business Review, 1996)

On Machines XII (Mind vs. Machines IV)

"In other words then, if a machine is expected to be infallible, it cannot also be intelligent. There are several theorems which say almost exactly that. But these theorems say nothing about how much intelligence may be displayed if a machine makes no pretense at infallibility." (Alan M Turing, 1946)

"The brain has been compared to a digital computer because the neuron, like a switch or valve, either does or does not complete a circuit. But at that point the similarity ends. The switch in the digital computer is constant in its effect, and its effect is large in proportion to the total output of the machine. The effect produced by the neuron varies with its recovery from [the] refractory phase and with its metabolic state. The number of neurons involved in any action runs into millions so that the influence of any one is negligible. [...] Any cell in the system can be dispensed with. [...] The brain is an analogical machine, not digital. Analysis of the integrative activities will probably have to be in statistical terms. (Karl S Lashley, "The problem of serial order in behavior", 1951)

"Although it sounds implausible, it might turn out that above a certain level of complexity, a machine ceased to be predictable, even in principle, and started doing things on its own account, or, to use a very revealing phrase, it might begin to have a mind of its own." (John R Lucas, "Minds, Machines and Gödel", 1959)

"There are now machines in the world that think, that learn and create. Moreover, their ability to do these things is going to increase rapidly until - in the visible future - the range of problems they can handle will be coextensive with the range to which the human mind has been applied." (Allen Newell & Herbert A Simon, "Human problem solving", 1976)

"We can divide those who uphold the doctrine that men are machines, or a similar doctrine, into two categories: those who deny the existence of mental events, or personal experiences, or of consciousness; [...] and those who admit the existence of mental events, but assert that they are 'epiphenomena' - that everything can be explained without them, since the material world is causally closed." (Karl Popper & John Eccles, "The self and its brain", 1977)

"It is essential to realize that a computer is not a mere 'number cruncher', or supercalculating arithmetic machine, although this is how computers are commonly regarded by people having no familiarity with artificial intelligence. Computers do not crunch numbers; they manipulate symbols. [...] Digital computers originally developed with mathematical problems in mind, are in fact general purpose symbol manipulating machines." (Margaret A Boden, "Minds and mechanisms", 1981)

"What makes people smarter than machines? They certainly are not quicker or more precise. Yet people are far better at perceiving objects in natural scenes and noting their relations, at understanding language and retrieving contextually appropriate information from memory, at making plans and carrying out contextually appropriate actions, and at a wide range of other natural cognitive tasks. People are also far better at learning to do these things more accurately and fluently through processing experience." (James L McClelland et al, "The appeal of parallel distributed processing", 1986)

"A popular myth says that the invention of the computer diminishes our sense of ourselves, because it shows that rational thought is not special to human beings, but can be carried on by a mere machine. It is a short stop from there to the conclusion that intelligence is mechanical, which many people find to be an affront to all that is most precious and singular about their humanness." (Jeremy Campbell, "The improbable machine", 1989)

"Looking at ourselves from the computer viewpoint, we cannot avoid seeing that natural language is our most important 'programming language'. This means that a vast portion of our knowledge and activity is, for us, best communicated and understood in our natural language. [...] One could say that natural language was our first great original artifact and, since, as we increasingly realize, languages are machines, so natural language, with our brains to run it, was our primal invention of the universal computer. One could say this except for the sneaking suspicion that language isn’t something we invented but something we became, not something we constructed but something in which we created, and recreated, ourselves. (Justin Leiber, "Invitation to cognitive science", 1991)

"On the other hand, those who design and build computers know exactly how the machines are working down in the hidden depths of their semiconductors. Computers can be taken apart, scrutinized, and put back together. Their activities can be tracked, analyzed, measured, and thus clearly understood - which is far from possible with the brain. This gives rise to the tempting assumption on the part of the builders and designers that computers can tell us something about brains, indeed, that the computer can serve as a model of the mind, which then comes to be seen as some manner of information processing machine, and possibly not as good at the job as the machine." (Theodore Roszak, "The Cult of Information", 1994)

🪷On Mind: Mental Models LXII

"A mental model is a collection of 'connected' autonomous objects. Running  a mental model corresponds to modifying the parameters of the model by propagating information using the internal rules and specified topology. Running a mental model can also occur when autonomous objects change state. For us the definition of state is distinct from the current parameter values of an object. A state change consists of the replacement of one set of behavior rules with another." (Michael D Williams et al, "Human Reasoning About a Simple Physical System", [in "Mental Models", Ed(s). Dedre Gentner & Albert L Stevens], 1983)

"Central to this conception of mental models is the notion of autonomous objects. An autonomous object is a mental object with an explicit representation of state, an explicit representation of its topological connections to other objects, and a set of internal parameters. Associated with each autonomous object is a set of rules which modify its parameters and thus specify its behavior." (Michael D Williams et al, "Human Reasoning About a Simple Physical System", [in "Mental Models", Ed(s). Dedre Gentner & Albert L Stevens], 1983)

"In the consideration of mental models we need really consider four different things: the target system, the conceputal model of that target system, the user’s mental model of the target system, and the scientist's conceptualization of that mental model. The system that the person is learning or using is, by definition, the target system. A conceptual model is invented to provide an appropriate representation of the target system, appropriate in the sense of being accurate, consistent, and complete." (Donald A Norman, "Some Observations on Mental Models" [in "Mental Models", Ed(s). Dedre Gentner & Albert L Stevens], 1983)

"The purpose of a mental model is to allow the person to understand and to anticipate the behavior of a physical system. This means that the model must have predictive power, either by applying rules of inference or by procedural derivation (in whatever manner these properties may be realized in a person); in other words, it should be possible for people to ' run' their models mentally. This means that the conceptual mental model must also include a model of the relevant human information processing and knowledge structures that make it possible for the person to use a mental model to predict and understand the physical system." (Donald A Norman, "Some Observations on Mental Models" [in "Mental Models"], Ed(s). Dedre Gentner & Albert L Stevens], 1983)

"From a functional point of view, mental models can be described as symbolic structures which permit people: to generate descriptions of the purpose of a system, to generate descriptions of the architecture of a system, to provide explanations of the state of a system, to provide explanations of the functioning of a system, to make predictions of future states of a system." (Gert Rickheit & Lorenz Sichelschmidt, "Mental Models: Some Answers, Some Questions, Some Suggestions", 1999)

"Under the label 'cognitive maps', mental models have been conceived of as the mental representation of spatial aspects of the environment. A mental model, in this sense, comprises the topology of an area, including relevant districts, landmarks, and paths. [...] Under the label 'naive physics', mental models have been conceived of as the mental representation of natural or technical systems. A mental model, in this sense, comprises the effective determinants, true or not, of the functioning of a physical system. [...] Under the label 'model based reasoning', the mental models notion is featured in yet another area of cognitive science - deductive reasoning. In contrast to the commonly held view that logical competence depends on formal rules of deduction, it has been argued that reasoning is a semantic process based on the manipulation of mental models. [...] Finally, under terms like 'discourse model', 'situation model', or 'scenario', mental models have been conceived of as the mental representation of a verbal description of some real or fictional state of affairs. The role of mental models in the comprehension of discourse is discussed in more detail below." (Gert Rickheit & Lorenz Sichelschmidt, "Mental Models: Some Answers, Some Questions, Some Suggestions", 1999)

"A mental model is an internal representation with analogical relations to its referential object, so that local and temporal aspects of the object are preserved. It comes somewhat close to the mental images people report having in their minds whilst processing information. The great advantage of the notion of mental models, however, is its ability to include the notion of a partner model and the notion of a situation model. Thus, mental models can build a bridge to the other two dimensions of communication, namely interaction and situation." (Gert Rickheit et al, "The concept of communicative competence" [in "Handbook of Communication Competence"], 2008)

"Because all mental models or mindsets are incomplete, we can engage in second-order studies, evaluations, judgments, and assessments about our own and other operative mental models. Of course this is highly complex since the act of reflection is itself a further of framing or reframing." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience", 2013)

"Mental models bind our awareness within a particular scaffold and then selectively can filter the content we subsequently receive. Through recalibration using revised mental models, we argue, we cultivate strategies anew, creating new habits, and galvanizing more intentional and evolved mental models. This recalibration often entails developing a strong sense of self and self-worth, realizing that each of us has a range of moral choices that may deviate from those in authority, and moral imagination." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience", 2013)

"These framing perspectives or mental models construe the data of our experiences, and it is the construed data that we call 'facts'. What we often call reality, or the world, is constructed or socially construed in certain ways such that one cannot get at the source of the data except through these construals." (Patricia H Werhane et al, "Obstacles to Ethical: Decision-Making Mental Models, Milgram and the Problem of Obedience", 2013)

Nate Silver - Collected Quotes

"A forecaster should almost never ignore data, especially when she is studying rare events […]. Ignoring data is often a tip-off that the forecaster is overconfident, or is overfitting her model - that she is interested in showing off rather than trying to be accurate."  (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Complex systems seem to have this property, with large periods of apparent stasis marked by sudden and catastrophic failures. These processes may not literally be random, but they are so irreducibly complex (right down to the last grain of sand) that it just won’t be possible to predict them beyond a certain level. […] And yet complex processes produce order and beauty when you zoom out and look at them from enough distance." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Data-driven predictions can succeed-and they can fail. It is when we deny our role in the process that the odds of failure rise. Before we demand more of our data, we need to demand more of ourselves." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Distinguishing the signal from the noise requires both scientific knowledge and self-knowledge." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Finding patterns is easy in any kind of data-rich environment; that's what mediocre gamblers do. The key is in determining whether the patterns represent signal or noise." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"The instinctual shortcut that we take when we have 'too much information' is to engage with it selectively, picking out the parts we like and ignoring the remainder, making allies with those who have made the same choices and enemies of the rest." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"The most basic tenet of chaos theory is that a small change in initial conditions - a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil - can produce a large and unexpected divergence in outcomes - a tornado in Texas. This does not mean that the behavior of the system is random, as the term 'chaos' might seem to imply. Nor is chaos theory some modern recitation of Murphy’s Law ('whatever can go wrong will go wrong'). It just means that certain types of systems are very hard to predict." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"The signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"The systems are dynamic, meaning that the behavior of the system at one point in time influences its behavior in the future; And they are nonlinear, meaning they abide by exponential rather than additive relationships." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"We forget - or we willfully ignore - that our models are simplifications of the world. We figure that if we make a mistake, it will be at the margin. In complex systems, however, mistakes are not measured in degrees but in whole orders of magnitude." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"We need to stop, and admit it: we have a prediction problem. We love to predict things—and we aren't very good at it." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Whether information comes in a quantitative or qualitative flavor is not as important as how you use it. [...] The key to making a good forecast […] is not in limiting yourself to quantitative information. Rather, it’s having a good process for weighing the information appropriately. […] collect as much information as possible, but then be as rigorous and disciplined as possible when analyzing it. [...] Many times, in fact, it is possible to translate qualitative information into quantitative information." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"Statistics is the science of finding relationships and actionable insights from data." (Nate Silver)

Complex Systems VII

"A complex system is a system formed out of many components whose behavior is emergent, that is, the behavior of the system cannot be simply inferred from the behavior of its components. The amount of information necessary to describe the behavior of such a system is a measure of its complexity." (Yaneer Bar-Yamm, "Dynamics of Complexity", 1997)

"Strategy in complex systems must resemble strategy in board games. You develop a small and useful tree of options that is continuously revised based on the arrangement of pieces and the actions of your opponent. It is critical to keep the number of options open. It is important to develop a theory of what kinds of options you want to have open." (John H Holland, [presentation] 2000)

"Abstract formulations of simply stated concrete ideas are often the result of efforts to create idealized models of complex systems. The models are 'idealized' in the sense that they retain only the most fundamental properties of the original systems. The vocabulary is chosen to be as inclusive as possible so that research into the model reveals facts about a wide variety of similar systems. Unfortunately, it is often the case that over time the connection between a model and the systems on which it was based is lost, and the interested reader is faced with something that looks as if it were created to be deliberately complicated - deliberately confusing - but the original intention was just the opposite. Often, the model was devised to be simpler and more transparent than any of the systems on which it was based." (John Tabak, "Beyond Geometry: A new mathematics of space and form", 2011)

[complex system:] "A system whose intricacy impedes the forecasting of its behaviour." (Valentina M Ghinea, "Modelling and Simulation of the Need for Harmonizing the European Higher Education Systems", Handbook of Research on Trends in European Higher Education Convergence, 2014)

"The problem of complexity is at the heart of mankind's inability to predict future events with any accuracy. Complexity science has demonstrated that the more factors found within a complex system, the more chances of unpredictable behavior. And without predictability, any meaningful control is nearly impossible. Obviously, this means that you cannot control what you cannot predict. The ability ever to predict long-term events is a pipedream. Mankind has little to do with changing climate; complexity does." (Lawrence K Samuels, "The Real Science Behind Changing Climate", 2014)

"A system which is usually composed of large number of possibly heterogeneous interacting agents, which are seen to exhibit emergent behavior. Emergence implies that system level behavior (macro level) cannot be inferred from observation of individual level behavior of its constituents (micro level). This absence of explicit links between the micro and macro levels makes complex systems especially difficult to analyze using traditional statistical and analytical techniques to study the dynamics of behavior. One typically requires the use of bottom up simulation based methods to study such systems. Complex systems are ubiquitous - markets, societies, social networks, the Internet, weather, ecosystems, are just a few examples." (Stephen E Glavin & Abhijit Sengupta, "Modelling of Consumer Goods Markets: An Agent-Based Computational Approach", Handbook of Research on Managing and Influencing Consumer Behavior, 2015)

[complex system:] "The occurrence of new phenomena generated unpredictably by the interaction of simple rules and individual mechanisms that are in constant flux and interaction. Emergence suggests something novel is perpetually emerging at a systems/global level as the world and environment constantly shifts and changes at a mechanistic/local level." (Kathy Sanford & Tim Hopper, "Digital Media in the Classroom: Emergent Perspectives for 21st Century Learners", Handbook of Research on Digital Media and Creative Technologies, 2015)

"A system characterized by the number of the elements that constitute it, and by the nature of the interactions between these elements." (Manuela Piscitelli, "Application of Complexity Theory in Representation of the City", Handbook of Research on Chaos and Complexity Theory in the Social Sciences, 2016)

"A complex system means a system whose perceived complicated behaviors can be attributed to one or more of the following characteristics: large number of element, large number of relationships among elements, non-linear and discontinuous relationship, and uncertain characteristics of elements." (Chunfang Zhou, "Fostering Creative Problem Solvers in Higher Education: A Response to Complexity of Societies", Handbook of Research on Creative Problem-Solving Skill Development in Higher Education, 2017)

[complex system:] "System made up of many interconnected elements on various levels; interactions on lower levels give rise to events on higher levels." (Naomi Thompson & Joshua Danish, "Designing BioSim: Playfully Encouraging Systems Thinking in Young Children", Handbook of Research on Serious Games for Educational Applications, 2017)

Complex Systems VI

"In short, complex adaptive systems are characterized by perpetual novelty." (M Mitchell Waldrop, "Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos", 1992)

"[...] it's essentially meaningless to talk about a complex adaptive system being in equilibrium: the system can never get there. It is always unfolding, always in transition. In fact, if the system ever does reach equilibrium, it isn't just stable. It's dead." (M Mitchell Waldrop, "Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos", 1992)

"If universality is one of the observed characteristics of complex dynamical systems in many fields of study, a second characteristic that flows from the study of these systems is that of emergence. As self-organizing systems go about their daily business, they are constantly exchanging matter and energy with their environment, and this allows them to remain in a state that is far from equilibrium. That allows spontaneous behavior to give rise to new patterns." (Terry Cooke-Davies et al, "Exploring the Complexity of Projects", 2009)

"The difference between complex adaptive systems and self-organizing systems is that the former have the capacity to learn from their experience, and thus to embody successful patterns into their repertoire, although there is actually quite a deep relationship between self-organizing systems and complex adaptive systems. Adaptive entities can emerge at high levels of description in simple self-organizing systems, i.e., adaptive systems are not necessarily self-organizing systems with something extra thrown in." (Terry Cooke-Davies et al, "Exploring the Complexity of Projects", 2009)

"Most systems in nature are inherently nonlinear and can only be described by nonlinear equations, which are difficult to solve in a closed form. Non-linear systems give rise to interesting phenomena such as chaos, complexity, emergence and self-organization. One of the characteristics of non-linear systems is that a small change in the initial conditions can give rise to complex and significant changes throughout the system. This property of a non-linear system such as the weather is known as the butterfly effect where it is purported that a butterfly flapping its wings in Japan can give rise to a tornado in Kansas. This unpredictable behaviour of nonlinear dynamical systems, i.e. its extreme sensitivity to initial conditions, seems to be random and is therefore referred to as chaos. This chaotic and seemingly random behaviour occurs for non-linear deterministic system in which effects can be linked to causes but cannot be predicted ahead of time." (Robert K Logan, "The Poetry of Physics and The Physics of Poetry", 2010)

"Complex systems seem to have this property, with large periods of apparent stasis marked by sudden and catastrophic failures. These processes may not literally be random, but they are so irreducibly complex (right down to the last grain of sand) that it just won’t be possible to predict them beyond a certain level. […] And yet complex processes produce order and beauty when you zoom out and look at them from enough distance." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"We forget - or we willfully ignore - that our models are simplifications of the world. We figure that if we make a mistake, it will be at the margin. In complex systems, however, mistakes are not measured in degrees but in whole orders of magnitude." (Nate Silver, "The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail-but Some Don't", 2012)

"If an emerging system is born complex, there is neither leeway to abandon it when it fails, nor the means to join another, successful one. Such a system would be caught in an immovable grip, congested at the top, and prevented, by a set of confusing but locked–in precepts, from changing." (Lawrence K Samuels, "Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action", 2013) 

"Simplicity in a system tends to increase that system’s efficiency. Because less can go wrong with fewer parts, less will. Complexity in a system tends to increase that system’s inefficiency; the greater the number of variables, the greater the probability of those variables clashing, and in turn, the greater the potential for conflict and disarray. Because more can go wrong, more will. That is why centralized systems are inclined to break down quickly and become enmeshed in greater unintended consequences." (Lawrence K Samuels,"Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action", 2013)

"One of the remarkable features of these complex systems created by replicator dynamics is that infinitesimal differences in starting positions create vastly different patterns. This sensitive dependence on initial conditions is often called the butterfly-effect aspect of complex systems - small changes in the replicator dynamics or in the starting point can lead to enormous differences in outcome, and they change one’s view of how robust the current reality is. If it is complex, one small change could have led to a reality that is quite different." (David Colander & Roland Kupers, "Complexity and the art of public policy : solving society’s problems from the bottom up", 2014)

Complex Systems V

"Complexity is the characteristic property of complicated systems we don’t understand immediately. It is the amount of difficulties we face while trying to understand it. In this sense, complexity resides largely in the eye of the beholder - someone who is familiar with s.th. often sees less complexity than someone who is less familiar with it. [...] A complex system is created by evolutionary processes. There are multiple pathways by which a system can evolve. Many complex systems are similar, but each instance of a system is unique." (Jochen Fromm, The Emergence of Complexity, 2004)

"In complexity thinking the darkness principle is covered by the concept of incompressibility [...] The concept of incompressibility suggests that the best representation of a complex system is the system itself and that any representation other than the system itself will necessarily misrepresent certain aspects of the original system." (Kurt Richardson, "Systems theory and complexity: Part 1", Emergence: Complexity & Organization Vol.6 (3), 2004)

"The basic concept of complexity theory is that systems show patterns of organization without organizer (autonomous or self-organization). Simple local interactions of many mutually interacting parts can lead to emergence of complex global structures. […] Complexity originates from the tendency of large dynamical systems to organize themselves into a critical state, with avalanches or 'punctuations' of all sizes. In the critical state, events which would otherwise be uncoupled became correlated." (Jochen Fromm, "The Emergence of Complexity", 2004)

"Complexity arises when emergent system-level phenomena are characterized by patterns in time or a given state space that have neither too much nor too little form. Neither in stasis nor changing randomly, these emergent phenomena are interesting, due to the coupling of individual and global behaviours as well as the difficulties they pose for prediction. Broad patterns of system behaviour may be predictable, but the system's specific path through a space of possible states is not." (Steve Maguire et al, "Complexity Science and Organization Studies", 2006)

"Thus, nonlinearity can be understood as the effect of a causal loop, where effects or outputs are fed back into the causes or inputs of the process. Complex systems are characterized by networks of such causal loops. In a complex, the interdependencies are such that a component A will affect a component B, but B will in general also affect A, directly or indirectly.  A single feedback loop can be positive or negative. A positive feedback will amplify any variation in A, making it grow exponentially. The result is that the tiniest, microscopic difference between initial states can grow into macroscopically observable distinctions." (Carlos Gershenson, "Design and Control of Self-organizing Systems", 2007)

"The butterfly effect demonstrates that complex dynamical systems are highly responsive and interconnected webs of feedback loops. It reminds us that we live in a highly interconnected world. Thus our actions within an organization can lead to a range of unpredicted responses and unexpected outcomes. This seriously calls into doubt the wisdom of believing that a major organizational change intervention will necessarily achieve its pre-planned and highly desired outcomes. Small changes in the social, technological, political, ecological or economic conditions can have major implications over time for organizations, communities, societies and even nations." (Elizabeth McMillan, "Complexity, Management and the Dynamics of Change: Challenges for practice", 2008)

"[a complex system is] a system in which large networks of components with no central control and simple rules of operation give rise to complex collective behavior, sophisticated information processing, and adaptation via learning or evolution." (Melanie Mitchell, "Complexity: A Guided Tour", 2009)

"A typical complex system consists of a vast number of identical copies of several generic processes, which are operating and interacting only locally or with a limited number of not necessary close neighbours. There is no global leader or controller associated to such systems and the resulting behaviour is usually very complex." (Jirí Kroc & Peter M A Sloot, "Complex Systems Modeling by Cellular Automata", Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2009)

On Nonlinearity IV (Organizations)

"In strategic thinking, one first seeks a clear understanding of the particular character of each element of a situation and then makes the fullest possible use of human brainpower to restructure the elements in the most advantageous way. Phenomena and events in the real word do not always fit a linear model. Hence the most reliable means of dissecting a situation into its constituent parts and reassembling then in the desired pattern is not a step-by-step methodology such as systems analysis. Rather, it is that ultimate nonlinear thinking tool, the human brain. True strategic thinking thus contrasts sharply with the conventional mechanical systems approach based on linear thinking. But it also contrasts with the approach that stakes everything on intuition, reaching conclusions without any real breakdown or analysis. [...] No matter how difficult or unprecedented the problem, a breakthrough to the best possible solution can come only from a combination of rational analysis, based on the real nature of things, and imaginative reintegration of all the different items into a new pattern, using nonlinear brainpower. This is always the most effective approach to devising strategies for dealing successfully with challenges and opportunities, in the market arena as on the battlefield." (Kenichi Ohmae, "The Mind Of The Strategist", 1982)

"So we pour in data from the past to fuel the decision-making mechanisms created by our models, be they linear or nonlinear. But therein lies the logician's trap: past data from real life constitute a sequence of events rather than a set of independent observations, which is what the laws of probability demand.[...] It is in those outliers and imperfections that the wildness lurks." (Peter L Bernstein, "Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk", 1996)

"In a linear world of equilibrium and predictability, the sparse research into an evidence base for management prescriptions and the confused findings it produces would be a sign of incompetence; it would not make much sense. Nevertheless, if organizations are actually patterns of nonlinear interaction between people; if small changes could produce widespread major consequences; if local interaction produces emergent global pattern; then it will not be possible to provide a reliable evidence base. In such a world, it makes no sense to conduct studies looking for simple causal relationships between an action and an outcome. I suggest that the story of the last few years strongly indicates that human action is nonlinear, that time and place matter a great deal, and that since this precludes simple evidence bases we do need to rethink the nature of organizations and the roles of managers and leaders in them." (Ralph D Stacey, "Complexity and Organizational Reality", 2000)

"The world is nonlinear. Trying to make it linear for our mathematical or administrative convenience is not usually a good idea even when feasible, and it is rarely feasible." (Donella H Meadow, "Thinking in Systems: A Primer", 2008)

"Complexity theory shows that great changes can emerge from small actions. Change involves a belief in the possible, even the 'impossible'. Moreover, social innovators don’t follow a linear pathway of change; there are ups and downs, roller-coaster rides along cascades of dynamic interactions, unexpected and unanticipated divergences, tipping points and critical mass momentum shifts. Indeed, things often get worse before they get better as systems change creates resistance to and pushback against the new. Traditional evaluation approaches are not well suited for such turbulence. Traditional evaluation aims to control and predict, to bring order to chaos. Developmental evaluation accepts such turbulence as the way the world of social innovation unfolds in the face of complexity. Developmental evaluation adapts to the realities of complex nonlinear dynamics rather than trying to impose order and certainty on a disorderly and uncertain world." (Michael Q Patton, "Developmental Evaluation", 2010)

"Internal friction is exacerbated by the fact that in business as in war, we are operating in a nonlinear, semi-chaotic environment in which our endeavors will collide and possibly clash with the actions of other independent wills (customers, suppliers, competitors, regulators, lobbyists, and so on). The internal and external worlds are in constant contact and the effects of our actions are the result of their reciprocal interaction. Friction gives rise to three gaps: the knowledge gap, the alignment gap, and the effects gap. To execute effectively, we must address all three. Our instinctive reaction to the three gaps is to demand more detail. We gather more data in order to craft more detailed plans, issue more detailed instructions, and exercise more detailed control. This not only fails to solve the problem, it usually makes it worse. We need to think about the problem differently and adopt a systemic approach to solving it." (Stephen Bungay, "The Art of Action: How Leaders Close the Gaps between Plans, Actions, and Results", 2010)

"Motivation is a fine example of social complexity. It is nonlinear and sometimes unpredictable. It cannot be defined or modeled with a single diagram." (Jurgen Appelo, "Management 3.0: Leading Agile Developers, Developing Agile Leaders", 2010)

"We have minds that are equipped for certainty, linearity and short-term decisions, that must instead make long-term decisions in a non-linear, probabilistic world. (Paul Gibbons, "The Science of Successful Organizational Change", 2015)