Corralation of notions «complex system» and «complex environement» in social philosophy

  • Ameri S. Mohammad South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushinsky
Keywords: social cognition, complex system / environment, phychosynergy psychodimensioned system / environment, whole-in-whole, unaccounted subject / product


The relationship between the concepts of «complex system» and «complex environment», which are relevant in modern socio-philosophical knowledge, is investigated. It has been substantiated that in modern conditions of the development of society, which are characterized by variability, non-linearity and complexity, a new research paradigm develops in social philosophy, which allows not only to introduce a systemic approach, but also gives a different interpretation of social phenomena. As a result, the systematic approach has been complemented and, even to some extent, is supplanted by the emerging synergistic approach, which presents social reality as a process of continuous changes and phase transitions. The emerging new view on social reality as an unstable integrity has confirmed that it is necessary to study events and processes. In particular, from the standpoint of psychosynergy (I.V. Yershova-Babenko), an understanding of the integrity and complexity of the system takes the form of a conceptual model of the “whole as a whole / whole-in-whole”. Therefore, the concept of «complex system» in social philosophy can be replaced by the concept of «complex environment», which indicates that emphasizes the dynamic characteristics of social reality, indicates its procedurality and disequilibrium.Also there was an appeal to the subject of social reality, which is a person. Focusing on the person and his social activities allows us to consider social reality as a “psychodimensioned environment” (the term of I.V. Ershova-Babenko), implying that it develops and transforms as a result of human mental activity, group, community of people in different scales of space and time, as well as the scale of individual cultures and civilizations.The use of the psycho-synergetic interpretation of the position of I. Prigogine on the non-equilibrium phase transition of a new type in the semantic field of social philosophy is also shown. For the first time, the phenomenon of “unaccounted subject / product”, related to the analysis of social reality, was used.


1. Bevzenko, L.D. (2002). Social’naja samoorganizacija. Sinergeticheskaja paradigma: vozmozhnosti social’nyh interpretacij [Social self-organization. Synergetic paradigm: the possibility of social interpretations]. Kyiv: IS NASU [in Russian].
2. Dobronravova, I.S. (2017). Prakticheskaja filosofija nauka : sbornik nauchnyh trudov [The practical philosophy of science: a collection of scientific works]. Sumy: University Book [in Russian].
3. Donnikova, I. (2016). Identichnost’ kak fenomen antropologicheskoj slozhnosti [Identity as a phenomenon of anthropological complexity]. The notes of the National University “Ostrozh Academy”. Series «Cultural Studies», 17, 215-222 [in Russian].
4. Yershova-Babenko, I.V. (1992). Metodologija issledovanija psihiki kak sinergeticheskogo objekta [Methodology of the study of the psyche as a synergistic object]. Odessa [in Russian].
5. Yershova-Babenko, I.V. (2005). Psihosinergeticheskie strategii chelovecheskoj dejatel’nosti (konceptual’naja model’) [Psychosynergy strategies of human activity (conceptual model)]. W.: NOVA KNIGA [in Russian].
6. Yershova-Babenko, I.V. (2015). Psihosinergetika [Psychosynergy]. Kherson: publishing house Grin D.S [in Russian].
7. Kochubey, N. (2013). Sinergeticheskie koncepty v nelinejnyh kontekstah: seti, upravlenie, obrazovanie [Synergistic concepts in nonlinear contexts: networks, management, education]. Saarbrücken: Palmariun Academik Publishing [in Russian].
8. Predborska, I.M. (1995). Minlyvist, sotsium, liudyna [Innovation, socium, people]. Sumy: Slobozhanshchina View [in Ukrainian].
9. Prigogine, I.R., & Stengers, I. (1986). Porjadok iz haosa. Novyj dialog cheloveka s prirodoj [Order from chaos. A new dialogue of man with nature]. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
10. Tabachkovsky, V.G. (2005). Polіsutnіsne homo: fіlosofs’ko-mistec’ka dumka v poshukah «neevklіdovoї reflektivnostі» [Polіsutnіsne homo: philosophical and mystical dumka in the prose «non-ecclesiastical reflectivity»]. Kyiv: Vidavets PARAPAN [in Ukrainian].
11. Haken, G. (1985). Sinergetika: ierarhii neustojchivostej v samoorganizushhihsja sistemah i ustrojstvah [Synergetics: hierarchies of instabilities in self-organizing systems and devices]. Moscow: World
[in Russian].
12. Shkaratan, O.I. (2011). Obshhestvo kak social’naja sistema [Society as a social system]. Sociological journal, 4, 117-143 [in Russian].
13. Sztompka, P. (1996). Sociologija social’nyh izmenenij [Sociology of social change]. Moscow: Aspect Press [in Russian].
How to Cite
Mohammad, A. S. (2019). Corralation of notions «complex system» and «complex environement» in social philosophy. Scientific and Theoretical Almanac Grani, 21(12), 62-68.