Synthesis: The cure to complexity
Topic: Synthesis
by George, 2021 Cohort
The dichotomy of synthesis comprises the use of historical information to explore unconventional ideas through a process of combining such information. A simile by British statistician and economist E.F. Schumaker outlines this challenge: “Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction”.
The general process for understanding complicated systems is by subdividing a system’s components, leading to the trend of infinite specialisation. However, at a certain point during the development of a scientific discipline, a grand synthesis enables the distillation and coalescence of disparate results into a coherent understanding of the system as a whole (Akasofu, 2007). Therefore, it is posed that synthesis is the cure to complexity.
The differentiator between summarising information and synthesizing, is that for synthesis to have taken place, it requires the creating of new ideas beyond those already available. Reflecting on previous personal experience, I have noticed at various times that the process of synthesis does indeed take place every time we want to untangle and understand a complicated event. I have summarised this process into four steps:
- Research and understand the topic
- Identify common (or opposing) ideas
- Cite all authors/ideas (if and where required)
- Posit a new argument regarding the topic (this is the outcome of synthesis)
Now that we know the synthesizing finds and explicates links between materials to construct a new thesis (syn-thesis) or idea, we shall consider its importance. This can be accomplished by examining the general process we use to understand complicated systems, which is analysis. By analysing, we decompose a whole into its parts and determine how one relates to the other to judge the quality of the whole.
Although analysis helps us get a practical understanding of the components of a complicated system, synthesis is what allows us to test and validate hypotheses, understand key processes, and better design future research efforts. Indeed, when a discipline succeeds in synthesis, it can make distinct, often epoch-making progress, leading the discipline to higher levels of understanding of the system being studied (Akasofu, 2007). This same process is the very exact our predecessors followed to develop new tools and survive over time, as well as the same used to study scale and complexity and the progression of time.
In conclusion, although analysis and synthesis are mutually dependent in allowing us to make discoveries, it is through synthesis that we can “cure” complexity and deduce theorems relating to inexplicable phenomena. The concept of plate tectonics is an example of synthesis in geoscience. [Stewart, 1990].
References:
- Akasofu, S., 2007. The importance of synthesis: A suggestion for international research efforts. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 88(25), pp.264-264.
- Stewart, J.A., 1990. Drifting continents & colliding paradigms: Perspectives on the geoscience revolution. Indiana University Press.
Disclaimer#
This content has been contributed by a student as part of a learning activity.
If there are inaccuracies, or opportunities for significant improvement on this topic, feedback is welcome on how to improve the resource.
You can improve articles on this topic as a student in "Unravelling Complexity", or by including the amendments in an email to: Chris.Browne@anu.edu.au