Another trend is toward a growing appreciation of complexity in the social as well as natural sciences, and indeed in the general mainstream world-view. (For many of these trends, the growing awareness of a given trend may only involve a small fraction of the general population in the next few years\u2014but I think this number is growing.) In the olden days when I was growing up\u2014in the mid-20th century\u2014the idea of complexity seemed to attach mainly to certain machines. Gradually this quality emerged in every science as the research uncovered more, and then more of this inter-related connectedness: Social intelligence, for example, involves a rich feedback system of non-verbal communications, and non-lexical types, too\u2014that involves verbal communications, but mixed with pauses, voice tone, shifts in tone (inflexion), pace, etc. These elements are often subtle, even subliminal. (The emergence of \u201csystems\u201d thinking is part of this, also\u2014a more feedback-filled, dynamic view that replaces the mechanistic view of how things work.) <\/p>\n
In mathematics we have seen the birth of fractals and chaos theory. In biology and psychology, there\u2019s been a growing awareness of individual differences between organisms. This trend supports a variety of new ways of thinking. We used to treat people as fungible, replaceable. Give each young person the same curriculum to study, and use the same methods of teaching. We\u2019ve found that this doesn\u2019t work, while what\u2019s more effective involves a more flexible approach that identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each person and adapts to this awareness. Few schools have caught up with this awareness, alas. <\/p>\n