Cultural Complexity

This paper is divided into four parts. The first section (I.) consists of definitions which center on the concept of complexity. As a minimum, the terms, system, complexity, and adaptation as used in this paper need an explanation. The second section (II.) is a sketch of cultural complexity in the real world. I will use Pueblo tribal laws and other ethnographic material as examples of that complexity. This part draws on anthropological fieldwork on the customary laws of Southwestern Indian tribes, especially the Pueblos of New Mexico and Arizona. With intermissions, this fieldwork took place between 1987 and 1998, comprising periods of time that add up more than thirteen months. This research included the internal laws ("tribal law") of the following nations: White Mountain Apache, San Carlos Apache, Jicarilla Apache, Yavapai-Apache, Pascua Yaqui, Tohono O`odham, Pima-Maricopa, Navajo, Kaibab Paiute, Moapa Paiute, Las Vegas Paiute, Taos Pueblo, Picuris Pueblo, San Juan Pueblo, Santa Clara Pueblo, Pojoaque Pueblo, Nambe Pueblo, San Ildefonso Pueblo, Tesuque Pueblo, Jemez Pueblo, Zia Pueblo, Cochiti Pueblo, Santa Domingo Pueblo, Santa Ana Pueblo (I and II), San Felipe Pueblo, Sandia Pueblo, Isleta Pueblo, Laguna Pueblo, Acoma, Zuni, and Hopi. The third part of the paper is (III.) what a lawyer would call a subsumption, and a logician a minor premise. In a brief but central remark I would like to state that cultural variety (II.) meets the requirements of complexity in the defined sense (I). A fourth and final section (IV.) offers some implications of this theoretical point of departure. The implications are, in part, of philosophical nature, and, among other aspects, deal with the ontological and epistemological difficulties of drawing conclusions in complex settings (in nature and culture). Ontology in this sense is - in short - the philosophy of truth, and epistemology the philosophy of discovering truth. A summary (V.) and some theses (VI.) conclude the paper.