A Metalanguage for Complexity
Designing a new tool to aid in rethinking the main obstacle to progress
“Symbolic language is a language in which the world outside is represented by images which stand for real things or events, and at the same time point to hidden, unconscious meanings.”— Erich Fromm, The Forgotten Language
The need
Using language is thinking. If we change the way we use language, we can change the way we think. The main challenge standing in the way of our progress in this century is the complexity of the systems we design, manage and are part of. Changing how we think about these systems is a potential viable solution, and leveraging language in new ways can be a useful tool to make it happen.
The core idea is that there are shared patterns in all complex systems. Whether we are dealing with the educational system in Germany, water consumption issues in Bulgaria or ecosystem restoration efforts in sub-Saharan Africa, the problems (and solutions) have commonalities. I decided to inject these patterns, such as feedback loops, black box systems, delays and others as inline decorators within the text itself. This was inspired by some existing efforts, such as Maria Popova’s and Kelly Anderson’s Curators Code, where they proposed to use several inline symbols to improve attribution in blogging work1. Before we have a look at a concrete example, let me provide a definition we can use going forward:
A complexity metalanguage is a second-order system of inline symbols used to help the reader identify shared patterns between seemingly disparate topics, aiding in finding common solutions, and letting go of reductionist thinking.
Example
Here are two paragraphs which I have annotated with complexity metalanguage. The topic itself - the Subak irrigation system, is very relevant to my work, and we will be revisiting it often2. These are the decorators I’ll use in the text:
Bottleneck: ⧖,
Delay: ⤕
Feedback Loop: ↺
Black Box: ■
Fragile System: ◘
Now, have a look at two annotated paragraphs:
The traditional Balinese irrigation system, the Subak, operates within a landscape shaped by cooperation, ritual, and ecological necessity. It functions not through centralized commands [⧖] but through a distributed structure that enables local interactions to coordinate water distribution and planting schedules across entire regions. At its core is a temple-based structure of collective decision-making [↺] that not only embeds cultural significance, but also aligns agricultural practices with ecological cycles. These nodes of coordination act as local leverage points that allow farmers to adjust practices dynamically [↺] in response to water flow, pest levels, and harvest timing.
The system maintains a delicate equilibrium between overuse and underuse of shared water resources [◘]. It processes flows of ecological and social input to guide collective planting and watering—thus acting as an intelligible and responsive architecture of relations, rather than an opaque decision machine [■]. The clarity of signals and trust in shared rituals help reduce uncertainty [⤕] and error in coordination.
Conclusion
This brief note serves as a minimal introduction and reference point for the metalanguage for complexity. It will be referred to whenever I use metalanguage in upcoming content. A deep dive is provided in the upcoming book, but I’ll also potentially publish it on Substack in the near future.
The metalanguage they proposed was often referred to as “micro-syntax”.
If you are impatient, I can recommend the excellent Islands of Order book by J. Stephen Lansing and Murray P. Cox. Check out https://www.islandsoforder.com/ to learn more.