If we do exist in a world of infinite structure then, good God--we exist in a world of meaning. We are "the expected" because our mental sophistication is the product of a deliberate and pre-determined course of development in a schema far more profound than the abribitary gambles of "natural selection"

All this sounds so much more seductive than the brute march of Darwinism , though one shudders to think what insidious way your garden variety elitist could use this theory to justify existing social systems.

The weakness unfortunately of Kauffman's principle, (and this is a very Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park moment) is that algorithms proceed on very controlled terms --a computer's idea of randomness can be oddly consistent. Further more they are very finite structures themselves attempting to "deconstruct" infinite epistemologies and that represent quite a conundrum. For even the shrewdest scientists, there is always the excruciating paradox that in order to know more and more, he must stretch his assumptions to address the unruly permutations of entities in perpetual flux.

Kauffman would of course protest that is the advantage of his proposition--that his tenets can help us anticipate malfunction and malformation but it is always simpler to analyze a situation in retrospect and a daunting challenge to analyze a new system as it unfolds. Or maybe I'm just part of that post-nuclear consciousness that cannot trust anything as a given.

But, for what its worth, Kaufman should easily find a mass culture following. Taken out of context, Complexity leaps off the page as a gorgeous metaphor for our times. It is very heartening to witness a revisionist spirit aligning science, art and philosophy to occupy a positive axis as the twentieth century, draws to a close.

"The Complexity Principle " is clearly exhibiting itself in latter day electronic music. Look at how computer technology has changed the nature of the recording industry and emitted more sub-genres than can be logically tracked anymore by the print press.

In time, the art world should embrace the fashionable certitude of these principles for wiseass installationists and smartass painters now have a new source of references to hype the controlled randomness that is inherent to the act of making art.

Architects could theorize about designing houses that build themselves--around the changing needs of the occupants. Wouldn't it be simply fabulous to live in a room where two of the walls were in actuality, speakers and the other two walls, fiber lined projection screens!

Last and certainly least, let some clever fashion designer declare himself a "Complexist" who creates interchangeable couture outfits affixed w. Velcro attachments which are utterly open to the re-mixes and re-stylings of the wearer. Can't you just see the fragrance line already, marketed in faux, test tubes--oops skip that thought --too Halston's Catalyst!

You may exit Kaufman's text unconvinced and it may take several readings to wade through all those flowcharts and diagrams and theorems but its heartening to witness a scientific movement that pronounces certitude in that old school "Age of Enlightenment" style.

My generation has its very own set of radical scientific principles that doesn't involve a bomb. Isn't tomorrow beautiful!