Re: `Structure' and contingency

I agree with Peter that

1.)  Once the conditions for a complex system have been
>created, the "freedom" of a participant within that system (be it
>an atom, molecule, or human) to alter the dynamics of the system
>itself are highly constrained by the macro-dynamics of the
>system, hence minimized.

When we speak of the "conditions" under which humans in the normal course of
events make history (which, as Marx tells us, are not "chosen by
themselves") ,  we must include both "past" conditions (structural
preconditions) and "future" conditions or options for action.  Just as the
former creates the "stage," the latter circumscribes what avenues can be
pursued.  I think this is even evident in semi-exceptional activties such as
invention. Invention is less a case of individual genius and more a case of
being in the right place at the right time (as the cases of Bell and Edison
demonstrate).

Human decisions can have a substantial autonomous impact but only in periods
of instability and even in these cases it is only the rare  individual who
is finds themselves under the right preconditions and confronted with the
"right" options.

Where I differ is that I believe that structures "do" more than constrain -
in constraining choices the create situations.  For example, competition
between forms in an industry not only constrains us, i.e. limits what we
can't do, it also determines what we can do and, in so doing, we recreate
competition.

Carl Dassbach