The Great Reset as a Realistic Utopia—A Critical Stance from Critical Realism and Complex Systems Theory

IF 2.3 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Systems Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI:10.3390/systems12080304
Ermanno C. Tortia
{"title":"The Great Reset as a Realistic Utopia—A Critical Stance from Critical Realism and Complex Systems Theory","authors":"Ermanno C. Tortia","doi":"10.3390/systems12080304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Great Reset (GR) has been presented by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022 as a model through which a “stakeholder economy” would achieve “resilient, equitable, and sustainable” social, economic, and ecological reform. The GR agenda includes environmentally sustainable use and more equitable distribution of resources. This article raises the question of whether the Great Reset program should be interpreted as a “realistic utopia” and what its reform potential is. To this end, the GR program is tested against the current state of science and philosophy. The idea of a utopia is analyzed in the light of recent philosophical and scientific approaches, such as critical realism in philosophy, social systems theory in sociology, and complexity theory in science. A comparative conceptual analysis is carried out by introducing the idea of a realistic utopia in Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. In the final discussion, some doubts are raised about the logical coherence, rigor of scientific theorizing, policy prescriptions, and predictive potential of the Great Reset. It is concluded that utopian projects of radical reform are not realistic due to the supposed long-term repercussions of exogenous shocks or “black swan” events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather, they must offer explanations of the deep structural elements and evolutionary patterns that underlie society and the economy, drawing from these explanations the policy implications, predictions, and prescriptions that can support change.","PeriodicalId":36394,"journal":{"name":"Systems","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12080304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Great Reset (GR) has been presented by the World Economic Forum (WEF) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022 as a model through which a “stakeholder economy” would achieve “resilient, equitable, and sustainable” social, economic, and ecological reform. The GR agenda includes environmentally sustainable use and more equitable distribution of resources. This article raises the question of whether the Great Reset program should be interpreted as a “realistic utopia” and what its reform potential is. To this end, the GR program is tested against the current state of science and philosophy. The idea of a utopia is analyzed in the light of recent philosophical and scientific approaches, such as critical realism in philosophy, social systems theory in sociology, and complexity theory in science. A comparative conceptual analysis is carried out by introducing the idea of a realistic utopia in Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. In the final discussion, some doubts are raised about the logical coherence, rigor of scientific theorizing, policy prescriptions, and predictive potential of the Great Reset. It is concluded that utopian projects of radical reform are not realistic due to the supposed long-term repercussions of exogenous shocks or “black swan” events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather, they must offer explanations of the deep structural elements and evolutionary patterns that underlie society and the economy, drawing from these explanations the policy implications, predictions, and prescriptions that can support change.
作为现实乌托邦的大重启--批判现实主义和复杂系统理论的批判立场
为应对 2022 年 COVID-19 大流行,世界经济论坛(WEF)提出了 "伟大重启"(Great Reset,简称 GR),作为 "利益相关者经济 "实现 "弹性、公平和可持续 "的社会、经济和生态改革的模式。GR 议程包括环境可持续利用和更公平的资源分配。本文提出了 "伟大复兴 "计划是否应被解释为 "现实乌托邦 "及其改革潜力的问题。为此,我们根据当前的科学和哲学现状对 "伟大重启 "计划进行了检验。乌托邦 "的概念将根据最新的哲学和科学方法进行分析,如哲学中的批判现实主义、社会学中的社会系统理论和科学中的复杂性理论。通过在罗尔斯的公平正义理论中引入现实乌托邦的思想,进行了概念上的比较分析。在最后的讨论中,对 "大重启 "的逻辑连贯性、科学理论的严谨性、政策处方和预测潜力提出了一些质疑。结论是,由于外来冲击或 COVID-19 大流行病等 "黑天鹅 "事件的所谓长期影响,激进改革的乌托邦计划并不现实。相反,它们必须对社会和经济的深层结构要素和演变模式做出解释,并从这些解释中得出支持变革的政策影响、预测和处方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systems
Systems Decision Sciences-Information Systems and Management
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
204
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信