Passive butterfly effect
[Master Chen Says]
This is a discussion about the passive butterfly effect of nonlinear psychosocial and sociopolitical dynamic systems.
An active butterfly effect is the standard definition of the “butterfly effect”, that small or minute activities can cause large effects. A small change in the state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state. A small change in initial condition can create a significantly different outcome in nonlinear dynamics. The deterministic nature of a system does not make the outcome predictable. The present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.
Let us begin with a revision of the last statement. We generally assume and presuppose that the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future, and that maintaining the approximate present can cause major chaotic future events.
This revised statement comes from observation of two sets of events. (1) One set of events is sociopolitical and (2) the other set of events is psychosocial.
Both sets of events illustrate a passive butterfly effect.
A passive butterfly effect is defined as a butterfly effect resulting from inactivity, procrastination, inaction in a nonlinear dynamic system.
In other words, inactivity, procrastination and inaction directly cause chaotic results which shatter our presumptions and presupposition that the present determines a predictable future. “Maintaining the approximate present” means maintaining a state of inactivity, procrastination and inaction.
(1) The set of sociopolitical events involve Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen and the consequences of her refusal to accept the “1992 consensus” and her claim of “maintaining the status quo”. As a result, Taiwan’s tourism has fallen into chaotic decline because of the massive reduction of Chinese mainland tourists to Taiwan since May 20, 2016, inauguration day, and the China Airlines stewardess union’s decision to oust the 20 stewardesses who served on board the June 24, 2016, flight of President Tsai Ing-wen’s trip to visit Panama and Paraguay. The new government’s insistent proposal to revise the weekly work schedule of the majority of workers to a five-day work week and the proposal to revise and cut pensions have caused the massive protest marches by 250,000 veterans, retired teachers and retired government workers on September 3, 2016, and the passive protest march by 150,000 tourism industry workers on September 12, 2016. These reactions were surprisingly unexpected.
Slow response by the new government and the cold shoulder response by President Tsai Ing-wen herself to public demands and public emergencies on the part of the new government of chief cabinet minister Lin Chuan, and the arrogantly dismissive response by President Tsai Ing-wen herself have caused their popularity and their trustworthiness to drop rapidly only after 100 days in office. The incompetence, the ineptness, the bungling and the bumbling of the new cabinet ministers have been surprising. Public trust in her and in her new government has been shattered.
These passive responses of inaction in dealing with emergency situations are the direct causes of the negative social reaction manifested by these massive protests, a negative social reaction to the inactivity, procrastination and ineptitude of the government and the president. I describe this as the butterfly effect of inactivity, procrastination and government passiveness.
(2) The set of psychosocial events involves a nonlinear dynamic situation of interpersonal relationship in which one partner insisted on maintaining the status quo while the other partner felt that maintaining the status quo has no future. As a result of this growing sense of hopelessness, the relationship was abruptly broken.
Here, passivity, maintaining the status quo and unwillingness to change it, as well as a complete breakdown in interpersonal communication have resulted in a catastrophic change in the relationship. I also describe this as the butterfly effect of passiveness and inaction.
Thus, minute activity as well as inactivity can both result in unexpected and unpredictable butterfly effect. And maintaining an approximate present does not approximately determine the future.
Attempts to maintain a status quo of an approximate present can result in a chaotic future both psychosocially and sociopolitically.