A ghost in the machine : the struggle for epistemological territory in chaos

This paper is a rhetorical examination of three works on the subject of chaos. The first two works discussed are the popular scientific texts "Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature", by Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers, and "Chaos: Making a New Science", by James Gleick. These two works, which cover the emergence of a new science of nonlinear dynamics, are analysed using Lawrence Prelli's topological criteria for scientific reasonableness, as outlined in his book A Rhetoric of Science. The third work discussed is N. Katherine Hayles' book "Chaos Bound", which is an interdisciplinary study of chaos as a cultural entity that was transformed by and has transformed our systems of knowledge in postmodern society. This paper is a discussion of the distinctions that Hayles' has drawn between Prigogine and Stengers' text and Gleick's. Hayles maintains that Prigogine and Stengers' text and Gleick's represent two branches of chaos science. This paper challenges that assumption, and offers an alternative explanation for the differences between Gleick's book and Prigogine and Stengers' book based on a rhetorical analysis of those two texts. This paper then goes on to suggest a reason for Hayles' portrayal of a split in chaos science based on her reading of Prigogine and Stengers and Gleick. It is suggested that Hayles' cultural model (taken from both science and literature) for the transmission of knowledge leads her to posit a split in science that might positively reflect on her own interdisciplinary study. After an analysis of Hayles' cultural model (illustrating the dynamics of culture through the terms ecology, economy, and equivocation), a suggestion is made for an extension of her model that could resolve the paradox which has led her to portray two branches of chaos science.Arts, Faculty ofEnglish, Department ofGraduat