RU
Manuscript
  • Original research article
  • September 28, 2026
  • Open access

The problem of complexity and common sense

Full
text RU

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problem of complexity, appealing to which is a common argument used by theorists and practitioners to justify failures in their endeavors. In such cases, complexity is presented as an objective property of an object, its ontological parameter. The apology for complexity has three important consequences: (1) its absolutization as an inevitable fact that must be humbly accepted; (2) the recognition of human inability to cope with it independently using natural (species-specific) capabilities; and (3) turning to artificial intelligence as the only possible tool capable of solving the problems associated with it. The purpose of the study is to formulate and substantiate the assumption that complexity is not an objective property of the world, but rather a projection onto it of the subject’s epistemological, linguistic, sociocultural, and other attitudes. What appears as complexity is actually a difficulty arising from the gap between actual human capabilities and capacities, on the one hand, and the world they claim to master, on the other. The contemporary world has become complex for humans because the aforementioned abilities have proven insufficient for accessing, organizing, and controlling it. Hence the hopes placed on artificial intelligence (AI), which, in the belief of its developers, is capable of overcoming the barriers posed by the key characteristics of complex objects: scale and heterogeneity. During the implementation of AI, its developers encountered a difficulty they termed the “AI brittleness problem”: it cannot solve problems that humans, from their emergence to the present day, have handled through common sense. Common sense, as a natural intellectual module, has been and remains the primary tool for human orientation in the world and for solving most everyday tasks that constitute the fabric of human life. As a result, the author formulates and substantiates the thesis that complexity is not an ontological characteristic of the world, but a projection onto it of various attitudes of the subject. The novelty lies in drawing upon common sense, as a manifestation of human rationality, as an epistemological resource for understanding and resolving this problem.

Research materials

  1. Ожегов С. И., Шведова Н. Ю. Толковый словарь русского языка. Изд-е 4-е, доп. М.: ООО «ИТИ Технологии», 2003.
  2. Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. https://www.dwds.de/
  3. Oxford Leaner’s Dictionaries. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com

References

  1. Аристотель. Сочинения: в 4 т. М.: Мысль, 1976. Т. 1.
  2. Аршинов В. И., Янукович М. Ф. Проблема наблюдателя и искусственные нейросети: на пути к трансдисциплинарной концепции наблюдения // Вопросы философии. 2025. № 12. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2025-12-72-89
  3. Бергсон А. Избранное: Сознание и жизнь / пер. с фр. И. И. Блауберг. М.: Российская политическая энциклопедия, 2010.
  4. Вебер М. Избранные произведения / пер. с нем. М.: Прогресс, 1990.
  5. Вико Дж. Основания Новой науки / пер. с итал. М. − К.: REFL-book; ИСА, 1994.
  6. Гадамер Х.-Г. Истина и метод. Основы философской герменевтики / пер. с нем. М.: Прогресс, 1988.
  7. Декарт Р. Сочинения: в 2 т. М.: Мысль, 1989. Т. 1.
  8. Думов А. В. Понятие сложность в философских контекстах: семантическая и прагматическая специфика // Вестник Кемеровского государственного университета. Серия: Гуманитарные и общественные науки. 2021. Т. 5. № 4. https://doi.org/10.21603/2542-1840-2021-5-4-328-337
  9. Инновационная сложность. Парадигма сложности в перспективе философской стратегии Жиля Делеза. Материалы «круглого стола» // Философия науки и техники 2016. Т. 21. № 2.
  10. Кант И. Сочинения: в 6 т. М.: Мысль, 1966. Т. 5.
  11. Князева Е. Н. Обсуждаем статьи о сложности // Эпистемология и философия науки. 2008. № 4.
  12. Кравченко А. И. Здравый смысл и Common sense: сходство и различие // Социально-гуманитарные знания. 2025. № 5.
  13. Марк Аврелий. Наедине с собой. Размышления. https://djvu.online/file/gnEaibQxrdFqE
  14. Марка Фабия Квинтилиана двенадцать книг риторических наставлений / пер. с лат. А. С. Никольского. СПб., 1834. Ч. 1.
  15. Морен Э. О сложностности / пер. с англ. Я. И. Свирского. М.: Институт общегуманитарных исследований, 2021.
  16. Ополев П. В. Проблемы концептуализации сложности в науке и философии // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Философия. Социология. Политология. 2019. № 48. https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/48/2
  17. Пейн Т. Избранные произведения / пер. с англ. М.: Изд-во Академии наук СССР, 1959.
  18. Платон. Сочинения: в 4 т. М.: Мысль, 1993. Т. 2.
  19. Пригожин И., Стенгерс И. Порядок из хаоса: Новый диалог человека с природой / пер. с англ.; общ. ред. В. И. Аршинова, Ю. Л. Климонтовича и Ю. В. Сачкова. М.: Прогресс, 1986.
  20. Рид Т. Исследование человеческого ума на принципах здравого смысла / пер. с англ., предисл., прим. Ю. Е. Милютина СПб.: Лаборатория метафизических исследований философского факультета СПбГУ; Алетейя, 2000.
  21. Ролз Дж. Теория справедливости. Изд-е 2-е / пер. с англ.; науч. ред. и предисл. В. В. Целищева. М.: Издательство ЛКИ, 2010.
  22. Соловьев С. М. История России с древнейших времен: в 18 кн. М.: Мысль, 1994. Кн. XIV. Т. 27.
  23. Цицерон Марк Туллий. Три трактата об ораторском искусстве / под ред. М. Л. Гаспарова. М.: Издательство «Наука», 1972.
  24. Эйнштейн А. Собрание научных трудов: в 2 т. М.: Наука, 1966. Т. 2.
  25. Юм Д. Сочинения: в 2 т. М.: Мысль, 1996. Т. 2.
  26. Яковлева Л. И. Метод здравого смысла и его социальная миссия // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 7. Философия. 2009. № 3.
  27. Boulter S. The Rediscovery of Common Sense Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230223134
  28. Brachman R. J., Levesque H. J. Toward a New Science of Common Sense. 2022. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2112.12754
  29. Choi Y. The Curious Case of Commonsense Intelligence // Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. 2022. No. 151 (2).
  30. Chong H. Y., Juanita M. C. Friend or Foe? Common Sense in Science Education from the Perspective of History and Philosophy of Science // British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science. 2014. No. 4 (5).
  31. Davis E., Marcus G.Commonsense Reasoning and Commonsense Knowledge in Artificial Intelligence. 2015. Vol. 58. Iss. 9. https://doi.org/10.1145/2701413
  32. Dennett D. The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987.
  33. Devitt M. Realism and Truth. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997
  34. Gregorić P. Aristotle on the Common Sense. Oxford University Press, 2007.
  35. Hasselberger W., Lott M. Where lies the grail? AI, common sense, and human practical intelligence // Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. 2026. Vol. 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-023-09942-x
  36. Kekes J. The Domain of Justification: Common Sense // Philosophical. 1975. Vol. 15 (1).
  37. Ledwig M.Common Sense: Its History, Method, and Applicability. N. Y.: P. Lang, 2007.
  38. Lemos N.Common Sense: A Contemporary Defense. Cambridge – N. Y. − Port Melbourne – Madrid − Cape Town: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511498800
  39. Lewis C. S. Studies in Words. Second edition. Cambridge University Press, 1960.
  40. Lorica B., Loukides M. What is Artificial Intelligence? // O’Reilly. 2016. https://www.oreil ly.com/ radar/what- is- artificial- intelligence/
  41. McCarthy J. Programs with common sense. 1959. https://www.cs.rit.edu/~rlaz/files/mccarthy1959.pdf
  42. Moore G. E. A Defence of Common Sense. 2004. https://archive.org/details/moore-george-edward-philosophical-papers/page/n5/mode/2up
  43. Musgrave A.Common Sense, Science and Scepticism: a historical introduction to the theory of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
  44. Prodanović S. The Structure of Common Sense and Its Relation to Engagement and Social Change – A Pragmatist Account // Zeitschrift für Soziologie. 2022. No. 51 (3).
  45. Quine W. V. Ontological Relativity. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. N. Y.: Columbia University Press, 1969.
  46. Reid Т. Essays on Intellectual Powers of Man. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
  47. Rescher N.Common-sense: a new look at an old philosophical tradition. Marquette University Press, 2005.
  48. Rosenfeld S.Common Sense: A Political History. Harvard University Press, 2011. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061286
  49. Sankey H. Science, Common Sense and Reality // Journal of Philosophical Investigations. 2024. No. 18 (48).
  50. Searle J. The Rediscovery of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
  51. Shanahan M. The Technological Singularity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2015. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10058.001.0001
  52. Simon H. A. The Architecture of Complexity // Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 1962. Vol. 106. No. 6.
  53. Vision G. Problems of vision: rethinking the causal theory of perception. Oxford University Press, 1996.
  54. Weaver W. Science and complexity // American Scientist. 1947. No. 36.

Author information

Sergey Georgievich Chukin

Dr

Baltic State Technical University “Voenmeh” named after D. F. Ustinov, St. Petersburg

About this article

Publication history

  • Received: September 7, 2026.
  • Published: September 28, 2026.

Keywords

  • проблема сложности
  • здравый смысл
  • понятие “communis sensus”
  • искусственный интеллект
  • problem of complexity
  • common sense
  • communis sensus
  • artificial intelligence

Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s)
© 2026 Gramota Publishing, LLC

User license

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)