The world is becoming more and more complex. Today it is indeed much more complex than it was only 10 years ago. We are in communication. We influence each other in countless ways, on an unprecedented scale.

This is a great opportunity. We can learn from each other and mutually amend cognitive biases in judgements how the world works.

But it is also a great threat. The ease and scale of mutual influence, in the absence of awareness, self-awareness of how we function and mutually react deprive us of the ability to control our lives.

The consequences of the invention of the Internet which is revolutionizing our way of communicating are similar to the consequences of the invention of the printing press described by Nat Silver: (…) At the same time, a flood of new ideas caused confusion. The amount of information grew faster than the human ability to comprehend or use it, to tell valuable information and lies apart. Ironically, increasing national and religious divisions were the effect of growing knowledge resources. For when we have „too much information” at our disposal, we instinctively start to select, choose the one that suits us and ignore the other – we enter a covenant with people making similar choices and reject others(69).

And instead of turning away from others we should improve the functioning – of enterprises, institutions, local communities, states. We should not indulge in the possession of sophisticated yet inaccessible algorithms or remain in the hands of experts proposing actions based on forecasts of dubious quality. Knowing well what our minds can – in a good and bad way – surprise us with we can more safely analyze reality and efficiently evaluate causal links by finding sources of problems, weak links. Then we may try to change them – not by taking shortcuts but by patiently tracking false, out-of-date paradigms and replacing them with new, creative solutions that are compatible with current reality.

Let us remember – we are all elements of a solution that is difficult to see through personal behavioral lenses. The way of perceiving the world which Michał Heller wrote about in Philosophy of Chance (Filozofia przypadku) gives us an advantage. It allows us to dominate our surroundings. But at the same time it limits us – as individuals and, consequently, as communities.

I tried in my study, using the consonance of behavioral sciences, complexity theory, constraints theory and probability theory, to indicate the direction in which we can, while consciously working on our minds, foster the emergence of solutions. Please accept the manner in which I read the works of the authors on whose contributions I am relaying as my sole responsibility. Thanking for their wonderful, inspiring books I apologize in advance to all those whose thoughts I am quoting contrary to what they might have wanted to express in the first place.