Two Types of Order

Taxis:

Planned, consciously created order directed toward specific goals or purposes. It is exogenous, as it originates from external imposition or deliberate design rather than arising naturally from within the system. Taxis orders or organisations are typically aimed at specific goals or purposes. To achieve these, it is necessary for their members to perform specific tasks and fulfill defined responsibilities. Tasks are distributed among members and are often issued as directives. Consequently, an individual’s position within the framework of the order is fixed, and they follow behavioral rules corresponding to their designated role. Examples are technical systems (machines and technology) and simpler social systems (groups of people less than 25) that may arise from both human action and deliberate intention.

Cosmos:

Spontaneous, polycentric order emerging from regularities in the behavior of its elements. Cosmos is endogenous, self-regulating, and self-organising. It often relies on rules or parameters as a "meta-system" established by external forces but operates freely within those bounds. However, such parameters themselves can originate from Taxis, where planned and structured guidelines create the environment within which self-organisation can occur or create behavioral patterns that then evolve and take on a life of their own. Using Taxis to form Cosmos is referred to as cultivation, a term coined by Friedrich Hayek. It is important to note that not all rules foster order—some hinder or even prevent it. Additionally, cultivation cannot produce concrete results but exerts abstract influence that merely guides developments in a particular direction. For example, introducing a flexible work policy in an organisation may not dictate exactly how productivity will increase but provides an environment where employees can self-organise to adapt their workflows, potentially enhancing overall performance.

Spontaneous order in the social domain (e.g., money, language, law, morality, family, society, church, enterprise) is a prime example of this cosmos. Friedrich Hayek emphasized that these systems emerged organically from patterns of behavior and unspoken rules, long before they were formally codified (written down and systematized). For example, language evolved not from a single inventor but through the repeated and shared use of sounds and symbols over generations. Similarly, morality, laws, and money are the results of human interaction rather than intentional design. These systems illustrate how spontaneous order can give rise to enduring and complex institutions without centralized control.

These self-organising systems in the social domain are difficult, if not impossible, to perceive with the senses alone and can only be reconstructed in the mind. For instance, a market in the economic sense cannot be directly observed or perceived but can only be inferred from observable transactions, exchanges, and transfers. These visible actions suggest the existence of a broader system of relationships we call a market. While individual transactions or outputs can be perceived, the overall order remains intangible. This aligns with the earlier notion that by observing parts of a system, we can infer its workings as a whole, extrapolating the behavior of the larger organism from its visible components.

Behavioral rules in spontaneous orders are not directed toward specific goals or purposes. They are abstract and apply to categories of individuals not known in advance and to predictable types and quantities of circumstances. In spontaneous orders, individuals follow these rules while also pursuing their own goals and purposes.

The more complex an organization, the more general its behavioral rules must be. Conversely, the more general the behavioral rules of an organization, the more complex it can become.

Spontaneous (Cosmos) vs. Made Order (Taxis)

Spontaneous order is not inherently more complex than made order but has the potential to reach any desired level of complexity. In such systems, individual elements’ behavior is influenced by a myriad of circumstances, akin to the "gods’ way" of orchestrating outcomes. This type of organisation demands vast knowledge and information, yet the concrete details of its formation remain unpredictable due to the multitude of influencing factors. This unpredictability is why we use principle explanations to navigate and influence these systems in the desired way, allowing for abstract steering without needing to account for every individual variable. A principle explanation serves as a conceptual framework that simplifies understanding of complex systems by focusing on overarching patterns and principles rather than specific details. It helps guide decision-making and influence system behaviors effectively, even amidst uncertainty.

For example, while we may understand the patterns of a magnetic field, we cannot precisely predict the arrangement of iron filings around a magnet due to the variability of specific conditions. These include properties of the paper the filings rest on, the angle of the table, room temperature, air circulation, or even minor environmental factors like low-level seismic activity. The possibilities are endless, limited only by our imagination, as countless factors in space and time interplay in that exact moment.

This inability to alter the inherent patterns of a magnetic field illustrates the essence of cultivation. While we cannot change the natural laws governing the magnetic field, we can adjust external factors like the type of paper used, the size of the filings, or introducing a fan to influence the outcome. Such adjustments reflect how we cultivate an environment to achieve a desired effect, showcasing how planned parameters can guide spontaneous organisation within the limits of natural constraints.