Complexity theory from the perspective of foreign post-non-classical philosophy

Multiparadigmality of post-non-classical philosophy and science creates pluralism of ideas and concepts in modern scientific research. In particular, the paradigm of complexity, which pretends to be the dominant of post-non-classical philosophy and science, also came under polyvariance trend. Not by chance, the background of «complexity» research and its development reflect interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity; this is in itself the driving force of diversity. Quite logical is the fact that many scientific schools and individual scientists make attempts to adapt complexity theory to their scientific fields. However, some scientists who do not share theory of complexity adhere in their activity systemic, and in some cases mechanistic research trends. This fact confirms multiparadigmality of post-non-classical science, moreover in the light of contradiction of scientific paradigms it is possible to observe genesis of new research areas and concepts. This article presents the philosophical and methodological analysis of «foreign» approach in research of complexity theory based on the scientific ideas of such scholars as F. Heylighen, P. Sellers, K. Gershenson, M. Conner, M. Waldrop, M. Gell-Mann, K. Mainzer. The works of presented scientific figures reflect the most current ideas and principles of complexity theory development in foreign philosophy and science, contain reflections on the fundamental issues of philosophy: What is the origin of order, organization and thought (intelligence)? What we can see around us? Moreover, each of the scientists is an innovator in categorical apparatus of complexity theory, since such research involves introduction of new terminology and its adaptation.