In reality, the chaos as disorder responds to an ideology according to which since the order establishing the non as disorder. Something similar happens in the social science. Anthropologist and sociologist Georges Balandier 2 has seen a parallel between the quest for the chaos of contemporary scientists and the post-modernist vocabulary, particularly with the concept of deconstruction. It can be agreed that the notion of chaos is harmonious with the autocalificado thought of postmodern ideas, but employment making it Balandier, because he understands as a disorder and destruction, deconstruction is not acceptable which has been explicitly rejected by Derrida 3, introducer of this term. Now well, considering the chaos as disorder naturally also implies the existence of an order, which also has to be absolute. And referred this to human societies, nor is evidence that in these given the total disorder nor a perfect order.

The latter is precisely the eternal aspiration of utopian literature, and should not be forgotten that when utopias have tried to bring to reality (and for this are: not to bring them to reality, but to try), as in the case of New Harmony inspired by the ideas of Owen 4, have not gone for the failure. And instead of the social order we refer to the mental order, whether to make a similar reflection. Bergeret 5, from psychiatry, warns that any personality is formed absolutely in order or absolutely in disarray, as the mental order corresponds to a good adaptability to conditions that correspond to the inner and outer realities of the subject in every moment. From the complexity, the apparent absence of order, given by the chaos, no longer a pathological phenomenon but a constitutive aspect of reality. Complexity explicit, then an order radically different from that in which we usually tend to move us by having been socialized in it. An order in which the uncertainty (called instability, spontaneity or freedom) dominates the accuracy and certainty.