Chaos and Accuracy
Emotionally, most respond to chaos in a negative way since it is the ever present threat of randomness. This prohibits us from building what we can envision. But what we call chaos may simply be a lack of understanding, and what we call evil might fall into the same category. The force that these two concepts have when they rest upon our consciousness would then be nothing more than the realization of our own ignorance. It’s predictability that puts us at ease, and what we can measure usually becomes predictable. Without measurement chaos is inevitable, and without creating more accurate and precise metrics, understanding will never occur.
Total accuracy is never achievable though. This is why there always needs to be a constant refinement of every knowable thing. Language is an example of a general metric that, even when utilized thoroughly to convey something true (such as one’s feelings, or a historical fact), will inevitably fail to express the intended truth. The word "dog" is understandable on a certain level, but doesn't refer to any particular dog, which is why it's only a general metric of dog-ness. Mathematical theorems are more accurate than written words, but are still prone to error as well. Everything knowable is subject to refinement and, as a result, criticism.
The desirable path of knowledge is that it moves through an ever refining system of criticism when it runs against problems. The beginning of the process starts as a general idea and may become a heuristic. Heuristics are helpful, but lack depth. Because they lack depth, a heuristic can never express a fundamental reality. It’s only a rule of thumb based on specific environments. To say dogs are good companions is only true as a general rule, for example. Concepts, ideals, beliefs, etc. all built on heuristics eventually crumble, at least in part, when an attempt is made to turn them into universals. (E.g. All dogs are good companions.) Further honing and specificity is necessary if any heuristic is to move beyond parochialism as universal explanations must take all of reality into account.
Even if chaos is inevitable, due to our lack of total accuracy, it doesn’t mean that the chaos we face will always be of the same kind. Said practically, we will always face problems, but not the same ones that have been solved. New problems will arise. I, for example, would love to have the issue of knowing what to do with a bunch of money. I still have the major hurdle of getting a bunch of money before I have that problem though. New problems stemming from solutions doesn't necessarily mean that chaos rules, it may only be an indication of our inability to have complete and total accuracy. Luckily we don’t necessarily have to reinvent the wheel to do this. That’s a problem that has already been solved. We can then take it from “here” and hopefully pass a baton that’s been understood a little bit more.