Abstract This essay considers the question of how to frame social complexity from the point of view of critical realism as it was developed in the direction of dialectics by Roy Bhaskar. One of the main objectives of dialectical critical realism (DCR) was to see dialectics as offering a more open and flexible way of handling social reality. I begin by outlining the main aims of DCR and its general orientation, before outlining some key concepts which afford it greater flexibility in handling complexity. In particular I look at ideas of totality, holistic causality, four planar social being and dispositional identity. I then use these ideas to explore in more detail two particular issues which relate to my own interests in thinking about the place of moral psychology in a dialectical critical realist setting. Here I focus on the complexity in understanding what it means to be responsible for an act in the light of the four planar social being/dispositional identity argument, and on how psychological phenomena animate social and political relations in light of ideas of totality and holistic causation.