"Transdisciplinarity, a new vision of the world" (Basarab Nicolescu).
"Transdisciplinarity, more than a new discipline or superdiscipline, is really a different way of looking at the world, more systemic and more holistic " (Manfred Max-Neef).
Transdisciplinarity (TD)
In recent times a new intellectual and academic movement called "transdisciplinarity" has emerged, which aims to go beyond multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity. The idea is to overcome the fragmentation of knowledge reflected in particular disciplines and go in the direction of knowledge unification. This movement has been promoted by UNESCO and CIRET (Centre de Recherches et d'Etudes Transdisciplinaires), whose headquarters are in Paris.
The advancement of knowledge in recent decades has increased the interconnections between different disciplines. But what is needed is a global perspective that allows us to see the forest where the trees are located. The traditional reductionist, analytical, logical and positivist approach is insufficient to achieve this goal. We also need the other pole: the holistic, synthetic one. It is a matter of eliminating the "ego" of the disciplines and going to the common self of all of them.
The objective of the TD is not only the unity of knowledge, but it walks towards self-realization or self-transformation, towards the creation of a new consciousness and a new art of living, more orderly and harmonious.
In short, what TD is about is the search for a universal paradigm or metasystem.
This topic is of special concern and interest to universities, in order to design the "university of the future", which lives up to its name, with emphasis on the confluence of knowledge. It is a matter of uniting science and humanism, which should never have been separated, and avoiding the excesses of hyper-specialization.
Unesco, in its "Report of the International Commission on Education for the 21st Century (Zurich Conference, 2000), establishes 4 pillars for the new education: learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be.
This new paradigm needs a new language that contemplates universalistic concepts applicable to particular disciplines. Each discipline has a different language. We need a common language, a universal language that is also a metalanguage in which the terms of all the particular disciplines can be expressed. It is the eternal search for the perfect language, the language of the essential unity of things, the language of consciousness. In the particular concepts are hidden the universal concepts. Everything particular must be contemplated from the universal.
The problematic of knowledge
Throughout history, mankind has tried to approach knowledge of reality in a reductionist manner, the result of which has been the creation of a sea of particular, specialized academic disciplines.
Each discipline organizes, classifies, structures and delimits a territory of knowledge. In principle, each discipline is independent of the others. It has its own methods, norms, languages, theories and practices, and offers a particular vision of reality. But disciplines are not isolated. There are relationships, interactions and interdependencies of all kinds among them, with no clearly defined boundaries.
Each discipline is a repository of knowledge, with a lot of detailed information. But from the superficial perspective of a single discipline it is difficult to see the forest, the environment, the global. Faced with the current challenge of achieving the so-called "knowledge society", a higher perspective or vision is required, an environment or platform that unites and gives coherence and unity to all the particular knowledge.
There has been a disciplinary Big Bang, with disciplines becoming increasingly specialized. The number of scientific disciplines is now estimated at about 8,000. And there is no general science or discipline that unifies and underpins them.
According to Edgar Morin, hyperspecialization prevents us from seeing both the global (because it fragments it into parcels) and the essential (because it dissolves it). "Essential problems are never parceled out and global problems are increasingly essential."
In general, disciplines are dehumanized, disconnected from the human being, because it favors the object over the subject. What is needed is to unite object and subject, to connect the objective and the subjective. There is a paradox of accumulative knowledge and an increasingly impoverished and disconnected human being.
Beyond knowledge, we need understanding. "Knowledge is one thing, understanding is something else..... Understanding depends on the relationship of knowledge to being" (Gurdjieff). "We know much, but we understand very little" (Manfred A. Max-Neef).
Knowledge is tinged with technicalities that hinder its widespread dissemination to the general public. Especially hermetic is the mathematical language. This has produced an inequality between those who possess the knowledge and those who do not. What is needed is to make knowledge accessible and intelligible to all, presenting it as simply as possible. Knowledge must be shared and easily accessible. The challenge of the information society demands it.
Reductionism is not a complete method to approach reality, because it effectively "reduces" the knowledge of the whole to that of its parts, making it impossible to see the whole. A complementary holistic method is also needed to contemplate reality from two poles: the particular and the general or universal.
Traditional logic, dichotomous or Aristotelian, is not sufficient for the understanding of reality, since it imposes a rigid and restrictive reasoning based on duality. We also need an intuitive type of logic that complements it.
There is a gap between science and humanism. Priority has been given to the scientific and objective. This scientism has nullified or restricted the human capacity for transcendence and spirituality.
In short, the classical model for dealing with the complexity of reality is insufficient. Humanity cries out for a new conception of reality, with new concepts (or categories of thought) capable of interrelating all things, of giving global explanations.
Solution strategy
Faced with this problem, what is needed is a unifying discipline (or meta-discipline):
That establishes fundamental values and principles.
That gives coherence and foundation to all the particular disciplines in order to achieve the unity of knowledge.
That is both global and essential, reductionist and holistic.
That unites the objective and the subjective, that reconciles science and humanism.
That unites thought and feeling.
Let it be theoretical and practical.
That connects the unified and the diverse, the universal and the particular.
That allows to approach particular issues and problems from a higher, more general or universal perspective.
That recognizes and treats phenomena as multidimensional rather than isolated.
That incorporates traditional (rationalist) logic and an intuitive type of logic.
That accepts indeterminism, uncertainty and fuzziness.
That it be simple in order to make knowledge accessible to the whole society, and not only to a few specialists. Knowledge must be democratized. The Internet is the ideal platform to achieve this goal.
That enhances or favors creativity.
That goes beyond all artificial dogma and discovers the truth of the essential, that which can never be questioned.
Human knowledge truly advances, not by delving into the details associated with particular disciplines, but by connecting and relating the particular with the global, the generic and the universal. It advances to the extent that it is structured, organized, contextualized and related.
The concept of transdisciplinarity
The word "transdisciplinarity" (abbreviated, TD) was first introduced in 1970 by the Swiss philosopher and psychologist Jean Piaget, although this term was used at about the same time by Edgar Morin, Eric Jantsh and other authors.
There are different conceptions and definitions of TD (in fact, there is talk of "the war of definitions"), although all of them refer to a new paradigm of a global type:
A meta-discipline, transcending particular disciplines.
A universal science that can only be expressed in mathematical language.
A holistic approach to all levels of reality.
The unity of knowledge.
A general axiomatic approach.
The search for the common essence, what is shared by all the particular disciplines, what is hidden behind the different disciplines.
The cooperation between researchers and scholars of the different ways of seeing the world (the paradigms) to try to face the complexity of reality.
A new way of learning and problem solving based on the generic and universal.
A new logic that overcomes duality.
A new global consciousness that entails a new way of feeling, thinking and acting.
"It is that which is at once between disciplines, across disciplines and beyond all disciplines" [Nicolescu, 2002].
We will keep the following definition: "TD is a universalistic and holistic approach that studies what is common and transcendent in all disciplines, whose objective is the understanding of the world through the unity of knowledge" [Nicolescu, 2002].
Characteristics and objectives of TD
It is a unifying conception.
Unification is not the same as integration. Unification is a top-down type process, from the universal or general to the particular. Integration is a bottom-up type process, from the particular to the general or universal. So from the transdisciplinary perspective, the different disciplines would be seen as particular cases or manifestations of a more general discipline, a superdiscipline (or metadiscipline), a supreme discipline that would be the foundation of the understanding of reality.
It seeks to relate all knowledge from deep or fundamental bases. Everything superficial must be explained from the universal and transcendent. Ervin Laszlo calls to build the "civilization of religation", a "religation of knowledge".
What TD studies is of a necessarily abstract nature and which links with consciousness, with the simple, the profound, the essential, the common to all things.
It aims at the comprehension of reality and the unity of external and internal knowledge, the unity of being.
It aims to overcome the babelization of knowledge, using cognitive schemes common to the different disciplines to try to achieve the unity of knowledge. "Transdisciplinarity aims at understanding the present world, one of whose imperatives is the unity of knowledge" (Basarab Nicolescu).
It seeks a new consciousness, an environment of freedom to connect all things through the profound that unifies all things. And at the same time it seeks a personal transformation, a self-awareness.
It aims to discover or bring out the common characteristics between the different branches of knowledge. "Unity in diversity and diversity through unity" (Nicolescu).
It pushes for a unifying model of knowledge, scientific and humanistic, subjective and objective, that unites reason and intuition, the real and the imaginary, the certain and the doubtful, and that integrates even the emotional. We speak of "sentipensar" (thinking and feeling at the same time).
It is a vertical vision, as opposed to the horizontal visions of particular disciplines.
It links to spirituality, to the sacred, to the superior and transcendent, to the true meaning of everything.
It is not limited to science. It also includes the humanities and the arts. In fact, it places the human being as the central actor in the unification of knowledge.
It is a research strategy that seeks to universalize the knowledge of all disciplines in order to enrich other disciplines.
It seeks to address problems that limited particular disciplines cannot address on their own.
It implies a new type of knowledge, higher, universal and transcendent.
It implies transgressing frontiers in all disciplines. "Transdisciplinarity is a kind of generalized transgression, which opens an unlimited space of freedom, knowledge, tolerance and love" (Nicolescu).
It is transcultural. There is no privileged culture superior to others.
It is a rebellion against the rationality of the logical-mathematical paradigm associated with modernity. It goes beyond dichotomous logic and subject/object, internal/external, simplicity/complexity, reductionism/holism, unity/diversity, hierarchical/relational, theory/practice (basic knowledge and applied knowledge), etc. dualism. In this sense it is a dialectic that tries to overcome opposites. "Knowledge is neither interior nor exterior; it is at the same time interior and exterior" (Nicolescu).
It aims to "descuadricularize" the human being and to recover the sacred, deactivated by so many centuries of techno-science and positivism.
It goes to the roots of knowledge, questioning our way of constructing and organizing knowledge. And it tries to integrate the knower into the knowledge process.
It aims to overcome hierarchical relationships by searching for the essential structures and relationships, present in all things.
It seeks a systemic conception of reality. In this sense it is linked to the General Theory of Systems.
It aims to overcome the "ego" of the particular disciplines and go towards the being, the common essence of all of them, thus diluting the boundaries between them.
Its application to teaching would allow an integrated, dual education, based on two main poles: theory and practice.
It investigates the elaboration of a new language, a new logic and new concepts that allow a deep communication between the different domains of knowledge.
Advantages of TD
Clarifies disciplinary research. Disciplinary and transdisciplinary research are not antagonistic, but complementary, since all knowledge must be "embedded" or encompassed within a higher context or environment that gives it meaning.
By studying problems from a higher perspective, problems are simplified and better understood.
It raises the level of consciousness. It is the consciousness associated with the right hemisphere (global, synthetic) as opposed to the consciousness of the left side (particular, analytical). And it connects, unites, both types of consciousness, since the particular is associated with the general or universal.
It increases creativity, by establishing relationships between different disciplines. "Transdisciplinarity is an accelerator of creativity" (Nicolescu).
Interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity
TD has been related and sometimes confused with the terms "interdisciplinarity" (ID) and "pluridisciplinarity" (PD). And the point is to go beyond both approaches. TD goes beyond mere integration or cooperation between disciplines.
Interdisciplinarity is about relationships in general between different disciplines. Relationships can be established between disciplines, just as international relationships can be established between nations. Just as nations are sovereign and independent, disciplines are also independent. The objective is to enrich the different particular disciplines by taking advantage of other people's methods. It is recognized that although each discipline is independent, the exchange of views between them can enrich them.
As a result of relationships between disciplines, interdisciplines can be created, such as: thermodynamics, electrochemistry, biochemistry, genetic engineering, bioethics, astrophysics, geophysics, sociobiology, etc. Paradoxically, interdisciplines often become new specialized disciplines, i.e., they become autonomous and lose their origin (the crossing of disciplines).
The term "interdisciplinarity" emerged in 1937 and its invention is attributed to the sociologist Louis Wirtz, although previously the term "cross-discipline" was used.
Pluridisciplinarity (or multidisciplinarity) occurs when several disciplines converge and contribute their point of view to the treatment of a given topic or problem. The subject under investigation is enriched by the convergence of these disciplines.
It may happen that once the problem or issue has been solved, the disciplines return to their original autarchic state. But it can also happen that the integration of disciplines is consolidated and a higher level discipline is created. For example, Cognitive Science (whose object of study is the human mind) is a science (or meta-science) integrated by 6 sciences: Linguistics, Psychology, Neurology, Philosophy, Anthropology and Artificial Intelligence.
ID is a horizontal process. PD is an integrative, bottom-up process. TD is a unifying process, top-down type.
Nicolescu's Transdisciplinarity
Nicolescu's manifesto
The physicist and philosopher Basarab Nicolescu (French of Romanian origin), researcher at the CNRS in Paris (France), is currently the main reference and driving force of the TD movement. He co-founded CIRET in 1987, together with Stéphane Lupasco, Edgar Morin and other relevant thinkers. He is honorary president of the Stéphane Lupasco Foundation.
Nicolescu presented in 1996 the "Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity" [2002], a manifesto of the 21st century against the fragmentation of knowledge and the search for a new consciousness based on the unity of all disciplines. Its salient points are:
Scientific and sacred or transcendental knowledge must be unified.
The goal is not only the unity of knowledge, but also the unity of our being.
The binary logic that underlies most of our reasoning is not sufficient to cope with all human situations and problems. The logic of the "included middle" allows us to go beyond dichotomous thinking. The two logics are not mutually exclusive, but complementary.
TD is the transgression of the duality of the binary pairs subject-object, reductionism-holism, simplicity-complexity, etc.
TD knowledge is a new type of knowledge that links the external world of the objective and the internal world of the subjective.
There are different levels of reality and, correspondingly, there are different levels of perception/consciousness. Disciplinary research deals, at most, with only one level of reality. TD deals with the dynamics generated by the interaction of different levels of reality.
"Disciplinarity, pluridisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity are the four arrows of one and the same bow: that of knowledge" (Lupasco).
The axiomatics of TD
According to Nicolescu [1998], TD is based on 3 axioms or fundamental principles:
The ontological axiom.
There are different levels of reality of the object and, consequently, different levels of perception of the subject.
The logical axiom.
The passage from one level of reality to another is realized by the logic of the included third party. It is based on the logic of Stéphane Lupasco.
The epistemological axiom.
The structure of the totality of levels of reality is a complex structure.
Lupasco's logic
Stéphane Lupasco is the creator of a new logic, a logic that questions the excluded third party principle of classical logic.
Binary, bivalent, dichotomous or Aristotelian logic is based on 3 axioms: 1) the axiom of identity (A is A); 2) the axiom of non-contradiction (A is not non- A); 3) the axiom of excluded middle (there is no third term T that between A and non-A).
The generalization or extension of bivalent logic is usually done by modifying the second axiom, including degrees of truth, e.g., intermediate values between 0 (false) and 1 (true), thus giving rise to polyvalent logics.
What Lupasco did was to modify the third axiom, introducing a third term, beyond duality: "the state T". The duality bases it on the "actual" and the "potential" (concepts that replace "true" and "false", respectively). The state T is both actual and potential. Lupasco thus created a new logic of the "included middle," consistent and formalized, which he applied to physics and epistemology and also creating a new theory of consciousness.
Lupasco's logic is a "trilectic", which resembles:
Kantian categories, based on groups of 3: Unity, Plurality, Totality; Reality, Negation, Limitation; Substance, Causality, Mutual Action; Possibility, Existence, Necessity.
The Hegelian dialectic, with its 3 aspects: thesis, antithesis and synthesis. This dialectic is analytical, the aspects follow each other in time. Lupasco's logic is synthetic.
The Hegelian categories, organized in 3 groups: Objective Knowledge, Subjective Knowledge, Idea; Foundation, Phenomenon, Reality; Quality, Quantity, Measure.
Peirce's 3 categories, signs or universal principles associated with every process of knowledge: Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness. These categories seem to be inspired by those of Kant.
Primerity corresponds to the original object of knowledge.
Secondness corresponds to a quality or aspect that the object presents to someone (the interpreter or cognizing subject).
Thirdness corresponds to an effect, communication or representation in the interpreter: the interpreter. The sign creates in the interpreter's mind another sign, which is the interpreter.
Gurdjieff's "Law of Three". Reality has a threefold structure. There are 3 independent forces: an affirmative force, a negative force and a reconciling or neutralizing force. The third force manifests itself in a different space-time, belongs to a higher level and is a liberating, consciousness-generating element.
For the biologist Francisco Varela, there are 3 primary entities that constitute reality: emptiness, distinction and self-reference. The latter constitutes a synthesis of the opposites (emptiness and distinction), a unity of higher order. In a biological system self-reference is the factor that allows it to function autonomously.
Characteristics of Lupasco's logic:
It is more than a formal logic. It is a logic of consciousness and energy.
It is a logic of the excluded third and the included third. It does not reject classical logic, it encompasses it. Classical logic is a logic of a practical type, usable on a large scale, a macro-logic, a static logic of being. The logic of the contradictory is a dynamic logic, "a logic of experience, at the same time as an experience of logic".
It is the logic of scientific progress, in which every judgment is intrinsically linked to its antagonistic judgment.
It associates the unity of the world with logic. "Everything is connected in the world...if the world, properly understood, is logical" (Lupasco).
The logic of the contradictory is the logic of the psychic and of the quantum world. There is isomorphism between the two worlds, but not identity. The quantum world and the psychic world are two different manifestations of one and the same trialectical dynamism.
It is based on the "principle of antagonism": every actualization is linked to an antagonistic potentialization. Every actual situation is characterized by a mixture of A and non-A, and both exist simultaneously with different degrees of actuality and potentiality. When we have A (actual) then non-A is fully potential (or virtual). And conversely, if we have non-A (actual), then A is potential. "Every event is the manifestation of actualizations - potentializations of its two contradictory poles" (Lupasco).
The state T of equilibrium between A and non-A is the "absolute contradiction". It is the resultant of the reciprocal annihilation of opposites. It corresponds to a non-observable reality. It is in dynamic equilibrium, it refers to itself, it is cyclic, it unites the opposites, it is the state of self-consciousness (consciousness of consciousness), for it does not rely on anything but itself, it is self-sufficient and independent. It is the state of reflective being, it is energy (on a higher level than the opposites from which it proceeds). In this space inhabit the symbol and the myth, which are dynamic and self-referent elements.
It is a state analogous to the vacuum of quantum physics, an intermediate state between the static and the dynamic. It is a transcendental, archetypal state. It is also a state of silence, of serenity, of stillness, which connects with the transcendent and the soul. The symbol that best represents this state is the Ouroboros, the snake that bites its own tail.
Lupasco calls the potential state (or potentialization) "elemental consciousness," the consciousness that has no awareness of itself. And the actual state (or actualization) he associates with objective consciousness, with what we call "real". When the symmetry of the opposites is broken, then there appears a component of elementary consciousness, and one of objective (or objectifying) consciousness.
Lupasco's logic, interpreted by Nicolescu
Lupasco's logical system was extended by Nicolescu by means of the principle of "levels of reality". According to Nicolescu, Lupasco's logic is more than a well-formalized and consistent logic: it is a worldview. "Lupascian trialectics is a vision of the unity of the world, of its inseparability" (Nicolescu).
Nicolescu places the third term (T) on a higher level of reality. The difficulty of accepting and understanding the axiom of the included third is overcome precisely by this concept of levels of reality.
For Nicolescu, there is a concordance between the use of a logic based on 3 values and TD, since the words "three" and "trans" have the same etymological root. "Three" means "the transgression of two, that which goes beyond two".
According to Nicolescu, the logic of the included third is not a metaphor. It is precisely the logic of TD, a deep logic. The logic of the included third party does not eliminate the logic of the excluded third party; it only restricts its field of validity to a superficial level.
Nicolescu was inspired by physics to elaborate his model. In fact, there are three different paradigms in physics: quantum, classical and relativistic physics, corresponding to 3 levels of reality, which are apparently discontinuous. For example:
At the level of classical physics:
Time is linear, unidirectional and irreversible, governed by the "arrow of time".
Space and time are independent magnitudes.
An object cannot have several states at the same time.
There is the law of causality and there is determinism. Causality is local.
The vacuum is effectively empty.
Space and matter are distinct and do not interact with each other, they are independent.
Objects are presented to us as continuous and independent of each other.
Subject and object are differentiated.
There is composition (addition) of relative velocities between objects.
At the level of quantum physics:
Space-time is diluted (e.g., an electron of an atom instantaneously changes orbital without passing through the intervening space).
A quantum entity manifests itself as a wave (at a deep level of reality) and as a corpuscle (at a superficial level). Both coexist. Bohr's so-called "principle of complementarity" states that the two manifestations (wave and corpuscle) are complementary and necessary to understand the quantum world. When Bohr was knighted in his country (Denmark), he chose for his coat of arms the symbol of Yin-Yang and the legend "Contraria sunt complementa" (Opposites are complementary).
There is overlapping of states. For example, at the deep level, spin is an infinite superposition produced by the linear combination of two basic states. When a measurement is made, only one of the two states is manifested (at the surface level). This is the so-called "Copenhagen interpretation" of quantum physics.
In quantum physics, an entity can be in several places at once.
The law of causality does not exist (cause and effect are confused).
The vacuum is a sea of quantum fluctuations, where pairs of virtual particles and antiparticles are mutually created and destroyed in extremely small times. In the vacuum everything is vibration, a fluctuation operating between being (manifestation) and non-being (the unmanifested).
Space and matter are blurred. Matter can be space itself vibrating. So vibration or energy could be the candidate for unifying concept at the physical level.
There is uncertainty, which is governed by Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle. This indeterminism is constitutive, fundamental and does not mean randomness. It is a consequence of the structure of space-time at the subatomic scale.
The entities are called precisely "quantum" because they are discrete. Planck, by studying blackbody radiation, was the first to discover that energy had a discrete structure (Planck's "quanta").
There is non-local causality (it is the phenomenon of quantum entanglement).
Subject and object are not separated.
According to the bootstrap theory (by Geoffrey Chew), there is interdependence, in the sense that every quantum entity is what it is because the other quantum entities exist at the same time in a situation of mutual dependence. "Things exist by virtue of their mutually consistent relationships" (Geoffrey Chew).
At the level of relativistic physics:
Space and time are united in an entity called "space-time".
Space-time is "curved" in the presence of matter.
The composition of relative velocities is governed by an imaginary expression: c+v = c, where c is the speed of light. The speed of light is an invariant.
Levels of reality
Nicolescu distinguishes between reality and the Real:
Reality is what is accessible to our knowledge, what we experience and are able to describe, represent and formalize mathematically. Reality is also a social construction, the consensus of a collectivity, but it also has a trans-subjective dimension.
The Real is the profound reality, the immense and inextinguishable source of the unknown. It corresponds to the sacred, that which does not admit analysis. The Real is veiled and hidden from us forever. It is not a level of reality; it is an undifferentiated reality.
There are levels of reality. A level of reality is a set of systems that are invariant with respect to the action of certain general laws. Two levels of reality are different if in passing from one to the other fundamental concepts and laws have to be changed.
Each level of reality sustains the other levels of reality.
There is no privileged level of reality from which to understand all other levels of reality (new principle of relativity). Each level of reality is what it is because the other levels exist at the same time. (This principle is clearly inspired by the bootstrap philosophy of quantum physics).
Abstraction is the intermediary element between us and reality, abstraction that not only serves to describe reality, but is a constitutive part of reality.
Each level of reality is incomplete. The laws governing one level are only a part of the totality of the laws governing all levels. The laws of a given level of reality are not sufficient to describe the totality of the phenomena occurring at that same level. This law is reminiscent of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. According to Nicolescu, the levels of reality have a "Gödelian" structure, in the sense that the laws or principles of a level are not sufficient to describe all the reality of that level. General principles or laws that affect all levels are also necessary.
TD deals with the dynamics caused by the simultaneous action of the different levels of reality. Disciplinarity considers only one level of reality.
Reality is understood and explained by considering all possible perspectives, all levels.
The universe is composed of 3 basic entities: the object TD, the subject TD and the third term, the "interaction term" (IT) between the two, the mediator between the Real and reality. "Reality comprises the subject, the object and the sacred, which are the 3 facets of one and the same reality."
There are 3 types of meaning: 1) the horizontal, which corresponds to the interconnections at a single level of reality; 2) the vertical, which corresponds to several levels of reality; 3) meaning of meaning, which corresponds to the interconnections of the whole reality: the object, the subject and the hidden third. This third type is the ultimate goal of TD research.
The unity of the levels of reality constitutes the object of TD. The unity of the levels of perception constitutes the subject of TD. TD tries to conceptually restore the continuity between levels by bringing the different levels into communication and by uniting subject and object.
The unity that links all levels of reality, if it exists, must necessarily be an open unity. "The open unity of the world implies that what is 'below' is like what is 'above.'" "In the transdisciplinary view, complex plurality and open unity are two facets of one and the same Reality."
Complexity
At one level of reality complexity is horizontal and the logic of the excluded third party applies. When several levels of reality are contemplated, there is vertical complexity and the logic of the included third party must be applied. Complexity is a modern form of the ancient principle of universal interdependence.
The logic of the included third party makes it possible to create complexity by the following iterative process:
At level 1 we have A and non-A. Both are joined in T, located in the next higher level (2).
At level 2 there is the pair A' and non-A'. These join to produce T' at level 3. A and A' combine with T to give rise to other elements at level 3.
The iterative process continues until the exhaustion of all known or conceivable levels of Reality.
Nicolescu calls this iterative process "evolution of knowledge", which allows connecting or crossing different areas of knowledge in a coherent way, generating a new "simplicity", a term that is justified because complexity is built from simplicity. Simplicity and complexity are linked.
Degrees of TD
According to Nicolescu, there are degrees of TD, depending on whether the 3 axioms of TD are considered to a greater or lesser extent. However, two levels or types of TD can be distinguished:
Weak (or superficial) TD is of a practical type, uses the methods of traditional, rational logic, based on the law of the excluded middle, and assumes the existence of a single reality.
Strong (or deep) TD is of a theoretical type, uses the methods of an intuitive, relational type of logic (such as intuitionist or constructivist logic), based on the law of the included middle, and assumes the existence of different levels of reality. This type of TD represents the great epistemological challenge, since it is a matter of knowing the common essence of all these levels and trying to conceptually restore the unity and continuity between them.
MENTAL, a Transdisciplinary Language
MENTAL is a transdisciplinary language:
It is a transcendental, unifying language, a language of consciousness, simple and abstract, which blurs the boundaries between different disciplines:
Transcends the sciences: Mathematics, Computer Science, Logic, Artificial Intelligence, General Systems Theory, Cybernetics, Linguistics, Physics, Biology.
Transcends the humanities: Philosophy (philosophical categories, global ontology, possible worlds, dialectics, Platonism), Psychology (archetypes of consciousness, models of the mind, universal paradigm).
In the face of Cognitive Science it brings a unification and not a mere integration of disciplines.
It is an abstraction of the highest level. It is not just a tool to describe reality. It is the meeting point between us and reality, between the subjective and the objective, the inner world and the outer world. The maximum transcendence is achieved with the maximum abstraction of the primary archetypes of MENTAL. The process of abstraction ends in the primary archetypes, which establish the limit and which constitute the gates of consciousness and the foundation of knowledge. Archetypes are internal and external, they unite subject and object. And from the primary archetypes we can intuit the absolute and transcendent, the Real.
Its simplicity makes it accessible to everyone, because it is based on intuitive concepts.
It provides the solution to the problem posed by means of a universal language that unites the opposites. The result is consciousness, for consciousness is union, and when opposites are united, maximum consciousness is produced. And in the case of MENTAL, all pairs of opposites are united. Examples of opposites that we can highlight in this context of TD are:
Unite the simple and the complex. Only through simplicity can true unification of knowledge be achieved. Complexity arises from the iteration or recursion of simplicity. The complex is generated and based on the simple. Complexity does not exist, it is only apparent, a consequence of a superficial or external perception. In the deep there is simplicity and unity. That is why it is more appropriate to speak of "simplicity" (that which is constructed by means of the simple), as Nicolescu does. MENTAL reveals the simple framework of reality, its language.
It is reductionist and holistic. The global is the essential, they are the same thing.
It unites subject and object.
Harmonizes reason and intuition.
Allows to create hierarchical and relational structures.
From the union of opposites or duals, the third element is born. This third element is the creative force, the conscience, the transcendence, the true value. MENTAL is a language union of "threes", represented by the union of pairs of opposite primitives. The number 3 is the number of consciousness because it represents or symbolizes the transcendence of duality, the harmonization of opposites.
The axiomatic methodology is in this case the primitives themselves, which are semantic axioms or principles. They are minimized because they represent dimensions or degrees of freedom at the semantic level. Axioms are common to the inner and outer world, to mind and nature.
MENTAL is absolute, but it is not a dogma. It is the essential and necessary in all possible worlds.
In MENTAL the concepts of simplicity, creativity, abstraction, transcendence, consciousness, union of opposites, freedom, unity, truth, possibility and universality are mutually implied.
MENTAL vs. the logic of Lupasco
The law of included third takes the form of union of opposites in the language itself (primitives are presented in pairs of opposites). It also allows the construction of the union of a certain expression x and its opposite x': {x x'}. This expression describes the superposition of two opposite or dual elements that can, in turn, be negated, so all kinds of expressions can be created, such as {{x x' {x x'}'}.
We can also construct a multipurpose logic based on the linear combination of opposites: (f*x + (1−f)*x'), where f is a real number between 0 and 1.
In MENTAL, the contradictory expression {x x'} indicates abstract space-time union, where space is shared and there is simultaneity or no-time.
The concepts of actual and potential that Lupasco uses can actually be considered equivalent to the concepts of existence and non-existence of MENTAL, which are the existential values that replace the "true" and "false" values of traditional logic.
In MENTAL, the expression f*x, where f is a factor between 0 and 1, is what we have called a "qualitative magnitude" (e.g., 0.3*green). It is interpreted as meaning that the expression x exists in degree f and does not exist in degree 1−f (its complement to 1). It is equivalent in Lupasco's logic to actuality in degree f and potentiality in degree 1−f of x. Therefore, the opposite is the complementary, as Bohr affirmed. When f=1, we have complete existence (or actuality) and its opposite (1−f) is complete non-existence (or potentiality) and we have the traditional logic.
In general we have the expression f1*{f2*x f3*x'}, where f2 is the degree of actuality of x, < code>f3 the degree of actuality of x' and f1 the degree of actuality of {f2*x f3*x'}. The corresponding degrees of potentiality are the complements to 1.
It allows using all types of logics (including the classical binary, the polyvalent and the intuitionistic or constructivist), that is, it allows using the law of the excluded third or the law of the included third, since both are constructive forms, that is, they are expressions derived from the primitives. They are not axioms, as in TD, they are consequences of the degrees of freedom of the language.
MENTAL vs. Nicolescu's TD
Paradoxically, Nicolescu's theory is not a unified theory, as the very conception of TD would require, since it is based on three different axioms, although they are related. In MENTAL, ontology, logic and epistemology are three aspects of the same unified system:
Ontology. There is a global ontology represented by the primitives.
Logic. Logic as such does not exist, it is not a fundamental principle. The different logics emerge as applications of the language, applications based on the primitive "condition" and supported by the rest of the primitives.
Epistemology. Complexity emerges from the combinatorics of primitives. All knowledge can be represented by primitives. It is a theory and practice of knowledge.
Nicolescu states that there is no privileged level of reality that explains or grounds all levels of reality. In MENTAL there is a privileged level, which corresponds to the primary archetypes, where everything is interconnected and which connect reality with the Real. All levels of reality can be expressed or formalized from this fundamental level. This level is fundamental, absolute, profound, immutable, and provides the semantics from which all manifestations, all levels of reality participate. There are, apparently, different levels of reality, but they are all manifestations of the archetypes of consciousness.
There is one (deep) reality and different (surface) manifestations of that same deep reality, which are the different levels of reality.
It includes weak (or superficial) and strong (or deep) TD, as it is both theoretical and practical. The epistemological challenge associated with the strong TD is achieved through the semantic primitives, since they constitute the truth, the deep reality, what is necessary in all possible worlds. These primitives mark our cognitive and expressive limits. MENTAL is an epistemology, a theory of knowledge.
The levels of reality do not arise from the mere union of opposites, but from the combinatorics of primitives, of which the union of opposites is a particular case. Thus arises the conceptual or expressive big bang, which potentially has no end.
Consciousness is not associated with the union of logical opposites but in the archetypes, which are the union of basic opposites and also generators of all derived unions of opposites.
Nicolescu states in his Manifesto that "no one has been able to find a mathematical formalism that allows the rigorous passage from one level to another". MENTAL does offer, not a paradigm of a relative type (passing from one level to another), but a universal language that, because of its maximum level of abstraction, allows the formalization of all levels of physical reality and of all possible worlds. MENTAL is a model of the mind, where there are no limitations, where everything is possible. The soul imagines and the mind formalizes and connects.
Nicolescu postulates, more than a Cyberspace, a Cyber-Space-Time, which is neither deterministic nor indeterministic, but the space-time of interaction between man and machine, between natural mind and artificial mind. And it also wonders about its number of dimensions. MENTAL is a language and an environment (an abstract space-time) of 12 dimensions (the number of primitives or degrees of freedom). With MENTAL there is a mind-machine isomorphism and where a transdisplinary level of consciousness emerges. MENTAL is the operational and relational (web) system in which to implement knowledge and which favors the creation of a unified consciousness.
The conclusion is that MENTAL is a concrete proposal for a simple, non-speculative TD system that integrates all types of logics. Moreover, it allows to formalize, implement and express Morin's complex thinking.
Addenda
Background of non-bivalent logics
Greek philosophy formalized with Aristotle the logic that today we call "classical". But it also recognized the contradictory (the union of opposites). In "De Interpretatione" (Of Interpretation) he accepts the possibility of a logic of the contradictory. "It is not necessary that every statement and its opposite one be true and the other false."
Polyvalent logics (with more than two truth values) appear with Nicolai A. Vasiliev (from 1910) and Jean Lukasiewicz, who called their logics "non-Aristotelian". They introduce intermediate values between opposite polarities giving different interpretations. In the case of trivalent logic, the intermediate value is interpreted in many ways as doubtful, uncertain, probable, random, indeterminate, meaningless, self-referential, etc.
Vasiliev proposed a logic that he called "imaginary", which accepted contradiction.
Lukasiewicz, devoted more attention to three-valued logic (trivalent logic), but claimed that one could increase the number of values indefinitely. The intermediate values between 0 and 1 he interprets as probabilities.
Alfred Korzybski also adapted polyvalent logic in his 1933 General Semantics system. He used three or more truth values interpreted as probabilities.
Hans Reinchenbach invented a logic directly associated with probability which he called "probability logic". He also suggested applying a three-valued logic to quantum physics.
Lofty Zadeh developed a fuzzy or fuzzy logic (fuzzy logic), using a range of values between 0 and 1, but clearly differentiating it with probability theory.
The "Charter of Transdisciplinarity"
From November 2 to 7, 1994, the first World Congress on Transdisciplinarity, an event organized by CIRET, was held at the Convent of Arrábida (Portugal). At that meeting, a sort of Magna Carta or Constitution of TD was drawn up, the "Charter of Transdisciplinarity", which we transcribe below:
Preamble.
Considering that the current proliferation of academic and non-academic disciplines leads to an exponential growth of knowledge, which makes impossible any global vision of the human being,
Considering that only an intelligence capable of grasping the planetary dimension of the conflicts existing in the present will be able to face the complexity of our world and the contemporary challenge of a potential material and spiritual self-destruction of the human species,
Whereas life on earth is strongly threatened by a triumphant techno-science, which obeys nothing but the terrifying logic of efficiency for efficiency's sake,
Whereas the contemporary rupture between an increasingly accumulative knowledge and an increasingly impoverished inner being leads to the acceleration of a new obscurantism whose consequences on the individual and social level are incalculable,
Whereas the growth of knowledge, unprecedented in history, increases the inequalities between those who possess it and those who do not, thus reproducing growing inequalities within peoples and between the different nations of our planet,
Considering at the same time that all the challenges enunciated have their counterpart of hope and that the extraordinary development of knowledge can lead, in the long term, to a mutation comparable to that of the passage from hominids to the human species,
Considering the above, the participants in the First World Congress of Transdisciplinarity adopt the present Charter, understood as a set of fundamental principles of the community of transdisciplinary spirits, constituting a moral contract that each of the signatories of the Charter makes with himself/herself, outside any legal or institutional restriction.
Article 1
Any attempt to reduce the human being to a definition and to dissolve it into formal structures, no matter what they may be, is incompatible with the transdisciplinary vision.
Article 2.
The recognition of the existence of different levels of Reality, governed by different logics, is inherent to the transdisciplinary attitude. Any attempt to reduce Reality to a single level, governed by a single logic, is not in the field of transdisciplinarity.
Article 3.
Transdisciplinarity complements the disciplinary approach. It makes emerge from the confrontation of disciplines, new results that are articulated among them; it offers us a vision of Nature and Reality. Transdisciplinarity does not seek the mastery of several disciplines but the opening of all of them to what crosses and surpasses them.
Article 4.
The cornerstone of transdisciplinarity lies in the semantic and operational unification of meanings across and beyond the different disciplines. It presupposes an open rationality, the product of a new vision on the relativity of notions such as "definition" and "objectivity". Excessive formalism, rigidity of definitions and the stance of absolute objectivity, implying the exclusion of the subject, can only have negative effects.
Article 5.
The transdisciplinary vision is definitely open insofar as it transcends the field of the exact sciences by stimulating them to dialogue and reconcile, not only with the human sciences but also with art, literature, poetry and inner experience.
Article 6.
In relation to interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity is multireferential and multidimensional. While recognizing different conceptions of time and history, transdisciplinarity does not exclude the existence of a transhistorical horizon.
Article 7.
Transdisciplinarity is neither a new religion, nor a new philosophy, nor a new metaphysics, nor a science of sciences.
Article 8.
The dignity of the human being is also of cosmic and planetary order. The appearance of the human being on Earth is one of the stages of the history of the Universe. The recognition of the Earth as our homeland is one of the imperatives of transdisciplinarity. Every human being has the right to a nationality, but as an inhabitant of the Earth he is also a transnational being. The recognition by international law of this double belonging, to a nation and to the Earth, is one of the goals of transdisciplinary research.
Article 9.
Transdisciplinarity leads to an open attitude towards myth, religion and those who respect those beliefs in a transdisciplinary spirit.
Article 10.
There is no privileged cultural locus from which one can judge other cultures. Transdisciplinary theory is itself transcultural.
Article 11.
An authentic education cannot privilege abstraction over other forms of knowledge. It must teach to contextualize, to concretize and to globalize. Transdisciplinary education reevaluates the role of intuition, the imaginary, sensibility and the body in the transmission of knowledge.
Article 12.
The elaboration of a transdisciplinary economy is based on the postulate that the economy must be at the service of the human being and not the other way around.
Article 13.
Transdisciplinary ethics rejects any attitude that opposes dialogue and discussion, whatever the origin of that attitude - be it ideological, scientistic, religious, economic, political or philosophical. Shared knowledge must lead to shared understanding, based on absolute respect for othernesses united by a common life on one and the same Earth.
Article 14.
Rigor, openness and tolerance are the fundamental characteristics of the transdisciplinary attitude and vision. Rigor in argumentation that takes into account all available information is the best barrier against any possible drift. Openness implies acceptance of the unknown, the unexpected and the unpredictable. Tolerance is the recognition of the right to ideas and truths opposed to our own.
Final article.
The present Charter of Transdisciplinarity is adopted by the participants of the First World Congress of Transdisciplinarity, without claiming any other authority than its realization and its activity. In accordance with the procedures to be agreed upon by the men of transdisciplinary spirit of all countries, this Charter is open for signature by any person interested in promoting progressive measures of national, international and transnational order to ensure the application of its articles in life.
November 6, 1994.
More congresses
The Arrábida congress was followed by Locarno (Switzerland), 1997 (Towards a Transdisciplinary Evolution of the University); Zurich, 2000 (International Transdisciplinary Conference); Göttingen (Germany), 2003 (International Transdisciplinary Conference); Vila Velha/Vitória, Espirito Santo, Brazil, 2005 (II World Congress on Transdisciplinarity); Brasilia, 2008 (III International Congress on Transdisciplinarity and Ecology of Knowledge); Costa Rica, 2010 (IV World Congress on Transdisciplinarity).
At the Vitória congress, the "Vitória Declaration" [www.cetrans.com.br] was presented, with 4 recommendations:
To create itinerant international transdisciplinary chairs; virtual transdisciplinary universities; undergraduate, specialization, master's and doctoral programs for the study of transdisciplinarity; virtual networks and transdisciplinary study, research and action nuclei.
To propose new models and actions of development, sustainable, capable of critically evaluating the contradictions underlying the development model based on technoscience.
Establish transdisciplinary evaluation criteria for actions taking into consideration not only quantitative but also qualitative parameters.
To carry out intercultural encounters that enable individuals to become aware of universal values and that stimulate transdisciplinary attitude, research and action.
td-net (Network for Transdisciplinary Research)
The Network for Transdisciplinary Research was created in 2000 by the "Swiss Academic Society for Environmental Research and Ecology" (SAGUF) and transferred to the "Swiss Academy of Sciences" (SCNAT) in 2003. Since 2008 the "td-net for transdisciplinary research" is a project of the "Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences".
Mode 1 and Mode 2
These are terms used by the authors of the work "The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies" [1994] to refer to the two forms of scientific knowledge production or ways of solving problems:
Mode 1. This is the mode applied in traditional science. Problems are established and solved in the domain of an academic discipline, in a closed, homogeneous environment, with hierarchical relationships.
Mode 2. Problems are contemplated at the TD level, in an open, relational (or heterarchical), heterogeneous, reflexive and contextual way.
In his next work, "Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty" [2001], the authors argue that there has been a shift in science from mode 1 to mode 2, toward greater transdisciplinarity, toward a more shared and democratic science. The authors propose to use the Greek term "Agora" (equivalent to the Latin Forum) to reflect that the management of complexity requires a shared, public environment, platform or space. But the Agora is also transcendent: it is internal and external. It is internal because it is in the mind. It is external because it is knowledge shared by the whole society.
Some background
In ancient times there were the Trivium (grammar, rhetoric and dialectics) and the Quadrivium (arithmetic, astronomy, geometry and music). They were pioneering initiatives of integrated teachings.
Francis Bacon believed in the need to try to unify knowledge.
Galileo distinguished between human mathematics and divine mathematics. The human is the language common to humans and God. And the divine is the direct perception of the totality of laws and phenomena.
Descartes, Comte, and Kant showed their concern for the degree to which a fragmentation of knowledge was taking place in fields of specialization without explicit communication between them. And they made some proposals to favor interdisciplinarity.
Leibniz was a universalist who expressed his hostility towards universities because their organization into faculties limited or prevented the unity of knowledge.
Bibliography
Aronson, P. La emergencia de la ciencia transdisciplinar. Cinta de Moebio, Revista electrónica de Epistemología de las Ciencias Sociales Nº 18. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Chile, Diciembre 2003.
Bill, A.; Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W.; Häberli, R.; Klein, J. Thomson; Scholz, R.W.; Welty, M. (editors). Transdisciplinarity. Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society. An Effective Way for Managing Complexity. Birkhäuser Basel, 2004. (Información relativa a “The International Transdisciplinarity Conference”, que tuvo lugar en Zurich, Suiza en 2000.)
CIRET. Centro Internacional para investigación Disciplinaria.
Laszlo, Ervin. La revolución de la conciencia. Un diálogo multidisciplinar. Kairós, 2008.
Limoges, Camile; Schwartzman; Simon; Nowotny, Helga, Trow, Martin; Scott, Peter. The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage Publications Ltd, 1994.
Gibbons, Michael; Nowotny, Helga; Scott, Peter. Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Polity, 2001.
Lupasco, Stéphane. Le principe d’antagonisme et la logique de l’énergie. Prolégomènes à une science de la contradiction. Hermann, Paris, 1951. Re-edited by Éditions le Rocher, 1987.
Lupasco, Stéphane. Energía y materia psíquica. Autor-Editor, 1983.
Lupasco, Stéphane. Logique et contradiction. P.U.F., Paris, 1947.
Lupasco, Stéphane. Les trois matières. Julliard, Paris, 1960.
Max-Neef, Manfred A. Fundamentos de Transdisciplinaridad. Internet.
Morin, Edgar. Los siete saberes para la educación del futuro. Paidós Ibérica, 2009.
Morin, Edgar. La mente bien ordenada. Seix Barral, 2007.
Morin, Edgar. Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Gedisa, 1995.
Morin, Edgar. Articular los saberes. ¿Qué saberes enseñar en las escuelas? Ediciones Universidad del Salvador, 1998.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity. State University of New York (SUNY) Press, 2002. La Transdisciplinariedad. Manifiesto. Universidad Mundo Real, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, 2009. Disponible en Internet en español: Ediciones Du Rocher (incluye La Carta de la Transdisciplinariedad).
Nicolescu, Basarab. Transdisciplinaredad: pasado, presente y futuro. Primera Parte. Visión Docente Con-Ciencia, año VI, n° 31, Julio-Agosto 2006. Disponible en Internet.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Transdisciplinaredad: pasado, presente y futuro. Segunda Parte. Visión Docente Con-Ciencia, año VI, n° 32, Septiembre-Octubre 2006. Disponible en Internet.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Transdisciplinarity. Theory and Practice. Hampton Press, 2008.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Towards transdisciplinary education and learning. Paper presented at 2005 Science and Religion: Global Perspectives conference. Disponible en Internet.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Qu'est-ce que la réalité?. Liber, 2009.
Nicolescu, Basarab. Transdisciplinarity as Methodological Framework for Going Beyond the Science-Religion Debate. Internet.
Piaget, Jean. La Epistemología de las relaciones interdisciplinarias. En Interdisciplinariedad: Problemas de la enseñanza y de la investigación en las universidades. Apostel, Leo et.al. Biblioteca de la Educación Superior ANUIES, pp. 153-171, 1979.
Sánchez Ron, José Manuel. La Nueva Ilustración: Ciencia, tecnología y humanidades en un mundo interdisciplinar. Ediciones Nobel, 2011.
Somerville, Margaret A.; Rapport, David J. Transdisciplinarity. reCreating Integrated Knowledge. McGill-Queen's University Press, 2002.
Vilar, Sergio. La nueva racionalidad. Comprender la complejidad con métodos transdisciplinarios. Kairós, 1997.
VV.AA. Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research. Springer, 2008.
