Introduction
This paper endeavours
to distinguish between several approaches to understanding
transdisciplinarity. The most common (Transdisciplinarity-1) is that based on efforts to formally
relate the insights of particular disciplines, providing some form of logical meta-framework
through which they may be integrated at a higher level of abstraction than interdisciplinarity. The
second (Transdisciplinarity-2) is that associated much more intimately with individual
experience in the moment. These two approaches are themselves contrasted with three other
forms. Illustrative use of metaphor and figurative language may be considered a primitive form
of transdisciplinarity (Transdisciplinarity- 0). This should be considered distinct from that form
of transdisciplinarity (Transdisciplinarity-3) associated with use of generative root metaphors
having fundamental cognitive implications. Finally, it is useful to hypothesize the existence of a
fifth form (Transdisciplinarity-4) that might in future combine the characteristics of the other
forms in a more operationally fruitful way.
Consistent with
the argument of this paper, the intention is not to endeavour to formulate
precise definitions of these different forms of transdisciplinarity. Rather the focus is on the
implication of emphasis on one as opposed to another.
This work is part
of a long-term programme of the Union of International Associations to
maintain and publish an Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential (1994).
First published in 1976, this explores ways of organizing conceptual and experiential resources
in response to some 10,000 world problems profiled from the documents of some 20,000
international organizations in every field of human activity (1994). The encyclopedia has
reviewed many integrative conceptual approaches (see Section K, notably in the 1991 edition),
especially in the light of the intractable differences between those with "answers" to the
problems of the world. Considerable work has been devoted to recording the many
approaches to human development and the more integrative states of awareness documented in
the literature of different disciplines, spiritual and otherwise (see Section H). Special attention
has been given to the potential of metaphor in reframing the challenges and possibilities of
conceptual and social organization (see Section M). Efforts have also been made to explicitly
relate specific human values to both world problems and approaches to human development.
The challenge of using new forms of computer- enhanced visual representations of such
database relationships to facilitate higher orders of consensus is a continuing concern (see
Section TZ).
A. FORMS OF
TRANSDISCIPLINARITY
Transdisciplinarity-1:
abstract formal integration
This form of transdisciplinarity
is being progressively clarified through pressure on individual
disciplines to interrelate their insights. This in part arises from the inadequacies detected in uni-
disciplinary programmes and the consequent demands by society for more integrative
approaches. Disciplines have traditionally resisted such pressures and university faculties have
done much to reinforce this anti-integrative orientation. Increasing social opposition to the
sciences in recent years has been a consequence.
The classic text
that positions this form of transdisciplinarity in relation to the preoccupations of
individual disciplines, interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity, is that of Erich Jantsch (1972).
The continuing work that best exemplifies this form is that of general systems research, however
its concerns are seen to overlap with the discipline of cybernetics (cf the International Society
for Systems Sciences and the World Organization of Systems and Cybernetics) and the
increasing interest in chaos theory and self- organization. Also relevant are attempts at a so-
called Theory of Everything (TOE) in fundamental physics, as well as the concern with
knowledge organization as exemplified by such bodies as the International Society for
Knowledge Organization.
The debate on the
possibilities of creating appropriate logical frameworks or meta-frameworks
will continue and will undoubtedly be a major focus of this Congress. Subtle definitions
distinguishing inter-disciplinarity from multi-, cross-, and pluri-disciplinarity will continue to be
made, whether or not these distinctions can be meaningfully established in many natural
languages (Judge, 1975). There is also the possibility that some languages may offer the
possibility of a greater range of distinctions than is implied by such traditional greco-latin
structural prefixes. The ability to integrate incommensurable perspectives and paradoxes within
such frameworks will also be a concern, whether or not frameworks are sought which depend
for their existence on the configuration of such differences (Schon, 1979, 1987).
There are, by definition,
no experiential referents to Transdisciplinarity-1, however much that
perspective may be associated with the study of experience. This may be one reason that
relatively little social significance is generally attached to work in this area. The aesthetic
pleasures of the pure mathematician and the intellectual delight in patterns of symmetry should
not be seen as characteristic of this form of transdisciplinarity since such experiential dimensions
are not integral to any formalized abstraction.
Transdisciplinarity-2:
integrative experience
Quite foreign to
the exploration of Transdisciplinarity-1 is that associated with integrative
experience. Transdisciplinarity-1 derives primarily from the development of "academic"
disciplines and methodologies, leading to formal abstractions and explanations that are
"integrative" to varying degrees. Such integration may be associated with "fundamental"
theories.
Transdisciplinarity-2
derives largely from traditional "disciplines" depending on some form of
praxis, leading to a largely experiential knowledge base or way of seeing the world. Such
transdisciplinarity may emerge from the integration within an individual of the cultural
perspectives resulting from the practice of artistic disciplines (as distinct from disciplines
studying the products or methods of the arts). It could be argued that transdisciplinarity ofthis
kind may also be associated with long training in muscular coordination (dancers, practitioners
of martial arts, and the like), given their sophisticated ability to respond to a variety of
unforeseen situations. Another variant could be said to be associated with the higher forms of
meditative and spiritual experience permitting some form of experiential transcendence. Another
might be associated with the experience of a skilled statesman, politician, businessman or
military commander. The aesthetic pleasures of the practitioner of the sciences may also be best
associated with this form of transdisciplinarity. All these forms tend only to follow from years of
training and experience -- although the degree of integration associated with transdisciplinarity
is not a necessary consequence of such application.
It is frequently
assumed in the West that little can be articulated concerning this form of
transdisciplinarity. Many attempts have however been made, often with the most severe
reservations (see Encyclopedia). Buddhists have been the most prolific in attempting to
distinguish nearly 1,000 states of awareness preceding surprising breakthroughs to more
integrative modes of experience. These articulations rely almost completely on use of metaphor.
The contrast between
Transdisciplinarity-1 and 2 is discussed in greater detail below. The
absence of formal abstraction makes Transdisciplinarity-2 virtually impossible to explain.
Understood as culture, it can only be cultivated. There is a sense in which it may be learnt and
experienced, but it cannot be satisfactorily explained. Much emphasis is made on learning by
example, triggered by such devices as koans and mandalas. It may be appreciated by others as
"maturity" and "presence".
Transdisciplinarity-0:
bridging metaphors
Perhaps the most
primitive form of transdisciplinarity is associated with the use of figurative
language and metaphor. This has been widely acknowledged as vital to the creative intellectual
process (Klein, 1990; Holyoak, 1995). Advances within many disciplines have resulted from
insights carried by metaphors, possibly as borrowings from other disciplines.
In this sense it
is the intuitive attitude, that accepts the value and legitimacy of using metaphor,
which is characteristic of Transdisciplinarity-0. Note that this attitude is poorly recognized and
as such cannot be considered a conscious framework such as with the other forms of
transdisciplinarity. Use of metaphor is usually considered quite unprofessional in the
formalizations associated with Transdisciplinarity-1. For example, there is strong pressure to
ensure that information systems are metaphor-free -- namely free from the ambiguity of multiple
connotations.
This form of transdisciplinarity
should probably be considered as the most widespread, with
origins dating back to the earliest use of language and the origin of community. Skill in the use
of metaphor and figurative language is honoured and appreciated in many cultures and indeed is
an important characteristic of the arts, especially poetry. Use of metaphor as a way of
articulating attitudinal responses to a complex environment is a vital feature of language even
amongst the most disadvantaged (such as in impoverished regions and urban slums). Such
metaphor enables people to transcend incommensurable domains of experience, namely
domains between which no logically consistent relationship exists or can be communicated -- at
least in the understanding of those involved. Community, as we currently know and experience
it as an integrative framework, may be closely associated with Transdisciplinarity-0.
In distinguishing
this form of transdisciplinarity from Transdisciplinarity-3 it is important to
recognize the many relatively superficial ways in which metaphor can be used for illustrative and
rhetorical purposes. It is this use as an essentially temporary bridging device which
characterizes this form. Transdisciplinarity-0 is therefore associated with the ability to draw
upon a pool of potential metaphors. The pool is in no way structured and it is this lack of
structure that effectively characterizes this form of transdisciplinarity -- through its failure
to
provide any stable framework. As such it may be closely related to "tacit knowledge" as an
incoherent assembly of knowledge that provides a context for new experience (Polanyi, 1966).
Transdisciplinarity-3:
metaphor as a cognitive framework
In recent years
there has been considerable interest in the cognitive function of metaphor as
fundamental to the development and maintenance of cognitive and experiential frameworks.
Such use of metaphor, which may even be unconscious, needs to be strongly contrasted with
that of Transdisciplinarity- 0. In a sense it is less a question of "using" a metaphor (as
in
Transdisciplinarity-0) but rather of having conceptual and experiential processes articulated
through a metaphor, or being embodied in metaphor. To some degree the "user" is effectively
trapped in, or "used by", the metaphor as within a conceptual "spell". The root
metaphor is
effectively a kind of experiential carrier wave.
The challenges
of comprehending the implications of such underlying or root metaphors have
notably been articulated by George Lakoff (1980, 1987) and others. In Physics as Metaphor
(1983), the whole approach of physics has been presented in this light, for example.
It can be argued
that the isomorphic equivalences between levels of systems that have been so
extensively explored in general systems research have a strong metaphoric dimension. However
the important characteristic of Transdisciplinarity-3 is the experiential quality of its cognitive
frameworks -- a quality totally lacking in the work of general systems.
Transdisciplinarity-3
raises the question as to the nature of the metaphoric framework through
which a person, or a group, sees and relates to the world, whether consciously or
unconsciously. In this sense it is necessarily holistic and transdisciplinary. Inconsistency,
incommensurability and paradox have to be handled by such a framework, if only by repression
and denial. This then raises the question of the nature of the metaphoric framework capable of
minimizing the need for such repression and denial (Judge, 1994). Elsewhere it has been argued
that more subtle forms of such transdisciplinarity may only be possible through the use of sets of
complementary metaphors (Judge, 1994). This is best exemplified by the need for both the
wave and particle metaphors in light physics.
In its most developed
form, such transdisciplinarity is associated with the conscious holding of
experiential paradox, especially around the nature of the relationship between subjective
experience and objectivized patterning. This is to be contrasted with the exploration of logical
paradoxes characteristic of Transdisciplinarity-1 and with existential paradoxes explored
through Zen koans in relation to Transdisciplinarity-2.
Transdisciplinarity-4:
action in the moment
A fifth form of
transdisciplinarity may be usefully hypothesized as a challenge to the imagination.
There is a sense in which the earlier forms are detached from the complexity of action in the
moment (and even "incompetent" in the "fire of the moment") -- however ablethey
may be to
passively comprehend its complexity and dynamics. It is also questionable whether they are
adequate as frameworks of transformation, especially when a basis must necessarily be found
to permit the transdisciplinary framework itself to undergo transformation in order to evolve.
These reservations
may least apply to the understandings integral to some of the more
advanced forms of martial art. It is however healthy to hypothesize the existence of a mode of
understanding in (and through) action capable of manipulating and transforming frameworks in
response to action opportunities and a will to act. This appears to call for some more profound
experiential sense of invariance that is perhaps the prime characteristic of Transdisciplinarity-4.
To a higher degree than Transdisciplinarity-3, this would integrate paradox into spontaneous
action in the moment.
Hints as to the
nature of such transdisciplinarity are evident in some of the literature of the
martial arts, Zen, Sufism, and Taoism (notably the writings of Chuang Tzu), especially as they
relate to the magical arts (including their Western equivalents). Much of this information (to the
extent that it may be considered reliable) is necessarily confused with other levels of
understanding. In particular there is the challenge of establishing the distinction between this
form of transdisciplinarity and that of Transdisciplinarity-2 and 3.
B. RELATING
THE DIFFERENT FORMS OF TRANSDISCIPLINARITY
One approach to
indicating the relationship between the different forms of transdisciplinarity is
that of Figure 1.
|
Figure 1
|
|
Integrative
(awareness)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transdisciplinarity-4
(Action in the moment)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theory of Everything
(TOE) ?
|
Transdisciplinarity-3
(Patterned experience)
|
Transcendent
personal experience ?
|
|
|
|
Transdisciplinarity-1
(General systems, etc)
|
|
Transdisciplinarity-2
(Integrative experience)
|
|
|
Formal
abstraction
|
|
Transdisciplinarity-0
(Bridging metaphors)
|
|
Experience
|
|
|
Disciplines (specialized
knowledge)
|
|
Daily
experience
|
|
|
|
|
Information
(interpretation)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fragmented
(awareness)
|
|
|
The table is helpful
in that it points to the possibility of people and groups who focus primarily
on vertical movement or advance on the left (through specialized knowledge to integrative
formal abstractions) or on the right (through aesthetic and meditative experience possibly
leading to integrative personal transformation). It might be argued that both encounter a
"barrier" to greater integration. Objective synthesis is faced with the godelian challenge
and
involvement of the observer, notably in physics. Subjective synthesis is faced with the disruptive
interference of social reality and the problem of others.
In this form the
table effectively stresses the public, collective and communicable nature of
advances on the left as opposed to the essentially private, individual and relatively
uncommunicable nature of advances on the right. That on the left is essentially objective
knowledge, whereas that on the right is essentially subjective. More helpful perhaps is Anthony
Blake's articulation (in a private communication) in terms of extensive knowledge versus
intensive knowledge. That on the left may also be associated with control frameworks whereas
that on the right emphasizes an integrative experience of flux.
The challenge for
society would appear to be the articulation of a form of transdisciplinarity that
effectively holds the relationship between both left and right, as suggested by the middle
pathway.
Attempts to
hold relationships between differences
One of the oldest
attempts to create a framework for mutually incompatible views is the
classical Buddhist text on The All-Embracing Net of Views (Bhikku Bodhi, 1978). The text
explicitly identifies 62 philosophical views as constituting a complete set of inappropriate or
unsustainable views which together establish a larger and more appropriate framework.
More interesting
approaches can be explored in relation to music, given its experiential nature
(Judge, 1981, 1984). Especially valuable is that which emerges from the explorations of
philosopher Antonio de Nicolas (1978) into the complementary conceptual languages of the Rg
Veda that are necessary to hold the complexity of insights and experience:
"Therefore,
from a linguistic and cultural perspective, we have to be aware that we are dealing
with a language where tonal and arithmetical relations establish the epistemological
invariances....Language grounded in music is grounded thereby on context dependency; any
tone can have any possible relationship to other tones, and the shift from one tone to another,
which alone makes melody possible, is a shift in perspective which the singer himself embodies.
Any perspective (tone) must be 'sacrificed' for a new one to come into being; continuity, and
the 'world' is the creation of the singer, who shares its dimensions with the song.
In ancient times,
the infinite possibilities of the number field were considered isomorphic with
the infinite possibilities of tone...Rg Veda man, like his Greek counterparts, knew himself to be
the organizer of the scale, and he cherished the multitude of possibilities open to him too much
to freeze himself into one dogmatic posture. His language keeps alive that 'openness' to
alternatives, yet it avoids entrapment in anarchy. It also resolves the fixity of theory by setting
the body of man historically moving through the freedom of musical spaces, viewpoint
transpositions, reciprocities, pluralism, and finally, an absolutely radical sacrifice of all theory
as
a fixed invariant." (de Nicolas, p. 57)
The philosopher
W T Jones (1961) has identified a system of 7 axes of bias between 14
polarized perspectives that can be used to interrelate and predict the kinds of academic
dialogue between unreconcilable positions. The work of Jones may be seen as one of a fairly
limited, and much neglected, set of frameworks that endeavour to interrelate disparate cultural
perspectives (Judge, 1993). This includes the work of Geert Hofstede (1984), Magoroh
Maruyama (1980), and Kinhide Mushakoji (1988).
Bridging intractable
differences is a concern of Donald Schon (1987), who is widely cited for
his work on generative metaphor as a tool in responding to this condition, notably in relation to
social policy.
The immediate practical
consequences can be seen in connection with international policy-
making concerning development and environment issues as featured in the Earth Summit (Rio
de Janeiro, 1992). The challenge of creating a framework for inter-sectoral dialogue about
strategic dilemmas was addressed in a background document (Judge, 1992). The arguments
for a spherical configuration of categories (Judge, 1994) were presented in revised form, taking
account of new material, at the European Conference of the International Society for
Knowledge Organization (Bratislava, 1994) on the question of environmental knowledge
organization and information management.
Of special interest
in dealing with such differences are the challenges to comprehension:
(a) in endeavouring
to encompass greater degrees of incommensurability. There is natural
resistance to endeavouring to encompass what may be far more conveniently rejected as
irrelevant.
(b) in dealing
with the manner in which a more contextual insight is perceived with the
understanding of a less contextual insight. There is a natural tendency to reject the more
contextual insight as "too complex", "too abstract", or "too subtle",
or more simply as
incomprehensible.
(c) in dealing
with the manner in which a less contextual insight is perceived with the
understanding of a more contextual insight. There is a natural tendency to reject the narrow
perspective as being inadequate and obsolete, whereas it may continue to perform valuable
functions for many under certain conditions (The sun continues "to rise", even in the language
of
many astrophysicists).
(d) in dealing
with the manner in which different forms of transdisciplinarity are conflated, with
more subtle or less obvious forms, being appreciated through (and confused with) those that
are less subtle.
What "is"
transdisciplinarity vs experiencing through a transdisciplinary "perspective"?
Multi-phase
learning/action cycle as a framework
Work by Arthur
Young on learning/action cycles (1976) could prove useful to another
approach to holding the relationship between the different forms of transdisciplinarity.
Young took as his
point of departure 12 dimensionless measure formulae used in physics to
describe the motion of a body or important to engineering (he worked on the development of
the Bell helicopter). He related these to categories of knowing and positioned thesesequentially
around the circumference of the circle in Figure 2 so as to highlight action (clockwise) and
learning (anti-clockwise) cycles. Of special interest is the place he gives to categories which
would normally be thought of as experiential.
Figure 2
Reproduced from
Arthur Young Geometry of Meaning (1976, p 49)
The attributes
he associates with each of these positions have been tentatively adapted and
developed in the tabular representation of Figure 3 (
http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs/learntab.php
). The value of this presentation is that there is
some merit in exploring the function of the columns in holding what is understood in this paper by
Transdisciplinarity-1, 2, 3, 4. This is especially interesting in that the table endeavours to relate
space-binding and time-binding forms of learning which are surely fundamental to any
understanding of transdisciplinarity.
C. PATTERNED
EXPERIENCE: Distinguishing Transdisciplinarity- 1 and 2
The intention here
is to contrast more vividly the quests of Transdisciplinarity- 1 and 2. Ideally
this procedure would highlight to a greater degree their respective strengths and limitations,
reinforcing their complementary nature. A classic attempt is that of Two Cultures (Snow,
1969). Organizational efforts to hold the relationship are epitomized by such bodies as the
World Academy of Art and Science, and even the United Nations Education, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO). It is questionable whether such institutionalization is
matched by any adequate conceptual framework through which to interrelate such
incommensurable forms.
However such complementarity
is to be understood, it provides a context for the emergence of
forms of transdisciplinarity between the two, as suggested by Transdisciplinarity-3 and 4. In
metaphoric terms it is a kind of divine "marriage" of the extremes, with the "birth"
of a form
sharing portions of the "genetic" material of both. This birth is a continuing process, however
much it may prefigure a more concrete social programme of the (possibly distant) future.
Unfortunately in practice the "parents" tend to be far from ideal and are often extremely
primitive. Each seeks to appropriate the "child" and educate it in its own image -- even iftearing
the child away from the influence of the other parent does long-term damage inhibiting
development of its own identity. It is therefore difficult to dissociate the identity of any emergent
form of transdisciplinarity from the programmes of Transdisciplinarity-1 and 2.
Characteristics
of patterned experience
The term "patterned
experience" will be used here to signify a fundamental characteristic of
Transdisciplinarity-3, and possibly 4. Note this is to be considered quite distinct from "pattern
recognition" which is concerned more with pattern matching (in which computers are
increasingly skilled) than experience of the pattern (such as of an aesthetic kind). For this
exercise it is useful to think of "pattern" as the fundamental contribution of Transdisciplinarity-1,
whereas "experience" is that provided by Transdisciplinarity-2.
The experiential
quality necessarily places an emphasis on subjectivity and an awareness of
subjective knowing. The knower is consciously aware of the knowing process in the present
moment -- as is often stressed in texts on meditation. But in the case of patterned experience
this would be matched by an awareness of the patterns in what is publicly known. One
metaphor to hold this relationship would have the experiencer at the centre of a hollow sphere
on which the patterns of the known were articulated -- perhaps like retinal blood vessels on the
inner surface of the eyeball. The world of information and objective knowledge can then be
understood as compressed into a thin spherical shell configured around the experiencer. The
challenge for the experiencer is how to reconfigure or organize the knowledge on the shell
surface in the most qualitatively integrative manner -- irrespective of the constraints of
Transdisciplinarity-1 and the seductions of Transdisciplinarity- 2. This is increasingly the
challenge of people exposed to the riches of Internet who seek to give experiential significance
to the patterns to be found there.
Such patterned
experience should be contrasted with the forms of knowing in which
subjectivity is denied or repressed -- as is the case in conventional academic disciplines, in the
bureaucratic world of organizational programmes and projects, and in the world of
technological devices. In such contexts the integrative quality of experience is virtually absent or
even "negative" in that people's experience is moulded and manipulated by such externalities.
Their experiential awareness is invaded, distorted and denatured, often deliberately. This is
increasingly a major factor in political apathy and rejection of the accomplishments of the past.
At issue then is
the way in which these extremes can be held. Clearly most of what is on the
surface of the shell is either public domain or copyrighted (marketable) knowledge stored and
communicated through information systems. However the patterning applied to it by the
experiencer in the moment may be essentially unpatentable and virtually impossible to
communicate or disseminate. Such spheres may be understood as constituting a universe of
private worlds (whose surface features may be individually common to many spheres --but not
the way in which experience of them is patterned in the moment).
As a distinct form
of transdisciplinarity the experiencer must have successfully configured a
knowledge sphere whilst at the same time introducing a self-reflexive experiential sense of the
present moment. This condition should be contrasted with being a "victim" of knowledge and
information systems or a "victim" of subjective experience. The experiencer then dwells within
a
configuration of knowledge that is not solely that of the mind. In contrast with regular
knowledge, there is an experiential integration of what, where, why, when, who and how. In
this condition knowledge is no longer experienced in the compressed or "dehydrated"
formcharacteristic of any explanation. In Gregory Bateson's much-cited phrase, it is a question
of maintaining the "pattern that connects" or face the loss of all quality. A sense of this
distinction can be recognized in the continuing appeal of face-to-face meetings in the flesh as
opposed to information exchange via (electronic) mail or video-conferences. Only dehydrated
knowledge can be communicated electronically.
The experiential
quality necessarily carries with it an aesthetic dimension -- perhaps even a
degree of sacralization. This may range from the beauties of a sunset to those of a meaningful
encounter and its dramatic moments. Music, poetry and the arts occasionally have the power to
evoke and sustain such experience. The experience of the Earth from orbit is to be contrasted
with any knowledgable explanation of it, however well-supported by visual aids. Explanation
draws understanding out of the plane of patterned experience.
Attempts to
convert pattern experience into knowledge
In parallel with
the monetarization of interpersonal exchanges, it can be argued that there has
been an objectification or reification of understanding that undermines the emergence of
patterned experience.
There are many
attempts to convert patterned experience into "dehydrated" knowledge in the
expectation that it may be subsequently "rehydrated" on demand. Examples include
photography and video-recording which have been so successfully commercialized. They also
include the design of conceptual models and especially knowledge-bases which are increasingly
subject to copyright (Judge, 1992; de Bono**). Those with a longer history include symbol-
building and story-telling. In all such cases cultural products should be considered distinct from
the experiential cultural perspective from which those products are generated.
Much has been claimed
for the multi-media environment and its extensions into virtual reality.
However it has yet to be demonstrated that these tools can support the emergence of new and
more integrative levels of understanding.
As Korzybski remarked,
the map is not the territory. It cannot provide the experience of the
territory, although photographers often appear to claim it does. There is however the possibility
that patterned experience can be sustained by construing the map as the territory (Judge,
1984). Visual displays could be used as surfaces through which to interrelate insights in new
ways -- as "morphing" techniques suggest.
Patterned experience
as a kind of biological cell
The above arguments
suggest that patterned experience might usefully be thought of as
analogous to a biological cell, with the experiencer as the nucleus and patterned knowledge as
the cell wall. This is even more interesting when there is recognition of the necessary complexity
of cells structures for them to be viable. Indeed their viability is based as much on structure as
on process. There are many features to cell organization that effectively mediate between
nucleus and cell wall. Even the cell fluid is now recognized as being highly organized.
The value of this
metaphor emerges to the extent that it becomes a vehicle for experience,
namely when the experiencer can experience through such a living framework. The exercise
may be rendered more challenging by introducing some equivalent to the uncertaintyprinciple.
Certainty about patterned knowledge (of the cell wall) is only possible at the expense of the
experiential awareness (of the nucleus) -- and vice versa.
This metaphor clearly
raises questions about the nature of communication between cells.
Dehydrating
pattern knowledge
Explanation and
definition can be viewed as the process of "dehydrating" pattern knowledge by
removing the experiential dimension. Dehydrated knowledge attaches little significance to the
distinction between a butterfly on a pin in a collection and a butterfly as a living entity in a
transformative cycle. Similarly a live camel in a zoo is not distinguishable from one in a rich
behavioral pattern in the wild (as opposed to a "game reserve"). The same is true of house
plants or pets cut out of their reproductive cycles. The most extreme examples are the cases
where knowledge of individuals is defined in terms of legalistic, statistical or probabilistic
realities. Is it possible for human beings to be adequately represented in information systems
without reductionistic distortions?
Explanation and
definition can indeed be used as very effective tools but should not be seen as
a satisfactory permanent definition of reality.
1. Constraints
