BACK TO ARGUMENT-About TRANSDISCIPLINARITY (IN AND BETWEEN DISCIPLINES)
“Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Back to argument this evening. Are we in the western art old museum engineer Dumitru Minovici together with Mr. Basarab Nicolescu. One author, I introduce him by his appreciation Michel Camus, who said about you in the introduction to your book “poetic theorems” “Do not be afraid of words! Author is a mutant in the order of scientific knowledge and philosophical. ” Although John of the Ladder says: “There is no saints praise for not resist the praise.” Yet this is a technical word: mutant. I want to enlighten us, in what sense mutant consider, what Michel Camus said.
Basarab Nicolescu: In my intellectual structure, I would say I’m a man who feels the interface between the Middle Ages and Renaissance, in that period that prepared rebirth. I hope a new birth, a rebirth, which accumulates all the knowledge of the Middle Ages until now. In this respect, a mutant, because they live can XXII century, may not know …
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: People can find out in what sense are a mutant, because your books talk about a new way of ourselves in the world to understand it otherwise. And attract attention the impasse in which our culture, Western culture, the culture of modern humans arrived. Tell us a little about the difference between transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary multifold.
Basarab Nicolescu: First, multiplication disciplines is a very interesting thing. In fact, the notion of discipline occurred in the thirteenth century, once the first universities. There were then seven disciplines: 3 + 4 (tririon, quadririon) plus one that explains everything: the Bible. Sorbonne university studies were done so. And thereafter was an exponential increase in the number of disciplines, so that’s a statistic from the National Science Foundation in 2000 were counted more than 800,000 subjects from American universities. Only universities. It trades or disciplines. So today we must be around 9000. So what does this mean? 9000 looks upon the world. 9,000 experts who know everything about a fragment of the 9000. So what does the expert today? It means someone who knows all about very little. In other words, ignorant of discipline 799 000. So put a tremendous problem at the outset. Multidisciplinarity has always existed. For that with the establishment of universities, multidisciplinary idea was already present. In 1950 was the great vogue of interdisciplinarity, when it discusses links between disciplines, “How can provide?”, And the idea was to transfer methods from one discipline to another. In other words, interdisciplinarity means: get some methods, say in mathematical physics, and apply them to an entirely different, say the shares on the stock market or weather phenomena. Thus is born a new discipline: chaos theory. It is a magnificent example recently as a discipline is born through an interdisciplinary transfer. There are many other examples. Mathematical physics is, by definition, a transfer from mathematics to physics. So transfer methods.
Basarab Nicolescu: Transdisciplinarity’s younger in some sense, the word appears only in 1970, at a colloquium at Nissa, where Jean Piaget, the great Swiss psychologist and philosopher, coined the word magnificent. Because it’s a beautiful word trans, huh? Trans etymology means that what is between the two disciplines, for example, crosses and beyond. So while three meanings. We know, it is nice because it’s related to the word transcendence. It has the same root, i.e. transcendence etymologically means: it means endless ascent. Again climb, climb again, without end. It’s also related to the word three. Sanskrit root of the word tranche is linked to the word three.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Three is the duality abolition …
Basarab Nicolescu: It really is home of duality abolition. There was one, two, three, trés that gives the word three in French. So word was especially lovely, Piaget. Now, to say what is the subject of transdiciplinarity(click here for the Oxford Dictionary Translation) is a nonsense. Why? Because transdisciplinary just look what is beyond disciplines. So, by definition, can not be a new discipline. Much more than that, in more subtle plan, and this was noticed by the great founders of quantum physics, a new report is established between subject and object. Between the subject who knows and the object that is known. Transdisciplinary employment relationship between subject and object. Then how can you say that the object is that the object is precisely the interaction between subject and object. So come back and say it in two words, the current definition, which is accepted by many researchers in many countries. Transdisciplinarity is defined by a triple statement, a triple postulate or three postulates. Postulate the concept of levels of reality and perception levels which correspond to the reality and the perception object in the subject. The second postulate, the idea of a new logic. As you say, in case of a large complex that yes and no are no longer valid to apply a common type logic yes and no. It has a finer logic. So the second postulate means a logic broadest, most comprehensive, and it seems that the logic of the included middle is adapted. At that Stefan Lupasco had a great contribution in its formulation. The third column architectural complexity is, that the idea of universal interdependence: each level is what it is because all the other levels exist at the same time.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: I propose to explain them all, because each of the three has significance and wisdom. First, the levels of reality. What this means? We live in a physical world. If we were dining, I think we settle for a single dimension. But not meals, in other words, being perpetrated endowed with reason, with feeling, can and soul, to tell us theorists countries, Daniel Dennett thinks that we have, we can thank size strictly biological our lives with the fact there is only one level of reality. If there is only one level of reality, a conclusion that seems clear it is that we might be slaves. I think that political and that slavery is something suits us, it follows that we can not settle for the affirmation of one level of reality. And you say that your classical physics, a glory of human intelligence, is solidarity with those theories, which in the twentieth century have shown the extent of loss and catastrophic Communism, Nazism, who made many death corpses. Tell us how little revolution in physics associated with quantum mechanics, introduced the need to admit that there is only one level of reality.
Basarab Nicolescu: You just focus on what is essential is not to say that such a desire is expressed in the idea that the level of reality, it’s a necessity. That is very interesting. What is the need? In this grand adventure must say it was groundbreaking in its day, the birth of classical physics by Galileo Galilei, by Kepler, by Newton. I overstatement least sometimes, when I say, but I think that 1632 is like a date of birth of modernity. Galileo wrote his great book, “Dialogue on the two great systems of the world” in inventing this new language, very interesting, as God and we place ourselves on the same level, through language. Of course, he feels, it was also a theologian, it was too much. And then says, in the same book by Simplicius: yes, but God has another language, the language of intuition. With the birth of this new language was born classical physics, founded on the idea of universal laws. It was already a revolution, the idea of universal laws, mathematical nature. Greeks were thought to universal laws, meaning that the earth, the sky, all are united. The Chinese, who had a highly developed industry, there were thought to stop them as their philosophy. Christianity allowed the birth of these ideas, which paradoxically have turned against Christianity. But the idea of uniting language, created the idea that at some point there is a tie between God and man, at least through language. So the law is of a mathematical reproduction, knowledge of these laws experimental by a special kind of experience, no experience chaotic life everyday and third postulate perfect reproduction of experimental data, wherever they occur, in any place would do. It was a revolutionary thing for those times. And gave magnificent results. It must be said that it was a magnificent development of classical physics under three centuries. But where it was operated, say, exaggeration and excess? The moment was a transfer of the highly successful, of a physical predictive who transform the world, who gave birth to technique, which was merged with basic science, which live under our eyes, otherwise it is techno science. So the idea that everything can be known in this way. This transition was almost rude, but that was stimulated course of the Enlightenment. And in the nineteenth century was an explosion ideological, not scientific background was, was scientism who said: “The only truth is science.” The rest are illusions ornaments for ghosts. The poem was included it and so on. In other words, a shift toward excess, but that seemed very natural, and which, in fact, killed God, how do you and your in “Recent Man.” The death of God, in fact, is linked to a process deeply moving, report that a man begins to have a universe that is not his, not inside. With movement, indeed the inside outwards, making the outside becomes everything. And nothing inside. Reduced to exactly 0, nothing. The world of knowledge has value because it preserved inside for faith, for privacy to say, but not as a means of knowledge. So what is the idea, in fact, that evolves from this adventure of classical physics to the early twentieth century? It was the idea that everything is reduced to one level of reality. We can not speak of anything else.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Yes, when it seems that there is another level, we deceive. Because physical manages to reduce everything to a single level of reality.
Basarab Nicolescu: Physics as a way of absolute knowledge. I mean, at first it was a physical knowledge among others. So scientism was turned into a way of absolute knowledge. In that way it becomes one level of reality. Reality in the sense that withstand experiences at representations at pictures, descriptions, theories, even the mathematical formalization. The idea of a level means possibility of different laws, different laws even rupture the fundamental concepts in torn, compared to a well-determined level. The point level has been eliminated. The idea of the level of pre-existence in all civilizations. In “Jacob’s Ladder” in our Christian iconography, a magnificent illustration of the idea of speed. Great thinkers of patristics literature are thinkers, people who spoke levels, even being not only of reality. So the idea there, but the idea was founded only on exploring the universe within. St. John of the Cross, for me is a scientist, he was a scientist, but in his own way, experience the inner world. He discovered these levels of reality, but within. Since disappeared inside, then of course, all levels have disappeared. Reducing to one level of reality: if it comes down to one level of reality, everything becomes possible. And especially the transformation of the subject in the object. That is the great perversion, I would say, ideological, philosophical, metaphysical, who gave birth in substance, the two tyrants great totalitarian systems-killer. Do not forget communism, it was presented as scientific socialism. Scientific word was emphasized.
It was not a joke, as a thinker couple Engels-Marx Engels was, and if you study, you see I took everything from classical physics. His book is a kind of manual scientism. Book of transferring ideas of classical physics in economics, but translates them directly. What is the big event? Great event, as always, happens quietly and seen afterwards. It was in December 1900. In December 1900, Max Planck, seen as a problem of physics, a black body saying, you have to push anything strange. As there is a solution, but it was a drama. He says in his biography, he met face to face discontinuity. The need to describe the phenomenon as between two points in space and time, there is nothing, no molecules or atoms. In other words, why is it so important word discontinuity? Why has troubled him so much? Because it is directly related to causal discontinuity. In the classical view, the cause of an effect, a point in space and time. The certain immediate neighbor becomes the cause, so local causality requires discontinuity. Planck felt from the beginning that the discovery had enormous consequences, even on the metaphysical plane and tried to prove that was wrong. He spent months demonstrate that was wrong and didn’t succeeded, and so was born this magnificent quantum theory. Incidentally through a coincidence of history, about the same time with abstract art. I do not think it is an accident.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: You use a very Interestingly reasoning. Quantum mechanics has shown us that the notions of classical, intuitive trajectory instance, or the distinction between the behavior of the wave, or behavior corpuscular, that is between entity called corpuscle and the entity called ripple in the classic we antagonism firm: if you corpuscle, you can not to have ripple because the wave is a continuous phenomenon in space, which takes place almost indefinitely, while corpuscles is a strict concentration, delimited, matter. You then have the situation in which, on this plane, an A is faced with a non-A. Either quantum mechanics forces us to think simultaneously behavior corpuscular and wave and say that it comes together, a paradoxical behavior: the object behaves as quantum and particle and wave at the same time.
Basarab Nicolescu: You’re doing one thing and his opposite.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: And opposite him. Or, to understand this contradiction without remain in stupefaction, we must assume that there is a level of reality where this behavior is contradictory to reconcile.
Basarab Nicolescu: Exactly.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: So it’s a necessity to think another level of reality. Now, in the policy, not to be a slave, so that if an object like this meal, I am a slave, you have to assume a new level of freedom that is my absolute.
Basarab Nicolescu: Exactly.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: And this level should be recognized tyrant. Because if I were just an object of the classical world, the tyrant would be unreasonable to oppress me. That reasoning is very interesting and actually get to Lupascu.
Basarab Nicolescu: One of the first who reacted was an engineer, Polish, who lived in America, less ana him in things quantum physics or philosophy, but guessed major problem and proposed solution is non-A . One thing is contrary to what is total nonsense, of course, we can not speak rationally, if we accept that something is opposite him. But Korzybski’s solution, so admired by Basal that it gives as an example, inspired the authors of science-fiction. A. E. van Vogt wrote the book “The World of Non-A” who’s very well written, and which was shown in French Maurice Vieux, a poet. Meanwhile Bohr, who was a pope as great physics at that time, knew very well that touched something very deep. But diplomatic reasons I would say, really shows in his correspondence, as Niels Bohr was a man for things officially published, another man in his correspondence with Einstein with Heisenberg, with others. And he proposes the solution, not to mention reality. Interesting. In other words, diplomatic solution to Bohr, the plan was to transfer all speech, saying: “in fact is a matter of language,” and there’s a real problem. Reality has one level. After that comes Lupascu through the years 1950-1951, included the idea that there is a third party that is both A and non-A. And his opposite thing. The idea included middle, goes into the fund, to Aristotle, so it’s not a new thing. The idea is that new Lupascu was based on quantum physics, quantum mechanics. But the world did not accept. Because it had no idea of levels of reality. The idea of reality can say, that is both a personal testimony, I can say the interactions of a man who was my great friend, despite the age difference.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Have you met Lupascu?
Basarab Nicolescu: He was born in 1900, died in 1988. I knew very soon after my arrival in France.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: You have gone in 1968.
Basarab Nicolescu: I left in 1969 and I came back 25 years later in 1992 the first time. So with Lupascu was an interaction, and I, the idea that the level of reality I had long ago, in Berkley, as I said, that there were many things prepared. But, a solution to this problem gave the third term. And I was very embarrassed when I proposed it to Lupascu, as some philosophers are embarrassed when they change their system. Lupascu, which was kind of kid, a real innocence, extraordinary, said the public, publish, publish immediately.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: And you published.
Basarab Nicolescu: 1984. We published it in a magazine at first, and then in “Us, the particle and the world.” The idea of levels of reality so was born and given an explanation, extremely simple, the paradoxes of quantum. And philosophy Lupascu the same time, which was extremely clogged. And my great surprise, to finish this adventure, the adventure is the key concept, which we discuss and that goes very far, the level of reality, I discovered many years after, in the early ’98 it was when he finally published a manuscript Heisenberg. Heisenberg in 1942, a writing philosophy, which remained in manuscript, for decades, had the same idea of levels of reality, to solve quantum paradox. So really, in that time was a space of freedom that was created, for thinking, for epistemology, the philosophy. For philosophy and metaphysics it is clear, if there is one level of reality we are a conglomerate beings, a conglomerate interesting indeed, cells, neurons. A combination, an interesting combination without any meaning other than a business combination just intellectually, but both. In other words, the only human nature. Contrary to traditional vision of man, of dual nature: physical, biological and spiritual nature. So another level of reality. Suddenly the door was open, so to speak, by this idea and transdisciplinary level of reality, a new spirituality, integrating people and knowledge. Transdisciplinary extend the validity of knowledge expands. Do not bring a new insight. But now may have ramifications in physics, metaphysics, in the dialogue between cultures in dialogue between religions.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: You listed three columns that support transdisciplinary. Multiciplicity idea of levels of reality, and perception-here we come to the subject transdisciplinarity- idea idea included middle, and complexity. If you want to tell us a little, the idea of complexity. Because the connection between the idea of levels of reality and the idea included middle is consubstantial.
Basarab Nicolescu: Absolutely.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Namely that a third party be included possible non-contradictory, must move into another level of reality (at least). And this introduces another idea: the hierarchy. Because if levels of reality constructed by saving contradiction that exists between a binomial between two binomial terms, this means that the upper level is higher, not only meaningful topic, it contains more information.
Basarab Nicolescu: Yes. In today’s terminology, I say more information.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: More info. So there is a bottom and a top level of reality and the top level is the level that has the most information. Moreover, there is the idea of autonomy, level up compared to the lower level. So the implications, so to speak, metaphysical, theological, are considerable. Because the idea of classical physics to the world, the idea of up and down, is purely formal. Define upside will, down the way I want.
Basarab Nicolescu: It’s a geometric notion.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: I want my transdisciplinary whole picture, what binds it upside down. How can pass in proximity to a level of reality to another. If I got up, or if I got down somehow bind this? What is the consistency ends.
Basarab Nicolescu: That translates into an expression, many books have been written about it, the anthropic principle. “Anthropos”, human, human being. The idea that if you change something, very little, an epsilon, the quantum world of the infinitely small and the infinitely short, there are no planets, there was no possibility of the formation of solar systems, there was no possibility of formation of heavy elements, which cause life where the word is used somewhat excessive anthropogenic that life is not confined to the heavy elements which condition biological life. Finally, it translates something that is extremely important. Another fascinating theory that was dominant otherwise in physics, by the 1960s, before the advent of the theory of quarks, called bootstrap theory was that bind each particle, the existence of all other particles. Why? Multiplied at first he thought they were 3-4-5 particles, then how great is the energy, the more appeared. An artificial creation. There is a universe in its natural state. We produce these things in the lab. Logical, rational, if we place on the territory of rationality, it means that the notion of up and down, be extended by a zone of nonresistant. It is what I call in my past writings, hidden third party. A third term. Within an Unstable, the experienced representation.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: That means a period of transparency.
Basarab Nicolescu: A term of transparency, total even resistance. Total transparency in our experiments, our theories, all our models, mathematical formalization. So it is in fact the sacred area that is most adapted to plan rationally be called sacred. I mean what is rational, but that can not be rationalized. We say that he is there, but do not say what it is.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: So your say they are obliged to introduce this term that the world exists as exists.
Basarab Nicolescu: Forced into the realm of the rational construction. If I place the realm of irrationality and delusion. But if I place this realm of logical deduction, to what is known now, -it knows a lot, enormous. Increasingly they learn more, but less known, because it is not integrated into our being, that’s another issue. But if we rely on it, we are compelled reasonable to suppose that this resistance area, top and bottom, and intermediate levels, extends through an area of Unstable allowing, and this is interesting, it allows communication between subject and object . And here we find many aspects of traditional thinking. We find in the Fathers, now, many of my readings are Fathers, that and trying to find my sources but also illustrations of thinking about nature. One of my favorite authors is Jacob Bohme, where I wrote a book about it, or St. John of the Cross. So we find in traditional thinking in the language since then, the same idea: a time line, a term that mediates the action between subject and object, but a term that has to be there for that communication to be possible. So there is a mediator, in the ordinary sense of the word. It is a result of interaction between subject and object. And why was fascinated Also, the thinking is that we found in great founders of quantum physics, the Heisenberg idea. Heisenberg is a very profound philosopher, the knowledge that says, do not tell him the third time, as the relation between subject and object can no longer be that of modern metaphysics.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: So in your substantive manifesto mean by transdisciplinarity, the revolution of quantum mechanics, forced us to think that the way to overcome contradictory.
Basarab Nicolescu: Exactly.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: This introduces the idea of levels of reality, multiple, and that the world is coherent and consistent in its complexity as exists, in that it forces us to think and extended beyond these levels of reality that somehow encompasses everything.
Basarab Nicolescu: What’s the source, say.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: And that would be sacred.
Basarab Nicolescu: Sacred’d say. It can be mapped to believe that this area is taller interference, but the sacred can be translated also in this area. It is not identical. It is the area where I think the great religious revelations occurred. Henry Corbin called this imaginary place, Mundus imaginalis, where reality is born. It can not be described, which can not be achieved. Sacred is an issue that is very interesting, and we have to remind named Mircea Eliade, who was a precursor of this idea that the sacred is not a historical stage of development of consciousness. That’s why he was so much attacked specialists history of religions. Sacred to him, he was constitutive of consciousness. We find this idea in transdisciplinary, and words are not accidental, because Eliade first introduced the idea of trans-disciplinarity (in and out of disciplines). The word was well chosen. Hence I Eliade provided as one of the founding members of the National Research Center transdisciplinary, which I founded in 1987.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: He died the year before. How can save us from killing nature, God’s killing, killing man, specialties of modernity? How can save transdisciplinary?
Basarab Nicolescu: I think the opportunity offered to us. First retrieve the sacred, which is the first step. Sacred, not necessarily religious, as well Mircea Eliade said. It’s very important to make this distinction. Already, that we recognize the reality and our social interactions, our lives every day. There is a sacred area. So I can respect, not because you are who you are, not because you are stronger, less powerful, more brilliant. Nu.Exista indefinable something that can not be defined. In other words, there is communication with others, tolerance and acceptance. The other is the recognition of a core of sacred, that you can not touch ever. I think then start true tolerance. It’s a small step, but very important, and socially and politically. Already resize it, I know it’s a utopian dream which already this step of introducing the sacred reality, so to speak, means a new type of education, concrete plan. In that dimension, not only analytical but affective dimension and body size.
From the beginning, children are more malleable, all that stuff. Our tales are full of third party included levels of reality, if you look good. Kids understand everything much better than adults, which are crystallized in the concept of a level of reality. The problem of education, human relations problem, I think here. Especially in education can start. In the sense of a transformation, how to say, a kind of preparation for auto birth. I say in the manifesto, it’s a new man. It’s absurd. The new man, see model in giving … It is a new birth, a potentiality that we all, the most democratic in the world is the spirit. We are given all. But if he sleeps, it’s absent, you can kill. You can do harm, violence can develop if fear can develop if. Go away very idea of levels of reality. The third party, the third secret, which is sacred I(ncluded)-T(hird)-T(erm). What can inform domains and fields, extremely concrete. When I say this I founded the things that were done, basically. Transdisciplinary in other countries: Australia, Canada, Brazil, especially in France. And in Romania, I started in Cluj, I had contacts with high school teachers formidable, they begin to experiment with methods of transdisciplinary education. So I advocate, not immediate salvation, because this takes time, the small steps that make things look great.
Horia Roman PATAPIEVICI: Thank you very much Mr. Nicolescu.”
This is the transcript from a dialogue between Mr. Basarab Nicolescu and Mr. Horia Roman Patapievici, from a TV cultural program, named “Back to argument”.
In my personal opinion, the proper translation of the new prefix “trans[trance]” should be, as stated by Armin van Buuren: (GO) IN AND OUT OF LOVE or go in mobile situation, above and beyond, from a certain point (perspective) in life. This is the big lesson of trance music, seek for a better perspective on understanding things, in life….IN A-S-O-T.
Best definition of LIFE: Unconditional Love