N-keywords
Contents
Keywords
Paradigm
The Liberation book begins with the iconic image of Galilei in house arrest whispering "And yet it moves!" and develops an analogy—between that historical moment when a sweeping paradigm shift was about to happen and our own time; in order to develop a direction and a strategy—to focus on comprehensive paradigm shift; because (paradoxically) comprehensive change can be easy (when conditions for it are ready)—even when small and obviously necessary changes have been impossible.
The simple idea is that holotoscope leads to holotopia; when the academic paradigm is developed—by resolving the reported anomalies—the natural result is the larger paradigm shift. Essentially holoscope begets holotopia as science fostered the present paradigm.
I use the word paradigm in two ways:
- To point to a general societal-and-cultural order of things where everything depends on everything else; and importantly to its basic fractal-like structure—where even the smallest detail reflects the overall shape of the whole big thing
- As Thomas Kuhn did; to point to
- new way to conceive a domain of interest
- which resolves the reported anomalies
- and opens a creative frontier to research and development.
The domain of interest here is not a traditional academic field, where paradigm shifts have been (as Kuhn demonstrated) relatively common—but information and knowledge in general.
Sweeping anomalies that necessitate the new paradigm have been found in three domains:
- Fundamental discoveries
- Global trends
- New information technology.
The creative frontier that this paradigm opens up extends all the way to the horizon: As the case was in Early Scientific Revolution, the academic paradigm (modeled as holoscope) invites being creative in the very way in which information is created and even thought of. The larger creative frontier involves rethinking and rebuilding basic facets of society and culture.
For the lack of a better word, I use materialism for the prevailing contemporary paradigm—both the academic and the general cultural and societal. And begin by pointing out that the reported anomalies compel us to abandon materialism as paradigm and take a quantum leap in evolution.
(Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, 1958)
Fundamental discoveries demand a new paradigm.
Heisenberg:
“[T]he nineteenth century developed an extremely rigid frame for natural science which formed not only science but also the general outlook of great masses of people. This frame was supported by the fundamental concepts of classical physics, space, time, matter and causality; the concept of reality applied to the things or events that we could perceive by our senses or that could be observed by means of the refined tools that technical science had provided. Matter was the primary reality. The progress of science was pictured as a crusade of conquest into the material world. Utility was the watchword of the time.
On the other hand, this frame was so narrow and rigid that it was difficult to find a place in it for many concepts of our language that had always belonged to its very substance, for instance, the concepts of mind, of the human soul or of life. Mind could be introduced into the general picture only as a kind of mirror of the material world.”
Heisenberg's point was that 20th century physics constituted its rigorous disproof. He wrote Physics and Philosophy expecting that the largest contribution of his field to mankind would be a cultural revolution—that would result from correcting this epistemological error.
(Aurelio Peccei, One Hundred Pages for the Future, 1981)
Global trends demand a new paradigm.
In One Hundred Pages for the Future, in 1981, based on a decade of The Club of Rome’s research into the future prospects of mankind, Aurelio Peccei—this global think tank’s leader and co-founder—concluded: “It is absolutely necessary to find a way to change course.”
Peccei’s call to action was to shift focus from material production and consumption to humanistic and cultural pursuits: “The future will either be an inspired product of a great cultural revival, or there will be no future.” He explained why in The Human Quality, in 1976:
“Let me recapitulate what seems to me the crucial question at this point of the human venture. Man has acquired such decisive power that his future depends essentially on how he will use it. However, the business of human life has become so complicated that he is culturally unprepared even to understand his new position clearly. As a consequence, his current predicament is not only worsening but, with the accelerated tempo of events, may become decidedly catastrophic in a not too distant future. The downward trend of human fortunes can be countered and reversed only by the advent of a new humanism essentially based on and aiming at man’s cultural development, that is, a substantial improvement in human quality throughout the world.”
(Neil Postman, Interview to XY, 1990)
New information technology demands a new paradigm.
Neil Postman—who as a professor and chairman of the Department of Culture and Communication at the New York University founded “media ecology”. Point is that when information becomes overabundant—federation becomes impossible. New and different organization in knowledge work is mandatory. Cannot do it as before!
(René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy , 1641)
Logos
THE key meme... Galilei in house arrest represents empowerment of reason. Rebirth of academic tradition. Error: When mind feels certainty—automatically assumed as correct. Logos was believed to be simply logical certainty. Fundamental discoveries proved it wrong.
The point here is to revive logos!
The interest where we deliberately empower the mind.
(Attributed to Archimedes)
Epistemology
Archimedean point — federate an epistemology. Use it to revive culture.
Apply logos (KF) to the way we use the mind; and to foundation.
Design epistemology as prototype
(Abraham Maslow, Psychology of Science, 1966)
Methodology
Archimedean point — federate an epistemology. Use it to revive culture.
Maslow—INVERSION--- tool-based instead of problem-based.
Polyscopic Methodology prototype— <p>Design epistemology as prototype
(Doug Engelbart, "Title*, Byte, 1995)
Knowledge federation
(Erich Jantsch, Loooong title, MIT Report,1995)
Systemic innovation
Etc...
(Erich Jantsch, Loooong title, MIT Report,1995)
Dialog
It was all ignored.
The function of the dialog is to dissolve the paradox.
