interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and after-postmodern - Part 1.

In the 1950's decade, some scholars started to look to the relationship among the different disciplines of Knowledge. In the 1920's it was already used the word "interdisciplinarity", but in another context.

In 1950's, at the same time that a "pragmatic postmodern vision" started in therms of "production of results", people that worked with Education were concerned about which kind of Education could be better for the new generation. 

At that decade Jean Piaget proposed the word "Transdisciplinarity" to mean a new way to go beyond the limits of the disciplines. With these kind of studies, in a general way, appeared 3 therms: multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity.

Someone says that "Multidisciplinarity" started with Aristotle. It is partially correct, because, in true, Aristotle did not think about multidisciplinarity although created a kind of disciplinary division.

This kind of reflexion was a concern of scholars that saw that the growing division among specialties could lead to a fragmentary knowledge that could dehumanize and make the noction of whole to be lost.

Multidisciplinarity is the most common way that we use to learn: each Discipline with its own language and own method, with few "permeability" to other disciplines.

Interdisciplinarity imply in some interrelation or exchange of language and method, with more "permeability".

Transdisciplinarity works with: different levels of reality; complexity; the third included.

New paradigms: Complexity.

In the Postmodern Period the strong spirit of competition a kind of "all or none" principle made only one line of thinking to be acceptable as a paradigm in scientific or other circumstances. 

In the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21th century, this model did not answer anymore all the questions or problems. It was necessary to see the possibility of different answers to one same question, and the possibility to try to understand and conciliate paradoxes.

So, it was space for a more "complex" comprehension of the world and the human being.

The notion of Complexity started in Biology, in the first half of 20th century, when some thinkers wrote about the idea that "a living being is more than the sum of its parts". So, life is more than the chemical and molecular components. Life is also a kind of net among parts of a living being and even among several living beings. 

This concept of Complexity reached Philosophy and Anthropology and could be used to understand society and nature. 

Thinkers like Edgar Morin and Basarab Nicolaescu wrote about Complexity. Maybe now, in the After-Postmodern Period could be possible to better understand and apply Complexity. 

    

malthusian cathastrophe ahead?

Malthusian hypothesis is based in an idea that the population would increase much more than food, and so, the world would enter in a disaster, or mess, or war for food... 

This menace maybe was usefull for postmodern efficiency keeps the steering wheel of the history, but, in true, we know that the population is not growing so fast and that there is enough food in the world for each person. 

The problem is that many have too much and many have too few food and other things.

This is not healthy for anyone.

We need an "individual ecology"...  Each one must be "more natural", more healthy... Our body has not the capacity to carry so many things inside... We don't need to eat so much...

We need a "sustainable individuality"...

Anyway, the malthusian cathastrophe will not happens...

Less competition, more cooperation: utopia?

When someone writes about a world with "less competition and more cooperation", we can quickly hear negative commentaries of "dreams" of famous artists and politicians that had or have that kind if "illusion" and that  it is not possible a good international economy without a strong competiton.

We don't want deny that the quality of products can improve if someone needs to make something better than other "competitors".

But there is a key tool that can give a differenciated mesure and conduction on the competitoon: Ethics.

If Ethics is ever ahead of any circunstance, it is a good beginning of more cooperation.

Ethics in a large meaning of the word, including aspects directly correlated to the competitors, but also aspects of respect to human beings, to animals, to nature. 

A new crisis?

Some news talk about a possible "new international crisis" in 2012 similar to 2008`s crisis?
In true it is the same crisis in a new step...

It is possible to see it if we understand that the postmodern efficiency cannot be the main paradigm anymore.

The capitalistic competition, as the only way to find welfare, doesn`t work for each person on earth.

At same time the Malthusian idea cannot be the core of development.

At same time that more tham 1 billion people is in misery, there are more than 2 billions in overweight or obesity...

The main problem is not the number of more than 7 billions of population on the earth. One of the problems is the possibility to access resources, vital resources for human beings...

"Modern" in 20th century

 In the end of 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century the "Modernist Movement" started in the Arts as a reaction against Realism and what was considered conservative values of that. It was not an exactly return to Romanticism but was, anyway, a look to "abstract" and to what was supposed to be "new". 

Eric Hobsbawm has a concept that the 20th century , in true, started in 1914, with the First World War.

After the Second World War some movements that intended to "surpass" the "Modern" appeared. 

So, between 1914 and 1945 there were not too much time for "modern"...

And the Futurism of that days was maybe a kind of "modernism" that latter walked together with dictatorial ideas... If it was so, Dadaism, that claimed to be against the principles that leaded to War, was, in some level, influenced by Futurism?

In the middle of all that, how was Surrealism and Expressionism situated?

Was Dadaism already a kind of Postmodern Movement? 

Maybe Modern and Postmodern was intertwined in 20th century...

New paradigms

Since the book of Thomas Kuhn "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" (1962-1970) was publicized the word of Greek origin "paradigm" became a kind of keyword for anyone that would like to promote any supposed "change", even in conditions that not would really change, but only because people are all the time looking for some "change for better". Sometimes, main in science, "paradigm" is pointing to a change, other times "paradigm" is just a good advertising word.

In an after-postmodern "paradigm", we can remember the use of this word by Boaventura Souza Santos when he writes about a new paradigm that stablish a relationship between "Subject" and "Subject" instead of a relationship between "Subject" and "Object". That idea brings a more complex and new vision about relationships of human beings and also between humankind and nature, in a way to see that all things are connected in a huge net, and so there are influences from each other. That is different of the supposed influence only from "Subject" to "Object" in the typical "controlling way" of postmodern efficiency.