Yes, Waldemar.
Here is how I am currently working on #8:
It is helpful to divide the world up into three domains/concerns. The first domain is the domain of idiographic phenomenology. The unique first person experience of being in the world. The second domain is the world. That is the ontic reality that we live in. The third domain is the intersubjective world whereby we, together, interact to create belief-value systems about how to divide up the world. The languages, conceptual systems, and language games that people co-create. The I/It/We.
The question is where do we start? I offer the ToK System as a novel entry point for the intersubjective construction of the scientific analysis of the “it”. That is, it offers folks a “scientific worldview”. As the book we are reading by Gauch notes (see attached), science has historically had a very “iffy” relationship with worldviews. In fact, most would say that science does not have a worldview. And that is correct at least generally speaking. There is no currently agreed upon scientific worldview. Big History is the closest thing to that. But, it is incomplete. As we have just argued in the Journal of Big History, the ToK offers a new and better solution. <https://jbh.journals.villanova.edu/article/view/2469/2412>
With that problem “solved”, we can now relate a scientific solution to the “it” (i.e., the ToK map of science as an emergent system of justification that is an onto-epistemology that maps the ontic reality as an unfolding wave of behavior across 4 dimensions of existence and x 3 levels of object analysis mapped by the PTB) to the humanistic languages of the I and the We.
The core concern of humanistic language of the “I” can be framed as soul/spirit and lifeworld/life language system.
The core concern of the humanistic language of the “We” can be framed in terms of ethical-moral considerations regarding “the Good”.
This sets the stage for resolving the great break down between the sciences and the humanities. Although E O Wilson and Stephen J Gould disagreed on much, they both agreed that “The greatest enterprise of the mind has always been and always will be the attempted linkage of the sciences and the humanities”
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Waldemar Schmidt
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: schumachter Guide to Perplexed
Gregg:
Thank you for sharing this - very interesting, as well as pertinent.
Suggesting levels of metatheory:
1. Schumacher’s Guide - recognized but unclarified inter-relationships - 1977.
2. Bhaskar/s Critical Realism - - 1994
3. Wilber’s Integral Psychology - - 2000.
4. Morin’s Complex Thought - - 2003.
5. Henriques’ Unified Theory - - 2011.
6. CIT - Complex Integral Thought - 2013.
7. Andersen’s Metamodernity - 2019.
8. ? - Complex Integral Thought, Unified Theory, and Metamodernity Explained - A Practical User’s Guide - ?.
#8 coming soon to a theater near me - I hope.
Best regards,
Waldemar
Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD
(Perseveret et Percipiunt)
503.631.8044
Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)
On Sep 26, 2019, at 10:00 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi TOK List,
I just wanted to let everyone know I found yet another articulation of knowledge that shares the basic ToK System onto-epistemological architecture. This was E. F. Schumacher’s A Guide for the Perplexed.
Here is the pdf and I just spend last 30<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.gornahoor.net_library_Schumacher-5FEF-5FA-5FGuide-5Ffor-5Fthe-5FPerplexed.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=wjF8cZoiFchamTuxBdDEmw&m=ICF7iR5bmL9iYlu10fF1xXF8E2edWVR7c5hwsLAUUKU&s=iddz8dsP3fB1TsiW98Qy1604U2Tc3bDYCMGFISyrvF4&e=> min or so going through. Here is the Wiki Entry, from which here is how it describes the four “levels of being”<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_A-5FGuide-5Ffor-5Fthe-5FPerplexed&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=kGI6bKNZfmUhF8V7cxJFeRAskzVy2lCKnS0FD0cyesk&s=VduToLs7OTVhHbtvfYPz_W82I75nFyxsTxIimyOkw0Y&e=>:
• "Mineral" = m
• "Plant" = m + x
• "Animal" = m + x + y
• "Human" = m + x + y + z
Of course, this lines up:
* Energy/Matter
* Energy/Matter + Gene/Cell/Evolve (Life)
* Energy/Matter + Gene/Cell/Evolve (Life) + Neuronal Net/Brain-Animal/Learn (Mind)
* Energy/Matter + Gene/Cell/Evolve (Life) + Neuronal Net/Brain-Animal/Learn (Mind) + Language/Person/Justify (Culture)
Just thought I would share.
Best,
Gregg
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
