Elaboration of the new paradigm of interdisciplinary investigations范文[英语论文]

资料分类免费英语论文 责任编辑:王教授更新时间:2017-04-25

范文:“Elaboration of the new paradigm” 这篇社会范文中阐述的观点是,接近现实的复杂现象理论框架必须有一些特定的构成。构建这样一个理论,适当的措施是必须制定正确的目标和标准。所以,两部分都有详细目标和标准措施。制定一个综合信息系统,在必要的理论框架的基础上,使用这样的一个新的理论框架,我们可以形成一组运用理论-全足的科学学科,并命名为跨学科探讨。


In the article, the idea is expressed that the theoretical framework for approaching the complex phenomena of Reality must be a part of some specific meta-theory. It is shown that, to construct such a meta-theory, the appropriate aim and criteria of approach must be correctly formulated. So, the two-part aim and eight criteria of approach are detailed. Also, the basic ideas of a new meta-theory are discussed. The postulate of the existence of an integrated information system is formulated, and it is shown that the necessary theoretical framework can be constructed on the basis of such a postulate. The idea is expressed that using such a new theoretical framework when formalizing the complex phenomena (including the consciousness-related phenomena), we can form a set of applied theories – the all-sufficient scientific discipline, and name it Interdisciplinary Investigations (in their new paradigm). The old paradigm presupposes to regard Interdisciplinary Investigations as a formal merger of the already existing different disciplines like Physics, Psychology, etc. It is shown, for example, that the applied theory of consciousness must be the element of such a new discipline. The article is much illustrated to make the author’s ideas enough understandable. 
Key words and phrases: intellectual product; meta-theory; aim and criteria of approach; cognitive paradoxes; integrated information system; complex phenomena; theory of consciousness; Interdisciplinary Investigations.

Before stating a scientific idea with a desire to be heard and understood, one must see if the following three conditions are met. First, the idea should be enough clear and sufficiently substantiated. Second, an appropriate cognitive environment must exist which the idea is meant for. Finally, an appropriate historic moment must also be present for society to require such an idea. As to the first, this thesis concerns substantive theoretical work on the methodology of interdisciplinary investigations using the information-systemic approach under the general title “The Fundamentals of Nonstatistical Analysis” (or, shortened, Nonstatanalysis). As to the second, restrained optimism still exists in the scientific circles regarding the possibility of approaching the most enigmatic phenomena of Reality. As to the third, the crisis of scientific methodology resonates with energetic, economic, ecological, and socio-political crises, which comprise the general crisis of human societies and planetary life. Since science is an integral part of the human’s cognitive activity, a breakthrough in scientific methodology will influence all social processes and the course of development of all post-modern civilization. At the present “post-historic” moment, any theoretical work that investigates the ways out of the methodological crisis deserves tolerant and serious consideration.

Existing scientific disciplines had their origins. The old natural philosophy was supplanted by the different sciences, each separated according to their objects of investigation. It is generally accepted that to study complex phenomena the different sciences/disciplines are required, though we may imagine a symbiosis of sciences. In my view, such a symbiosis is not always efficient because of each science uses its own special methodology, and differing methodologies are not always compatible. For example, the methodology of physics has been developed around physical objects, processes and forces and cannot be effectively used when investigating social or consciousness-related phenomena. The task emerges in this time to work out a unified methodology for investigating complex phenomena, and thus, to conceive interdisciplinary investigations as a distinct, all-sufficient scientific discipline. 

The accumulation of information about phenomena which cannot be approached using the existing and can be regarded as symptomatic of the epistemological crisis. Really, science can say almost nothing about the mechanisms of mind operation, or about the etiologies of many diseases. Many peculiarities in animal behavior remain mysterious. The nature of elementary particles is far from being clear; quantum theory cannot explain the details of nucleon interaction. Unsolved remain the problems of the emergence and evolution of life on Earth and the evolution of consciousness. There are no satisfactory explanations to a limitless array of rare and anomalous phenomena, etc. The situation presently looks like the crisis in physics at the end of nineteenth century. The question of cognizability of Reality again becomes topical. In our view, a possible way through the crisis could be constructing a and as constituent elements of a particular meta-theory (or system of knowledge). The new specially constructed meta-theory, in interaction with existing ones, would possibly provide approaches to any complex phenomenon of Reality. So, Nonstatanalysis is a candidate for such a meta-theory.

The creation of an intellectual product (or, production of mental output) is a determinative feature of the human as the participant in the cognitive process (let us call him a subject of cognition). We accept that any intellectual product is created with a certain approach. We also assume that any approach may be described as having a certain aim and a certain set of consecutive cognitive actions or steps to achieve this aim. Such a set of cognitive actions we will call the criteria of approach. In practice, the aim and criteria of approach may correspond or not. We will call rational (reasonable, clever, etc.) and expedient such an intellectual product for which the aim and criteria of approach correspond. We will call a field of expediency a set of expedient intellectual products (various assertions) created/formulated under such aims and criteria that correspond to each other. Together taken, the aim and criteria of approach are called the limits of the field of expediency, or canon. Thus, every intellectual product may be attributed to a certain canon (since we will regard four levels of intellectual product, therefore we will also say about for kinds of canon).

Criteria of approach
The human, involved in the cognitive process, creates an intellectual product, and thus carries out a certain experiment. The results of such an experiment may be evaluated regarding the extent to which the constructed 3 meta-theory (as the MT-level intellectual product) will make it possible to develop the applied theories, which, in their turn, will be able to explain certain classes of complex phenomena. To ensure the integrity of the experiment in constructing the meta-theory, we deliberately did not carry out our theoretical research on the basis of any others’ results (we construct our meta-theory from a bland print). This allowed the opportunity to avoid the mistakes of others, and it now allows investigating our own meta-theory for compatibility with other authors’ metatheories. Therefore, the ideas in this article are offered as the author’s original, subjective ideas. Now let us accept that in case some ideas or conclusions (as intellectual products) coincide with such of others’, it would mean that two independent authors have determined for themselves the similar aim and criteria of approach when proposing their own ideas.

Aim of approach
The aim of approach, which is set for constructing of any meta-theory we will call a meta-theoretical aim (or abbreviated, MTA). Such an aim (in case of constructing of Nonstatanalysis) is formulated as the following two assertions: 
1) there is nothing outside integral and objectively existing Reality; and 2) some general Law of Reality exists, simultaneously as the condition and the transitional result of the process of cognition (of the process of achieving the first sub-aim). The sub-aim (1) means that we have to show that there are no parallel realities, and therefore all phenomena and processes belong to one, our Reality. In other words, we have to show that any phenomenon or process can be explained. But to achieve the sub-aim (1) we have to go through the sub-aim (2). It means that to achieve the subaim (1) we have first to develop a particular theoretical base of the process of cognition, the important element of which would be some general Law of Reality. is the transitional result of the process of cognition; but is a condition of the progress of the process of cognition.

The necessity of formation of the meta-theory’s specific base of notions is taken as a second criterion of approach. It is a fact that every scientific discipline uses its own notional base and terminology. There are also many, so called, received or commonly understood notions from our every-day usage which do not have a mono-semantic meaning. Examples include such concepts as , , , , , , , , , , , etc. As result, when we try to set out a new meta-theory in a verbal/writing form, we necessarily face the challenge of a conceptual (semantic) tautology. This problem inevitably arises out of the attempts to give definitions of the primordial concepts (the way in which this problem is solved will be shown in Part IV). Let us accept that everything, that bears relation (pertains) to any system (in our case, to the meta-theory as some system of concepts and assertions), can be regarded as the element of such a system. The element, in virtue of its very presence, influences the system in such or other way. Any system has at least two elements. In the presence of such two elements of one system a relation (or reference) emerges as between them, so between of the system as a whole and any of its elements. Let us call the as its sense of the other. 

The sense of the element in reference to the meta-theory (as a system) is simultaneously a denotatum and a notion. Within the context of a meta-theory, any element appears as a denotatum-notion complex. All meta-theory’s assertions consist of the denotatum-notion complexes. The sense of the element as a denotatum is its property; the sense of the element as a notion is its meaning. The sense of the element must be set. The sense of the element, set during the process of cognition, we will call a cognitive sense. During the process of cognition, any element of a meta-theory may be described with as its property, and with as its meaning. Nonstatanalysis has a few hard rules of cognitive sense setting, which are named the principles of cognitive sense setting (or abbreviated, the CSS principles; see Table 1 for the list of them).

更多范文欢迎访问我们主页 当然有需求可以和我们 联系交流。-X