Assemblage of people & processes spiral up & down, in & out in spacetime, how to they have and sustain attunements to field forces, and to emotions

The concept of transdisciplinarity is becoming very popular with the increased complexity of problems and solutions that require strong collaboration and expertise across different sciences and disciplines. We can see strong integration trends between various areas of science, arts, technology, and humanities, building up new areas of research and practice in the process...

Thank you.

Many cultural anthropologists are asserting that the traditional ecological knowledge evident in the cultural beliefs and practices of local communities are scientifically driven and are agreeable to scientific conservation practices.

Knowledge appears as a system in which understanding and disciplines are subsystems in mutual integration. Fundamental principle of systems science is that systems and subsystems can never isolate their problems, but have to integrate them, because they cooperate with each other to the functioning of the global system and other subsystems. This complexity requires programs and guidelines, drawn together by their mutual cooperation. This processing operation is based on a more profound and decisive reflective level. Hence the importance of reflective interdisciplinarity, or search for the structural relationships of each discipline, which aims at developing a true system of science and of the relationship between theoretical consistency and versatility of the various models. Equally important is the judgment on the fragmentation of the disciplines, which sub-divide their own experience and knowledge. Because knowledge and scientific understanding are intended to overcome the critical immediate evidence, they must update their methods and adapt them to the new requirements.

Now, if the '' human being'(in the ethical, existential, social and cultural dimensions) has always been the specific subject of the humanities, for this has always been considered "training" for excellence, I think we should ask whether this can still be considered acceptable. Lost any philosophical – metaphysical foundation justifying the unity and truth of knowledge, the multiple understanding on humans have developed in a process of proliferation similar to that of the natural sciences: law, economics, political science, sociology, cultural anthropology, demography, psychology.

This proliferation has created, however, the implicit tension of human knowledge towards a certain unity with different forms. One of the first is the modern rediscovery of interdisciplinarity, in its "weak" form of simple multidisciplinary, as "horizontal" approach that promotes better understanding or representation of an object whose full study escapes the grip of a single disciplinary method. Or else in its "strong" meta-disciplinarity or even transdisciplinarity, as an investigation of the "vertical" dependence which methods and objects of a given discipline can have when read and understood in the light of the more general and fundamental knowledge, from which can also implicitly assume, in a manner more or less aware, principles, statements or models.

The factors of this rediscovery have been manifold. The experimental progress, for example, has allowed the access to more fundamental entities - think of the quantum mechanics and generally  to the physics of elementary particles, but also to the deeper understanding of chemical transformations and biological processes of living organisms - and then recognizing them as an object of disciplines other than that of departure. The need to use tools such as logic, statistics or systems theory, within disciplines traditionally handled by heuristic principles, has encouraged the emergence of new disciplines and the dialogue between the existing ones, often surpassing the fence between science and the humanities. Other times it was the complexity of the object under examination (physical systems that do not obey simple and predictable laws, living organisms, man and his health, social dynamics, economic, communication, etc.) to suggest a coordinated multidisciplinary approach.

The growth of scientific knowledge does not solve but greatly increases the problems, the uncertainties and contradictions of knowledge. The emergence of complexity has highlighted the need to integrate or change the reductionist models, of simplification of modern scientific thought.

In fact, the various knowledge multiply the related issues and opportunities to deepen the common roots. These facts have decisive value for an interdisciplinary background reflection: overcome the reductionism of the current conceptual systems; recognizing the plurality and the complex interrelationships; correctly describe the ways in which conceptual schemes and complex mutual interrelations influence our cognitive practices; identify which of these ways form the substrate base.

Science, reflecting on its procedures and results, do not abdicate its ambition of total knowledge, but project it beyond the old classifications of knowledge. Keep in mind that for the latest epistemology, this assumption is incorrect, as perpetuate the basic mistake of the old scientism, which caused major misunderstandings and obstacles for scientific activity. Abdicate complaints eloquently the old scientist prejudice, negative for others knowledge. Science abandon pure observability, to try systems or operational structures, regulatory, probabilistic, theoretical that bring together different disciplines, through transformations regulated or defined.

Recall that science and philosophy competed for the roles of the various disciplines, to outline the map or encyclopedia of knowledge. Under such conditions, the unity of knowledge proved unworkable and sciences, more interested in the practical success, ceased to care. Based on these successes, however, they claimed a priority over other forms of knowledge, when their increasing fragmentation in various specializations greatly complicated the relationship between knowledge and culture. Philosophy, in turn, found itself increasingly unable to oversee the unity of knowledge, leaving to be overwhelmed by the demands of the natural sciences, formal and human-social. In this way, in modern times, man, society and culture fell into the hand of scientific interpretations partial and provisional, which ranged between chance and necessity. Partial and provisional knowledge of science in vogue for many philosophies became the "absolute". When the one and the others fell into crisis, postmodern philosophy and weak thought, skeptics or agnostics to reason and truth, proved unable to define their identity in the face of sciences, going to a progressive dissolution. Weak and postmodern thought, then, are not able to understand the positive value of mindfulness, developed progressively by the epistemology of the twentieth century, of partiality, temporariness and falsifiability of scientific uncertainty and identity and role of science.

The seven complex lessons in education for the future proposed by Morin is actual? 

I have questions about the Pharisees as they are portrayed in Matthew.

I am a Reform Jew and was trained to believe that I am a descendant of the Pharisees, inheriting their dedication to Torah study and to the democratic sharing of Torah with the community.

I would like to learn how to examine the construction of the Pharisees in the Book of Matthew - without my own emotional religious concerns entering into the examination.

I am blessed to study with Dr. Warren Carter at Brite Divinity School.

I have completed my PhD course work and also passed the Comprehensive Exam. Now I want to do research work from abroad. My subject is Islamic Studies. Studying religions, ethics, gender studies and linguistics are my area of ​​interest. Please give me information and guidance in this regard. Can you tell me exactly about such opportunity?

DUMBING-DOWN THE WORLD

Who is responsible for the dumbing-down of the world's population? Language is the medium of consensus and of discord. As cultures seek a meaningful world-view, volubility increases with the need for more words. Concepts become redundant and discarded; words are invented and reification changes reality. Modern science, religion – and contemporary education – are based on the presumption of Pluralism (not Realism or Materialism, as is commonly held). The primacy of a metaphysical perspective has all-but been abandoned. The vast body of academic scholarship over the last century was predicated on the catastrophic Oxford Model and is mostly meaningless and redundant. An incomprehensible waste of resources and lives supporting the crumbling edifice of Ivory Tower-based education. That culture, based on erroneous assumptions, must take responsibility for the World's stultified condition. The world-view of the vast majority is based on harm, through ignorance, lies and deception.

Non-confessional religious education might not be a good approach in order to theologically, but it may be a good approach sociologically. Can you give me examples about this argument?