|
EVOLUTION AND DESIGN Relationships
Between Toward a Theoretical and Applied Metaphysics Anil
Mitra PhD, © 1987, 2nd Ed. 1999, Rev. 2004
SOME RETROSPECTIVE COMMENTS, SEPTEMBER 2007 This essay was written in the period autumn 1986 to spring 1987, over twenty years ago. The idea—a range of ideas—had been percolating for a while. I had become familiar with the basic ideas of Darwin’s theory of evolution it about 1961, continued to maintain an interest in it, and found it capable of shedding light on many aspects of the world. I had come to seek, among other goals, to found a metaphysics from the basic ideas—perhaps in analogy to the manner in which Karl Popper, in the Logic of Scientific Discovery, 1934, and other writings had found some foundation for epistemology in evolutionary ideas. Naturally, there was no thought that the actual evolution of the universe is that of a living organism, evolving in the way in which organisms evolve—individual organisms do not evolve. Rather, it is the species and, perhaps, other collections that evolve by variation of factors of inheritance and selection of adapted variations This work is deficient in many respects. The primary deficit is that while the ideas of evolution are employed to explain cosmological variety, there is no explicit formulation of a metaphysics of objects but only an implicit metaphysics of process which acts in the world The world is not taken to be material in principle but material things form the bulk of the cosmological variety considered in this essay. Even if the world is not all matter, this is not a bad idea because the introduction of non-material objects is often an excuse to not be concerned with explanation or theory at all. The problem with an absence of explanation is not that what is written is invalid but that it is accessible at most to privileged persons and is accepted by others without understanding. There is also a deficit in the idea of materialism but it is not that the universe is not made of matter. It is, rather, the idea that what we know matter to be, i.e. our concept of matter, is final and universal. It is entirely conceivable and perhaps even likely that any ‘final’ physical theory of matter shall be quite different from the present theories. A second deficiency, then, is not in making any mistake of materialism but in tacitly excluding cosmological variety at the outset of investigation. A similar deficiency revealed by my recent thought—e.g., in Journey in Being—is that while process explanation is useful it is by no means the only or the most powerful explanation. Some philosophers insist on explanation that transcends both time and object, preferring these kinds and their explanatory aspects to fall out of, e.g., a metaphysics that is not based in temporal or material nature. That objective is achieved in Journey in Being and the reader is reviewed to that essay for the development itself The present work has further deficiencies and these include (1) organization and style and (2) content that is often in the form of rough notes After writing this essay, I became dissatisfied with its approach, its effective basis in materialism and temporality. Years before writing this essay, I had been a materialist—the result of an education in science and engineering. The subsequent years and the thought involved in writing this essay cured me of that but provided no real substitute. In about 1990, I explicitly set out to find an alternative. In the process, my background in science and mathematics, years of reading and reflection, the writing of this essay were extremely useful but not fully adequate—I continued to read, to reflect and to write I turned to the idea of the absolute—in a metaphysical rather than in any formally religious sense I considered idealism. In contrast to the typical modern materialist, I found that there is no essential distinction between idealism and materialism unless the nature of mind and matter are taken to be very specific. If some very specific notions of mind and matter are adopted and if it is thought that matter is nothing but the notion adopted and that mind is nothing but its notion, then idealism and materialism are both absurd from the contrary point of view. What is more, mind is not atoms, not buildings, not the cosmos in the standard view and therefore, idealism is absurd (on the assumed view of mind and matter.) Further, while materialism is not patently absurd, it becomes impossible to see how mind could arise in the material world. However, if the notions of mind and matter are not regarded as final, and not regarded in the ‘nothing but’ sense, then there is no reason that the universe can be seen, equivalently, as mind andor matter. That is, the concepts of mind and matter may converge. Perhaps, more accurately, while the sense of the concepts may remain different, the ranges of reference will converge I studied consciousness—I was initially motivated by John Searle’s essay, The Mystery of Consciousness, that appeared in the New York Review of Books in 1995. I read Searle’s The Rediscovery of Mind published in 1992. I was impressed by the thought of many writers in the field, especially that of Searle, but I was not persuaded by Searle’s commitment to evolution and atomism as a basis of—an understanding of—all being I wrote a number of essays—see essays on being and essays on mind. In the process, I sharpened my conceptions of a number of fundamental ideas including being, mind, matter, consciousness, substance, and read much including the writing of Heidegger and Wittgenstein Starting around 1997 till 2002, I had been thinking that the void, i.e. nothingness, might form the basis of a metaphysics. It was a somewhat mystical position. Even hard nosed scientists will agree that mysticism is acceptable as inspiration though not of proof. However, it was not entirely mystical for, even in fundamental physical science, it is known that the emergence of a cosmos from the void does not violate the principles of physics when the positive energy of matter cancels the negative energy of the gravitational field. I was also encouraged by some reflections of Heidegger and Robert Nozick. (I was disappointed to find nothing of worth regarding metaphysics in the thought of Sartre.) However, I was unable to prove the equivalence of the void and the universe and I did not get very far with use of the idea as a working hypothesis However, in 2002, I saw how to show the equivalence of the void and all being. I had been trying to show that the—known—world is equivalent to the void. The key idea of 2002 was to focus on the void, its properties, rather than, first, on the universe. This was the essential idea that made it possible to show the equivalence of the void and all being and, encouraged by this development, was able, incrementally over the five years since 2002, to develop the ultimate metaphysics of Journey in Being and its implications for the theory of objects, for logic and meaning, for mind, for cosmology and for a study of the human world It seems that the new development is infinitely advanced beyond where I was at the completion of the present essay on evolution and design. Yet this essay remains of interest to me primarily as a way station in the journey to the present and especially as a source of ideas, later much refined, on the emergence of mind and the capacities of mind from a state that does not—appear to—involve mind and, more generally, as a source of ideas on the equivalence of manifest being from the void state. The essay is also of interest in that it is my first system—it attempts to be systematic and it attempts to write down, to formulate, a comprehensive set of categories of kinds of being
Introduction, Objectives, Structure The Future Of Evolution And Design Section and Paragraph Numbering 1 INTRODUCTION, OBJECTIVES, STRUCTURE EVOLUTION AND DESIGN - LEVELS AND RELATIONS - ORIGINS OF OBJECTIVES 1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF DESIGN 1.1.1.1 Level I - Problem solving and objective design 1.1.1.2 Level II - Social and human process 1.1.1.3 Level III - Evolutionary design 1.1.1.4 Level IV - Design is evolution 1.2.1.1 Objective 1 - Design as fundamental in society and universe 1.2.1.1.1 Idea A - Practical and objective design 1.2.1.1.2 Idea B - Social process as design 1.2.1.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in design 1.2.1.1.4 Idea D - General evolution 1.2.1.2 Objective 2 - Use of design 1.2.1.3 Objective 3 - Design as universal process 1.2.2 DISCUSSION AND FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS 1.2.2.1 Objective 1 - objective design 1.2.2.1.1 Idea A - Objective design is a fundamental human and social process 1.2.2.1.2 Idea B: Objective design generalizes to social process 1.2.2.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in Design 1.2.2.1.4 Idea D - General Evolution 1.2.2.2 Objective 2 - Use of Design 1.2.2.3 Objective 3 - Design As Universal Process 1.3 BASIC THESES AND POSTULATES 1.3.1 There is a human motive to the universal 1.3.2 This resolution requires vision 1.3.3 DESIGN, AS PROBLEM SOLVING IS AN ESSENTIAL ACTIVITY AT ALL LEVELS 1.3.4 objective design must include holistic values 1.3.5 Generalization of the basic design leads to more inclusive and universal processes 1.3.6 The idea evolution = design [Level IV] universalizes and hierarchizes design 1.4.3 WHERE ARE THE OBJECTIVES TREATED? 2.1 REASONS TO STUDY EVOLUTION 2.1.1 As the universal process of unfolding reality 2.1.2 To show levels of understanding: 2.1.2.1 [A] Knowledge As Static 2.1.2.2 [B] Knowledge as evolving 2.1.2.3 [C] Knowledge As An Element Of Evolution 2.1.2.4 [D] Evolution Of The Processes Of Knowledge 2.1.3 To establish “the” dimensions of being 2.1.4 Provides learning for design 2.1.6 To understand relation of universal to human Being 2.1.7 Relation to objectives of the present work 2.1.8 Provides insight into culture and human institutions 2.1.9 As a foundation for design 2.1.9.1 [1] Design is within evolution 2.1.9.2 [2] Design is analogous to evolution 2.1.9.3 [3] Design is part of evolution 2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF EVOLUTION 2.2.2 Processes of evolution are not different than ordinary processes 2.2.3 Evolution need not be distinguished from or equated with creation, guidance, or destruction 2.2.6 Evolution does refer to specific set of mechanisms or theories 2.2.7 Evolution is not a social or political program 2.2.8 Evolution is not a philosophical program 2.2.9 Evolution includes emergence of order by natural processes 2.3 ABSTRACT EVOLUTION WITH EXAMPLES 2.3.3 Mathematical - a special case of the symbolic 2.5 ORGANIC ACCOUNTS OF CREATION, GUIDANCE AND DESTRUCTION 2.5.1 Reasons for studying organic accounts of creation, guidance and destruction 2.5.1.1 [1] As archetypes of origins 2.5.1.2 [2] As archetypes of psyche 2.5.1.3 [3] Continuity with the past 2.5.1.4 [4] Some functions are still valid 2.5.1.5 [5] Organic knowledge of human origins 2.5.1.6 [6] Symbolic-organic knowledge is valuable 2.5.1.7 [7] If science should decay 2.5.1.8 [8] Insight organic knowledge 2.6 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS OF EVOLUTION 2.6.1 Reasons for studying systematic accounts 2.6.1.2 [2] The Study Itself is Part of Human Evolution 2.6.1.3 [3] As a Source of Knowledge and Its Systematization 2.6.1.4 [4] Knowledge for Design 2.6.1.5 [5] Learning about the processes and meanings of design 2.6.1.6 [6]. A continuation of the organic accounts discussion of evolution 2.6.1.7 [7] Centering Humankind in Nature 2.6.1.8 [8] As a Framework for a Unified Concept of Evolution 2.6.2 General comments on evolution and mechanisms 2.6.4 Cosmological evolution. Known and speculative universe 2.6.5 Evolution of the phenomenal and physical objects of the known universe 2.6.8.1 Relation of biology and biological evolution to science and general evolution 2.6.8.1.1 Objectives of Science 2.6.8.1.2 Discovery and Method in Science 2.6.8.1.3 Special Features of Biology 2.6.8.1.4 The Problem of Teleology 2.6.8.1.5 Special Features of Life 2.6.8.1.6 Reduction in Biology 2.6.8.1.6.1 Constitutive Reductionism 2.6.8.1.6.2 Explanatory Reductionism 2.6.8.1.6.3 Theory Reductionism 2.6.8.1.7 Conceptual Structure of Biology 2.6.8.1.8 Philosophy of Biology 2.6.8.1.9 Some Principles of a Basis for Philosophy of Biology 2.6.8.1.10 Biology and Human Thought 2.6.8.1.11 Biology and Human Values 2.6.8.1.12 Philosophical Implications of Darwin's Theories 2.6.8.2 Theoretical and Empirical Problems of Biological Evolution 2.6.8.2.1.1 A Four-Kingdom Scheme based On the Notion of Common Tree-Like Descent 2.6.8.2.1.2 A Three Level, Five Kingdom Scheme based On Descent, Morphology and Ecology 2.6.8.2.2 [2] Provision of Evidence: 2.6.8.2.3 [3] Methodological Problems 2.6.8.3 Outline Treatment of the Problems 2.6.8.3.1 Darwin's Theory and it's Five Strands 2.6.8.3.2 Early Criticisms of Darwin's Theory 2.6.8.3.4 An Outline of the Theory of Evolution 2.6.8.3.4.3 [3] The Synthetic Theory of Evolution 2.6.8.3.4.4 [4] Major Stages of Evolution 2.6.8.3.4.4.1 [1] Origin of life 2.6.8.3.4.4.2 [2] Multi-cellular Organisms 2.6.8.3.4.4.3 [3] Colonization of Land 2.6.8.3.4.4.4 [4] Human Evolution 2.6.8.3.4.5 [5] Post Synthesis Development 2.6.8.3.4.5.1 [1] Population Genetics 2.6.8.3.4.5.2 [2] Molecular Biology 2.6.8.3.4.5.3 [3] Natural Selection - Evidence 2.6.8.3.4.5.4 [4] Modes of Speciation 2.6.8.3.4.5.5 [5] Macroevolution - the Subject of Paleontological Study 2.6.8.3.4.5.6 [6] Human Evolution 2.6.8.4 Outstanding Problems of Biological Evolution 2.6.8.4.1 [1] The Problem of Mechanisms 2.6.8.4.2 [2] Questions of Interaction 2.6.8.4.3 [3] Genetic Variability in Populations 2.6.8.4.4 [4] Rates of Evolution 2.6.8.4.6 [6] Relationship and Phylogeny of Major Types of Plants and Invertebrates 2.6.8.4.7 [7] Interaction among Fields and Levels of Evolution 2.6.8.4.8 [8] Specialist Questions 2.6.8.4.9 [9] The Question of Gradual Change 2.6.9 Evolution or emergence of levels of organization and interactions 2.6.10 Human and psychosocial evolution: descent and development 2.6.11 Evolution of human society 2.6.12 Evolution of individuation and independence 2.6.13 Possibilities and speculations: universal again 2.6.14 Open and fundamental problems of evolution 2.7 EQUILIBRIUM, DECAY AND GROWTH IN EVOLUTION 2.7.1 Why study these aspects of evolution? 2.7.2 Evidence for origin and growth, equilibrium, decline and death 2.8 EVOLUTION AND CREATION: CONFLICTS, ANALOGIES, SYNTHESES 2.8.1 Conflicts and resolutions 2.8.2 The ultimate nature of things 2.8.3 Analogies and conceptual synthesis 2.9 PROBLEM OF EVOLUTION OF ORDER: A SCIENCE OF ORDER 2.9.1 Generalized characteristics models of systems undergoing evolutionary CYCLES 2.9.4 Relation with type of causation 2.10 EVOLUTIONARY DETERMINISM AND INDETERMINISM 2.10.3 Does evolution approach perfection? 3.1 REASONS FOR INCLUSION OF PHILOSOPHY 3.1.1 NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF ASPECTS OF DESIGN AT DIFFERENT LEVELS 3.1.2 FOUNDATIONS OF THE OBJECTIVES AND BASIC POSTULATES 3.1.3 APPLICATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO DESIGN VALUES 3.1.4 TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESSES OF HUMANKIND, SOCIETY, AND NATURE AS A UNITY 3.1.5 AS AN OUTLINE or FRAMEWORK FOR STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY, BASED IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGN 3.2.1 SOME ASPECTS BASED IN DESIGN 3.2.2 PHILOSOPHY AS A METHOD VS. PHILOSOPHY AS KNOWLEDGE 3.2.3 GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION 3.3.2 EPISTEMOLOGY - the THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE 3.3.2.1 The Nature of Knowledge...and of Truth, Logic and Reason 3.3.2.2 The Universe of Being, Action and Thought 3.3.2.3 Perception, Reason and Knowledge...and their Modes 3.3.2.4 Issues in Epistemology 3.3.3 PHILOSOPHICAL METHOD. CRITICAL AND SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY 3.3.4 PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY: AN OUTLINE 3.3.4.1 Speculative Philosophy 3.4 FURTHER CHARACTERIZATION OF PHILOSOPHY: ITS OBJECTIVES, VALUE AND METHOD 3.4.2.1 Comments From Whitehead's Process and Reality 3.4.2.2 An Advertisement for Philosophy by Bertrand Russell in relation to the eternal questions 3.4.2.3 Social Change and Creative Personality 3.4.3.1 Brief Criticism of Invalidation Theory 3.4.3.2 Whitehead on Speculative Philosophy. The following quotation is from Process and Reality: 3.4.3.3 Speculative Method - An Outline 3.5 SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY...AND ITS APPLICATIONS 3.5.1 PHILOSOPHY OF THE SPECIAL DISCIPLINES AND ACTIVITIES: OUTLINE 3.5.2 ETERNAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY 3.5.3 VALUE: AXIOLOGY, ETHICS AND AESTHETICS 3.5.3.1 Types of Ethics and Ethical Study 3.5.3.1.3 Deontological ethics 3.5.3.2 General Foundations of Value 3.5.4.1 Philosophical Anthropology 3.5.4.2 Philosophy of cultural institutions - Art, Religion, Learning and Discovery, Education 3.5.4.3 Philosophy of social organization and relation of individual to the group 3.5.4.3.1 Political philosophy 3.5.5 PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE...As distinct from “academic” philosophy 3.5.5.3 Religion and the Philosophy of Religion 3.5.5.5 Role of instinct, mind, spirit 3.5.5.7 Relationship to psychology 3.5.6 PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN MATERIALISM, MECHANISM, CHOICE 3.5.6.1 Evolution as a Framework for Knowledge...and Method 3.5.6.1.1 Value of such a framework 3.5.6.1.2 Nature and evolution of knowledge 3.5.6.1.2.1 Role of knowledge in culture 3.5.6.1.2.1.1 Level I: Mythic Cultures 3.5.6.1.2.1.2 Level II: Post-mythic Cultures 3.5.6.1.2.2 Further comments on evolution of knowledge. Models of change 3.5.6.1.2.2.1 Origins of knowledge 3.5.6.1.2.2.2 Changes in the process or mechanism of knowledge at the socio-cultural level 3.5.6.1.2.2.3 Changes in socio-cultural knowledge 3.5.6.1.2.2.3.1 Models of change at level I - mythic thought 3.5.6.1.2.2.3.2 Models of change at level II - post-mythic thought 3.5.6.1.3 Further comments on the selection or evolutionary theory of knowledge and science 3.5.6.1.5 Relation of evolution to other aspects of knowledge 3.5.6.1.5.1 [1] Accidental knowledge 3.5.6.1.5.2 [2] Social theory of knowledge 3.5.6.1.5.3 [3] Relation between cognition and emotion 3.5.6.1.5.4 [4] Science and religion 3.5.6.2 Evolution as a Framework for Social Process and institutions of society 3.5.6.3 Evolution as a Framework for Consciousness 3.5.6.4 Evolution as a Framework for Design 3.5.6.4.1 Evolution in designs 3.5.6.4.2 Evolution in design methods and capabilities 3.5.6.5 Evolution as a Framework for the Universal 3.5.6.6 Consistency among the Frameworks and Points of View 3.5.7 THE OPEN PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY 3.5.7.1 Problems and Problem Areas in Metaphysics, Epistemology, Design, Motivation and Action 3.5.7.2 Problems and Problem Areas for Philosophy and Human Enterprise as a Whole 3.5.7.2.1 Problems relating to unity 3.5.7.2.1.1 [1] Foundation in physical cosmology 3.5.7.2.1.2 [2] Synthesis of all modes of knowledge 3.5.7.2.1.3 [3] Motivation, value, psychology and religion 3.5.7.2.1.4 [4] Design and action 3.5.7.2.1.5 [5] A study of unity and diversity 3.5.7.2.1.6 [6] Equivalence of metaphysical and epistemological systems 3.5.7.2.1.7 [7] Structure of knowledge 3.5.7.2.2 Problems relating to evolutionary origin 3.5.7.2.2.1 [8] The philosophic, open outlook 3.5.7.2.2.2 [9] The universal in the particular and the symbolic 3.5.7.2.2.3 [10] Evolutionary foundations of philosophy 3.5.7.2.2.4 [11] Development of a philosophy of evolution and design 3.5.7.2.2.5 [12] Foundation for a sequence of philosophies 3.5.7.3 The Fundamental Problems of Humankind; the Value of Philosophical Perspectives 3.5.7.3.1 On Problems and Solutions 3.5.7.3.1.1 [1] The human situation must be seen and felt in its full context 3.5.7.3.1.2 [2] On choice of values 3.5.7.3.1.3 [3] Humankind and environment in balance in relation to a full spectrum of needs 3.6.1 Emergence of a new naturalistic view of cognition, emotion, philosophy, knowledge and design 3.6.2 TRANSITION to the Realm of Knowledge 3.6.3 FUTURE work for the Realm of Philosophy 4.1 ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGN 4.2.1 PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION 4.2.1.1 Concepts of the Nature of Knowledge 4.2.1.1.1 System Theory of Knowledge 4.2.1.1.2 Adaptive-Evolutionary Theory of Knowledge 4.2.1.2 An Ideal Organization of the Object of Knowledge 4.2.1.3 Conventional, Practical and Cultural Factors 4.2.1.4 General Principles of Classification 4.2.1.4.3 Dependence on domain 4.2.2 PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC and POETIC EXPRESSION and of ART 4.2.2.1 Modes of Human Experience with Preliminary Discussion of Art 4.2.2.1.1 [1] Levels of existence 4.2.2.1.2 [2] Levels of experience 4.2.2.1.3 [3] Levels of consciousness and levels of cognition: 4.2.2.1.4 [4] Symbolic modes of representation: 4.2.2.1.5 [5] Modes of coding, expression, communication: 4.2.2.2.1 Art is expression of experience 4.2.2.2.2 Art contains existential elements of experience 4.2.2.2.3 Art is a form of knowledge 4.2.2.2.4 Art integrates the modes of human being 4.2.2.4 Analysis of Language and Logic and Relation to Art 4.2.3 AN EXTENDED CLASSIFICATION OF PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE WITH EXAMPLES 4.2.3.1 Natural and Chronological Classifications 4.2.3.1.2 Aristotle [384-322BC] 4.2.3.1.3 Francis Bacon [1561-1626] 4.2.3.1.4 French Encyclopaedists: Diderot and d'Alembert 4.2.3.1.5 Immanuel Kant [1724-1804] 4.2.3.1.6 Samuel Taylor Coleridge [1772-1834] and the Encyclopaedia Metropolitana 4.2.3.1.7 Andrė Marie Ampere [1775-1836] 4.2.3.1.8 Auguste Comte [1798-1857] 4.2.3.1.9 Wilhem Dilthey [1833-1911] 4.2.3.1.10 Twentieth-Century Efforts 4.2.3.1.10.1 Fifteenth Edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica 4.2.3.1.10.1.1 Propaedia - A Detailed Topical Outline of Knowledge 4.2.3.1.10.1.2.1 An arrangement in super-divisions 4.2.3.1.10.1.3 Great Books of the Western World; Syntopicon 4.2.3.1.11 Comments on Knowledge and Design 4.2.3.2 Classifications Based on Practical, Design, and Special Considerations 4.2.3.2.3 Knowledge for Design 4.2.3.3 Actual Classifications 4.2.3.3.1 [1] Universities and academies 4.2.3.4 Design of a Knowledge Base 4.2.3.4.2 Functional Considerations, Problem Definition, Decisions 4.2.3.4.2.1 [1] General function and economics 4.2.3.4.2.2 [2] General vs. Special Purpose 4.2.3.4.2.3 [3] Levels of treatments 4.2.3.4.3 Performance or Design Specifications - Including Format; Synthesis: Decisions 4.2.3.4.3.1 [4] Length - Estimate 4.2.3.4.3.2 [5] Principals of organization 4.2.3.4.3.2.1 Natural vs. Practical 4.2.3.4.3.2.2 Single or multiple principles of organization 4.2.3.4.3.2.2.1 Hybrid-matrix organization is one approach 4.2.3.4.4 Analysis and optimization 4.2.3.4.4.1 General or general and specialized base? 4.2.3.4.4.2 Dual levels or multiple index systems - table of contents system? 4.2.3.4.4.2.1 Information level 4.2.3.4.4.3 Systematic [natural vs. logical-material] vs. Alphabetic arrangement of knowledge level 4.2.3.4.4.5 The Systematic Outline 4.2.3.4.4.6 Encyclopaedia Britannica - 15th Edition as a model 4.2.3.4.5 Cross reference systems 4.2.3.4.8 Principles of generation 4.2.3.4.9 Evaluation and feedback: Presentation 4.2.4 MAJOR DIVISIONS OF SYMBOLIC KNOWLEDGE 4.2.4.1 Concepts from Evolution. Effect of Culture 4.2.4.2 Main Divisions of Knowledge 4.2.4.2.1 Main Divisions of Knowledge - 1 4.2.4.2.1.1.1 [1] General purpose; descriptive metaphysics 4.2.4.2.1.1.2 [2] Natural systems: for art 4.2.4.2.1.1.3 [3] Special purpose: for science and technology 4.2.4.2.1.2 Symbolically coded knowledge 4.2.4.2.1.2.1 [1] Philosophy; symbolic systems 4.2.4.2.1.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts 4.2.4.2.1.2.3 [3] Sciences; technology 4.2.4.2.2 The Main Divisions of Knowledge - 2 4.2.4.2.2.2 Symbolically Coded Knowledge 4.2.4.2.2.2.1 [1] Philosophy; knowledge of symbolic systems 4.2.4.2.2.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts 4.2.4.2.2.2.3 [3] Science; technology 4.3 A BRIEF OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGE 4.3.1.2 Language and Related Systems 4.3.1.3 Special Purpose Symbolic Systems 4.3.2 KNOWLEDGE - SYMBOLICALLY CODED KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLD 4.4 DETAILED OUTLINES OF KNOWLEDGE 4.5 OPEN PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE 4.5.2 STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION 4.5.3 PROBLEMS OF THE DISCIPLINES 4.6 THE ESSENTIALS OF KNOWLEDGE - A BRIEF TREATMENT 4.7 AN ENCYCLOPEDIC COMPILATION 4.7.1 A general plan of approach: 5.1 ROLE OF DESIGN AND PLANNING 5.1.1 ROLE OF DESIGN IN SOCIETY 5.1.1.2 Social and Global Design. Design for Diversity. Social Process as Design 5.2.1 MANAGEMENT. Role of Management in Design 5.2.7 OUTLINE OF A VOLUME ON PRACTICAL DESIGN 5.3 FORMAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN: PLANNING AND DESIGN 5.3.2 MANAGEMENT OF DESIGN. PLANNING 5.3.3 TOP ® DOWN DESIGN: DESIGN AND PLANNING LEVELS. PRIORITIES DESIGN 5.3.3.1 A Set of Global Design and Planning Levels 5.3.4 Outline of Methodologies 5.3.4.1 Component Design - The Basic Procedure 5.3.4.2 System and Subsystem Design 5.3.4.4 Business Organization, Planning and Management 5.3.4.5 Technology and Technological Systems 5.3.4.6.1 Levels of global-social planning 5.3.5.1 Area A. Modes of Analysis 5.3.5.2 Area B Analysis of Systems 5.3.5.4 Area D. Problem Solution 5.3.5.4.1 Area D.1 Search for and Generation of Alternatives 5.3.5.4.2 Area D.2 Problem Solving for Complex Systems 5.3.5.5 Area E. Open problems in science of design 5.3.5.5.1 Problems outlined in 5.3.5 5.3.5.5.2 Transformation of General Problems of Design to Science 5.3.6 A Classification of Application Areas 5.3.6.1 Planning Levels - Constraints 5.3.6.2 Planning Levels - Constraints and interactions for which control is possible 5.3.7 Examples of Design and Planning Activities...Towards a Complete and Structured Set 5.3.7.1 Global Planning and Design 5.3.7.2 Social Planning and Design 5.3.7.3 Engineering and Technology. Professions 5.3.7.5 Educational and Learning Systems 5.3.7.6 Individuals and Groups 5.4 Some Application Areas: Detailed Considerations 5.4.1 GLOBAL, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AND PLANNING 5.4.2 ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN. PROFESSIONS 5.4.2.1 History of Engineering 5.4.2.3 Engineering Activities 5.4.2.4.1 The process of design and its context 5.4.2.4.3 Tools knowledge, and language for design 5.4.3 PERSONAL DESIGN. APOLLO AND DIONYSIUS 5.4.4 DESIGN FOR KNOWLEDGE AND INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNING 5.4.4.1 What are the fundamental problems of knowledge? 5.4.4.2 Design of a Knowledge Base 5.5 AN OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGE FOR GENERAL DESIGN 5.6 TOWARDS GENERAL AND UNIVERSAL DESIGN 5.6.2 PROBLEMS IN SPECIFIC LEVELS OF DESIGN 5.6.3 SIGNIFICANT MODERN AND EMERGING DESIGN PROBLEMS 6.1.1 Philosophies and psychologies of action 6.3 SYNTHESIS OF BEING, ACTION, MOTIVATION 7 LEARNING...AND TRANSFORMATION 7.1 EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND DESIGNS 7.1.1 Was the design or plan implemented? 7.1.2 Is design or planning effective? 7.1.3 Is the design efficient? 7.2 PERSONAL EVALUATION: DIMENSIONS OF BEING OR GROWTH 7.3 ENGINEERING EVALUATION: OTHER PROFESSIONAL SYSTEMS 7.4 EVALUATION OF GLOBAL SYSTEMS 8 DESTINATIONS: THE FUTURE OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN 8.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT 8.2.2 General outline of considerations and priorities for planning 8.2.3 Detailed outline of considerations 8.2.3.3 Leadership, Administration and Management for an Effective Research Environment 8.2.3.3.1 Effective research environment on individual, institutional and large scales 8.4 FURTHER SPECIALIZED INFORMATION ON FUNDING INSTITUTIONS 8.4.1 A listing of some grant and contract sources 8.4.2 Plan for research and related funding 8.5 IDEAS TOWARD A RESEARCH GROUP OR INSTITUTE 8.5.1 The idea of a research group 8.5.2 Background work towards forming a group 8.5.3 Outline of budget - an example 8.5.4 Further sources of information and special problems 8.5.5 Further possibilities for a group or institute 8.6 PERSUASION AND PRESENTATION 8.6.1 Introduction: old and new rhetoric 8.6.2 Practical rhetoric: the art of persuasion and communication
PREFACE AND INTRODUCTIONApril 2003 Evolution and Design began with the observation that an evolutionary perspective – fact and theory – is vastly simplifying for understanding the world and therefore also in planning and design. The text outlines the sources and foundations and provides some details of that understanding and some of its applications I used to say that Evolution and Design is about the relations between blind and conscious evolution Some people regard natural evolution as something like the most important fact about the world and there are others who think that it is not a fact at all. I find it reasonable to hold that life emerged from the physical world; that all known forms of life have a common origin and that theories that originated with Darwin satisfactorily explain much of the qualitative and some of the quantitative features of the natural world. I think that the explanatory power of natural evolution carries over, to some extent, to the social world which is not distinct from the natural world. The possibilities that and the ways in which evolution may occur at the physical level is not treated to a significant degree in Evolution and Design Naturally, evolutionary explanation and functional explanation must complement one another For those who hold that evolution is not a fact, it is still possible to view evolutionary explanation introducing economy into understanding Despite my enthusiasm for material explanation – evolutionary and functional – I have not found it to be the end of even scientific understanding. After I wrote Evolution and Design in 1987, I spent many years looking for a more comprehensive but still universal and unifying view. That has culminated, now, in 2003 search culminated in Journey in Being June 1998: From the Revised Original Introduction Evolution and Design is, first, an open vision of my world. It is a view - and a record of my experience, learning and entry into a dynamics - of my being, my vision and my process in the universe of being, vision and process. Being, knowledge and action are not seen as separate and part of the origin of Evolution and Design is in my own drives to knowledge, knowing and action The first philosophy of Evolution and Design is evolutionary It has a view - or metaphysics - that sees the world in an evolutionary process Its epistemology, the text itself, and the concept of text are informed by the metaphysics As knowledge and its instruments are part of the world, so are its processes within the processes of evolution. That does not imply that the nature of knowledge is fully determined by any a priori specified evolutionary base Imagination and discrimination - hypothesis, deduction and criticism...experiment and testing...i.e., proper criteria - must be applied in drawing conclusions from evolutionary - or any - considerations. But the criteria are the means to the ends of validity, truth, pragmatics, groundedness, relatedness, being in The criteria of epistemology are applied to epistemology. This generalizes: in grounding knowledge, we are required to ground epistemology, metaphysics, knowledge and its disciplines - which include evolution - and the nature of our being. Knowledge is of the world - not alien or impressed. We are required to consider the elements also in totality and in their relations Evolution is not employed as a doctrine. Concepts and science of evolution are critiqued. This starts with biology and is extended to the realm of the universe and the mind. In metaphysics, or knowledge of the universe or of being as a whole, evolution - that is origins - is used to show relations among the elements of the universe, being and knowing Evolution and Design writes this philosophy and seeks to elaborate it in all spheres As an open account it is not limited to one paradigm. The first emphasized paradigm was evolutionary. Other trends - existential, idealistic... - appear. It is not limited to paradigmatic knowledge and seeks grounding in being and action. These trends, begun in Evolution and Design, continue in my thought and life and especially in the natural consequences of my life and thought as expressed in the tentatively titled Evolution, Design and the Absolute. The latter work - in progress - takes Evolution and Design and the alternate and perhaps inclusive principles to natural and logical conclusions If it were possible for me to provide a full meaning, with implications, origins and sources of my thought in a brief preface then the text that follows this preface might be unnecessary. Brief elaboration of sources and contents...follow Evolution and Design Entertains issues of value, choice and action...and therefore, while not an axiological, ethical, social, political, legal, or educational philosophy per se it cannot and does not seek to avoid implications for meaning and action in these spheres...and therefore it is...A philosophy of and an approach to understanding, action, change and choice, values, planning, organization, and design...At all levels of material, social-cultural, human, and universal processes and institutions Derives from and informs my life, attitudes and action, from my experience, thought and learning, in the worlds of nature, society, mind and learning, and the universal Derives from and informs science...primarily biology, then physics, cosmology, geology, and the sciences of mind Derives from and informs philosophy and humanities [The language of dialog may be preferred to that of derivation, information, and instruction. But to force a view of relationship on the disciplines is a prior sin...] Sees and derives from the elements of being as intimately related, the elements of process - knowing, design and action - as being intimately interactive...and develops, deploys and generalizes these relationships This process is reflected in the outline of the contents: 1. Origins, 2. Evolution, 3. Philosophy, 4. Knowledge, 5. Design, 6. Action, 7. Learning, 8. The Future The same process informs ontology and epistemology. Ontology finds being as diverse, structured, related and in process between equilibria and transition. Epistemology finds the unity of knowledge to be multi-modal and possessed of degrees rather than polarizations in the mode of truth That the work is evolutionary implies that it is open. The openness also derives from my attitudes. Complementary and alternate paradigms are sought, integration is sought but contradiction - where resolution is not known - is allowed, all modes, levels, categorizations of being, process, knowing - implicit and formal - are sought for impact, inclusion, instruction, juxtaposition in harmony or in opposition and contradiction Paradox may shake our foundations of knowledge but can only illuminate being For the future I seek...discovery, learning: alternative paradigms...experience and study of and action within all disciplines, cultures, modes of being and process and through all modes and means of knowing, action...including exploration of dissolution of the distinction - whether apparent or real - between the subject and the object, or between knower and known, or between consciousness-awareness and their contents Related work appears in the following articles and essays Reflections on Metaphysics and the Problems of Consciousness, Assist - on a design for uses of computer systems in my conceptual work, its organization and application, Dynamic Uses of Computers in Universal, Global and Personal Process - and ongoing work on the uses of a computer in conceptual and related work which investigates some aspects of the computer as a dynamic link in these processes...and reflect on the issue of “What is machine intelligence and consciousness?”...”If possible can such intelligence be fabricated or will evolution be necessary?”...”Can intelligence or consciousness be transferred from human to machine?” Evolution and Design contains extended analysis of the processes of knowledge, design and planning. Some projected applications: A support group for work on the different aspects of the Evolution and Design Project as an ongoing work. Establishment as an institute with programs and funding Publication Work on the concept of knowledge resources. Work on an encyclopedia along the lines of the evolutionary or open text. Incorporation of modern computer information storage, processing, and networking Expansion of the institute to a self-supporting enterprise Knowledge, design, planning, and government consulting, application and support ...from the individual to national and world levels, from technical to personal, social, global and universal dimensions Evolution and Design was written November 1986 to March 1987. This was an intense period of study, reflection and writing. The work has eight parts. I called the parts “Areas” since they were each ambitious in scope and relatively independent. Each Area had its own foci, emphases and problems or issues. My thought has traveled far since the original writing. However, except proofing, some minor changes to the section on an evolutionary analysis and extension of Kant's treatment of the synthetic a priori, a new title for Area 7 and addition of a introductory section to Area 8 there are as of this date no changes in the text. This new preface incorporates the essence of the original one and begins to supplement it with information, further elaborated in §8.1, on the trends of my thought since 1987 and on plans for further work and application Before writing the work had been incubating for a long period. This happened originally and without intent - except a call to fullness of being that would later become a principle - or explicit plan in my studies and reflections in a wide variety of fields. This is detailed in Area 1. By 1984 many of the elements were present - engineering, evolution, experience of the natural world at first hand through living in it, philosophy, and feeling of a need for a universal perspective on knowledge and human and social processes. Summer of 1985 to summer 1986 was a period of study on a wide variety of topics on evolution, planning and design in engineering, other professions, government and human and social process The inspiration for the structure and contents of the work came during two weeks at an isolated lake cirqued by ridges and peaks two thousand feet above, in the Trinity Alps Wilderness in Northwestern California, September 1986. I have returned to this place of magic many times and sought and received renewal and inspiration. I am in awe of and yet at home in such places Upon return to my home - shared with good friends - in a shaded green place just off Dow's Prairie Road in McKinleyville, California I felt ready to write a brief synoptic essay. That was October 1986. Then, in November, I began the work of research, extensive library study, reflection, synthesis and writing. What was planned as short, preparatory essay manifested itself as Evolution and Design Anil Mitra Page NumberingThe current version is essentially the original manuscript, word-processed by my friend Joan Elk on a Mac 512K, then imported to my Pentium PC and word processed with Microsoft Word 97 - with the minor changes noted above in “origins.” Conversion to HTML was accomplished by custom macros and conversion to HTML by Microsoft Word 97. It was then necessary to make a number of fine adjustments manually There are two sets of page numbers: Normal page numbering for the word-processed version - the numerals are on the lower margins of the pages. Arabic numerals begin with the first page of Area 1, which is page 1. Pages before page 1 are assigned lower case Roman numerals. This system of numbering is unnecessary in the HTML version - the document you are now reading - and is, therefore, currently omitted The page numbering of the original hand manuscript is retained. These allow the use of the original page number references without need for update. Update is a possible task for the future and would be part of major revision. Since I plan a successor, Evolution, Design and the Absolute, that revision may never be done by me. The successor text would include the entire essential and what I see as valid ideas of Evolution and Design - with appropriate revision. Portions of text may also be incorporated- again with possible revision The original page numbers are placed at the right margin of the text at the locations of the original page breaks. The form is as follows: 3-25 Section and Paragraph NumberingIn the original hand manuscript the text was divided into Areas and sub-areas or sections. The section numbering has been retained except that some of the lower level section identifiers were alphabetic. An example of an old section “number” is 3.5.6.B. The alphabetic marking has been replaced by numeric marking thus the new number for the same section would be 3.5.6.2 Some paragraphs and low-level sections were marked by single numbers or letters. These have been replaced by section numbering that is consistent with the higher level numbering. The single letters have been replaced by numbers and then single numbers replaced by the multiple numeral format so that the section number identifies all the higher level sections to which the sub-section belongs. An attempt has been made to update all cross-references but this may not be complete and therefore the old numbering has been retained along with the new. Thus if a paragraph or low level section within 3.5.6.1 was B, then the new number would normally be 3.5.6.1.2. However, in order to also retain the old numbering, it would be 3.5.6.1.2 [B]. Reference to this would then be either 3.5.6.1.2 or 3.5.6.1.2 B or, within 3.5.6.1, just B While the sequential section numbering was consistent, a number of variants were used in the individually numbered paragraphs. Therefore the previous paragraph is a guide rather than a complete map
1-4 1 INTRODUCTION, OBJECTIVES, STRUCTUREGENERAL ORIGINS AND OBJECTIVES… AND ORIGINS IN MY LIFE AND COMMITMENTS I have always enjoyed understanding at deep and broad levels, and I have enjoyed the effort related to understanding. As a child, I had an unusual curiosity. In high school, I preferred to study the material directly from the sources over listening to instruction. My main interests were chemistry, poetry, and avid reading, in addition to sports and outdoor activities In college, my propensities led to a sequence of nonsystematic, but enjoyable and valuable excursions into engineering, mathematics, physics, and evolutionary biology, into the foundations of these topics and into logic and philosophy. My interest in philosophy was quite general. In graduate school, I was able to significantly further my technical skills in mathematics, physics, and the applied sciences of engineering - including computer implementation of modeling approaches. I continued to browse in the literature of biology, logic, philosophy and foundations As a member of the research and instructional faculty at a number of universities, I continued to develop these interests, and to do original studies in the development and application of mathematical 1-5 and computer methods in physical science. I came, through other associations, to develop interests in individual development and psychology, social sciences and sociology, and in the nature and values of religious experience. At this time, I also began to concern myself with the modes of perception and the ways in which knowledge is formulated and incorporated in the organism. Throughout this development, my favorite subjective experiences in art have been in music, literature and poetry, theatre and cinema. I have had occasional creative experiences in theatre, poetry and writing. Related to these were my direct experiences with mystery and beauty in nature and cosmos, and the manner in which the organism, that is, my body attunes itself to the rough and primitive natural environments into which I enter To this point, my development was formally nonsystematic in the sense that I never had a perfectly complete and well-defined program. The level of my achievement in the different disciplines was uneven. However, my development has been characterized by the following. [1] An informal and evolving rational and intuitive sense of coherence and purpose. This is undoubtedly derived, in part, from culture. [2] A continued interest in the use and meaning of my studies and researches. [3] A diffuse sense of beauty and mystery in the enterprise. [4] An emphasis, to a significant degree, on breadth, logic, foundations and synthesis, and fundamental problems in the nature and 1-6 limitations of mind [“mind”]. [5] Undoubtedly the items use, meaning, aesthetics and logic are related. I originally felt this idea to be true, but later developed it as a formal thesis. This means that function, value, beauty and consistency are not competing values when each is truly understood in relation to the whole picture. [6] A broad understanding of the methods and foundations of science. The emphasis has been on physics, but a well-developed outline in evolutionary biology is also included. Such an outline should refer to physical, cosmological, geological, and social evolution. [7] The emphasis of my first serious understanding - beginning at college - was in the area of natural science and mathematics. This understanding was later broadened through my interest in psychology, sociology, philosophy - east and west, and religion. [8] Development of original ideas, systems of ideas, synthesis and anticipation in the areas of interest In 1984, I decided that a clear statement of the fundamental issues, with which I was dealing, was essential to full development. I felt that it would also be valuable to make a careful assessment of the fundamental problems of humankind. Such feelings were not new, except for the essential way in which I now felt them. At this point, I was working at Humboldt State University and the prevailing environment there has a valuable influence on this development. Unfortunately, the mode of operation and the expectation at Humboldt was to import ideas from elsewhere. I found this stifling. In June 1985, my connection with Humboldt was severed, and this offered me an opportunity for careful and systematic development of my ideas and interests 1-7 This did not begin immediately. Further assembly of the constituent concepts was essential. I did not realize this explicitly and formally at the time - but, although I felt a need for organization, I must have felt that I had the full system of concepts and the organizing principles for which I was looking. These principles would synthesize the different parts It turned out that, in addition to the very general concepts of philosophy, value and knowledge, which, to that point, represented the dimensions of my development, including planning and anticipation, the additional concepts of design, action, and evaluation, were necessary I found two organizing principles. The first is social process or problem solving which organizes and displays value, knowledge [and philosophy], design both formal and reflective, action, evaluation, and feed back as a unity The second is evolution which organizes and displays [1] social process as a method of adaptation involving elements of conscious foresight, intelligence and choice, and of blind trial and error; and [2] social process as coming out of and a unity with physical, cosmological, geophysical, geo-chemical, biological and human evolution Before turning to a description of these developments, I should point out that unity does not imply identity. Each level of abstraction omits some facts of experience. Nor does the truth of a system of abstraction imply completeness. It is thus absurd to say that life is completely physical - even if the physical level of description were true and exact. It could turn out that biology is completely founded in physics but that 1-8 foundation might involve some new biology and some new physics. Until the foundation is performed, we have neither need nor reason to believe it to be true, or untrue. This is the essential reason for not subscribing to materialism - determination of biology and sociology by physical science, or to biological determinism - determinism of social structure or behavior by biology. Choice and potential are among the primary facts of experience. It would not be inconsistent for social behavior to be completely based in material behavior but only partially based in biology of organism. The fact of the partial basis could be explained as the interaction of biology with a complex environment, and the fact of choice could be explained by incompleteness of “mind” or of biology or, perhaps, by an intrinsic indeterminism at the material level The development and synthesis of my ideas as an organic system will now be described. In this system of my ideas, no indication of finality is intended [1] In June 1985, I decided to formulate an outline of the modern engineering disciplines and to form an estimate of basic or essential activities of engineering. This would provide a basis of my further development in engineering and match my interest in the foundations of the knowledge-oriented disciplines. Engineering is more directly oriented toward action than are the humanities and sciences. I decided that the essence of engineering is design - the transitional process between knowledge and action. This was the first step, the recognition that the central process and problem of engineering is design [2] I decided to study the 1-9 process of design. As I did this, I came to recognize that the application of the design process is of much more general than I had previously thought. This becomes clear when design is viewed as problem solving. The fundamental process is equally applied to personal situations, technical problems, social, global and environmental problems - to design, planning, and policy analysis. The idea of problem solving is not new. It goes back, undoubtedly, to the origins of humans. However, there is an array of modern techniques that can be used in design. First is our knowledge and knowledge in general, of system behavior - the sciences, modeling and experiment. Second is a collection of methods for determining maximal performance according to criteria. Third, is the management of the design process; this involves determination of the criteria, streamlining the steps in design - optimality of the design process, and enhancing the creative response through psychology. I found that there have been deep studies of the problem solving process in the literature of cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence. I decided to collect information on the design process, on application. I decided to think carefully about the nature of the design process [3] I also began to reflect on the role of design in the total social future. I recognized the existence of a fundamental social process that begins with value formation and knowledge, which lead into design and is completed by action and feed back. I recognized the fundamental unity of these processes: design links thought and action, design completes what knowledge begins, knowledge is potential design, knowledge is a process of design applied to states of knowledge. I continued to 1-10 collect information and to reflect - and as I did, so my concept of design deepened and evolved. That is, in addition to new areas of application as outlined above, my concept of design came to include new spheres of human and non-human activity. The sequence of concepts of design is discussed below EVOLUTION AND DESIGN - LEVELS AND RELATIONS - ORIGINS OF OBJECTIVESThe first meaning of design is the process of coming up with a plan to solve a problem. It involves seeing and creating viable alternatives and in making choices from among the alternatives. Related means of design are the completed plan, the completed implementation, the relationship - in the senses of function, value, aesthetics - of the parts to each other and to the completed whole. My focus is on the process of design. This is the creative process; it includes the formal and informal techniques of problem solving and aesthetics and, in its full sense, the ideas of dance and of destruction. Dance, in this sense, includes action - especially action in the face of ignorance and despair. To have full meaning for humans, design must balance the ways of Apollo and Dionysius, and the ways of Vishnu and Shiva. Design, the process, includes being. What we learn about the process from various designs can be generalized and used in other designs. One of the aims of this work is to display the common elements of design - some of the models of design - and their application in a variety of situations, including definition and resolution of the fundamental problems. At the same time, one of the ideas of dance is the intrinsic value of each situation - we will not always find formal design appropriate. This is the first meaning of design Design uses knowledge, is used to act toward solution, and thus integrates human and social institutions in the composite and looping or repetitive process: thought-value-knowledge --> design --> action --> reflection and learning. As I 1-11 made this realization, my formal interest in sociology, politics, technology, art, religion and philosophy deepened. These disciplines would provide a background to a careful definition of the problems of humans, and to a provision and evaluation of solutions. The unity of the processes of knowledge now becomes clear; in facing so complex a situation as the problems of humans, knowledge and design must condition each other - despite the value of their separation. The value of their separation includes division of labor - efficiency, division of power, creation of a fund of knowledge, and a method of design. There is also a unity of these cognitive processes with action; they are a type of internal action which anticipates the total process of humans and environment; they take the place of additional external action which would otherwise be required; this accomplishes the objectives of humans with minimal expense of resources. This unity has an existential value: against alienation. A second objective of this work is to study and display this unity and its value, and the elements of the unity. The total process knowledge --> design --> action is a more inclusive design: total process of society as a mode of negotiation and being in the environment. This is a second meaning of design New designs [and knowledge] include new elements and new variations of successful ideas. The new aspect is often discovered through non-conscious factors. A new design must be implemented before we can be sure it will work. This is because knowledge and design processes are not “perfect” - they improve the chance of success but do not guarantee it. Some designs work, others fail. The information from success or failure can be used to improve designs through learning: knowledge --> design --> action --> learning, or, simply, design --> learning. Thus both variation and selection in design involve rational [conscious, choice of future] and blind [trial and selection] factors. The pace of change is sometimes slow [small modifications], and sometimes fast [new idea]. This is a third meaning of design: evolutionary design. A third objective of this work is to display evolution in design, and to show how an understanding of this factor can lead to better design 1-12 The idea of evolution that I will use is emergence of stable order by processes that are not improbable. This would rule out the chance formation of a complex structure through proximity of its constituents. It implies that we should demonstrate reasonable mechanisms of formation. This is an idea of evolution also includes more than the processes of a universe, an earth, and its life and society There are three parts to this idea. [1] Stability means existence for a period greater than transience. [2] Emergence of ordered structures from an environment. This includes the import of order from the environment. If the environment is ordered or if it contains ordered structures, the emerging order of evolution must be new. There is nothing in the idea of evolution which implies slow change or increasing order; rapid change and decrease in order are also included; such as, catastrophe and devolution [e.g., DNA\RNA --> virus]. [3] The processes of evolution are not improbable. Stated positively this means that we should be able to demonstrate reasonable mechanisms for evolution, that the mechanisms of evolution are the known mechanisms of nature [whose natural rates are the rates of evolution]. This does not rule out indeterministic mechanisms or random descriptions of mechanisms, provided the probability is sufficient. Randomness is not a property of events or of processes although we do refer to random events and random processes. The word random refers to our knowledge of a situation and not of the situation itself. A random occurrence is one we would describe in terms of probabilities. In this discussion, I will not need to refer to the concepts of indeterminism or randomness. However, there must be some qualification on the extent to which it can be shown that emergence of a complex order proceeded by known mechanisms of nature. We do not know the facts of such evolution or the mechanisms of nature [especially in their detailed unfolding] sufficiently well. Hence, evolutionary theory must confine itself to a generalized description of mechanisms applied to an abstract of evolutionary history. For example, it would be useful to know that evolution of complex biological structure by natural processes acting over the history of earth is reasonable even if only in outline. It would be valuable to know if the principles of quantum or classical and other behavior of matter would be sufficient. In addition, since the elementary processes of nature show, apparently, no intrinsic orientation toward order, we would like to show that order is be produced despite this indifference. Success or failure in this will affect confidence in our understanding of the basic natural processes 1-13 The primary or driving mechanism of evolution is change or variation. Some systems have accessible ordered states through which they pass during evolution. Examples are [A] alignment of the planets, and [B] spontaneous separation of air into its constituent gasses. These examples of emergence of order do not constitute evolution. In either case the order is very transitory; the second case though possible “in principle” is too improbable to reasonably occur over the history of Earth; therefore, variation alone is insufficient for evolution. A second mechanism is preferential stability or selectivity. When the new ordered states are stable [for a period of time, in the environment which may contain other ordered structures], this increases the likelihood that a system which passes through such a state will stay there; or, in a large environment the population of ordered structures of the given type will be relatively high. Variation and selection explain a number of ordered structures in nature; on the cosmic scale: galaxies, stars, solar systems; on an intermediate scale: relaxation oscillations in nature, fluid convection patterns; on the microscopic level: elementary particles, atoms, molecules Variation and selection are sufficient for evolution. Other mechanisms enhance the variation and selection. A third mechanism of evolution, one that enhances variation and delays selection, is reproduction. This is the mechanism by which an ordered structure can copy its structure into the elements of the environment and so, even though the physical entity which carries the order ceases to exist, the order itself is perpetuated in time and space. In order to be a factor in evolution, reproduction must copy variations. Reproduction enhances the ability of nature to access complex stable ordered states by enhancing the cumulative effect of variations. This does not rule out large individual variations: the idea of evolution includes that large changes can come about by combinations of large individual variations and cumulation of small variations. Thus, structures that reproduce are at an obvious advantage over those produced by raw variation 1-14 One of the basic questions of biology is the origin of reproduction. The mechanisms that produced reproduction must include raw variation and selection; these mechanisms are pre-biological and represent one area of interface between physical and biological science. With reproduction, individuals and populations are the bearers of order: individuals and populations are “units” of evolution. Without reproduction, the individual is the unit of evolution; this excepts “cooperative phenomena” - perhaps such phenomena are the origin of reproduction. In addition to biological systems, reproduction occurs in growth of crystals, societies, and ideas A fourth mechanism of evolution, which enhances variations, is interaction between ordered structures of similar and different types. Such interactions produce complex and composite structures to produce new variations. Some examples are [1] symbiotic structures, [2] composite structures: very weak interactions - populations; weak interactions - societies; intermediate interactions - colonies; strong interactions - organisms1; [3] sex, [4] mapping of space-time and material structure of environment into organism - instinct, knowledge, consciousness, mind. [5] The complex of interacting organisms in an environment also moves toward a stable ordered state, thus giving environment the character of an organism [though not a biological one as usually understood]. This opens further possibilities for variation and selection; we could consider the sun in the same light or, since the sun is hardly affected by biological evolution, regard it as one of the drivers of variation The mechanisms of evolution are nature traversing through complex, but natural, paths to nature's own complex, stable and ordered states. To those who seek natural explanations and theories, these mechanisms seem necessitated by the improbability of order in a neutral or chaotic universe. This improbability is the same as saying that most states in the universe are unordered. Perhaps, however, ordered states are more common than imagined and the explanation of evolution is to be found in a composite of [1] mechanisms that access the complex, stable, ordered states and [2] the frequency of such states One of the objectives of this discussion of evolution has been to provide a general framework for the understanding of design, its different - but related - meanings, and its role in and relation to evolution. It has been implied, and it will be 1-15 seen, that the concepts are so close and interwoven that a full consideration of one must include the other. I will now summarize the general framework The nature of evolutionary theory is to understand the existence of complex physical and biological structures as elements of nature, nature as understood by humans; hence, theory is a programmatic toward understanding. Evolution is the emergence of order by natural processes. We usually understand these natural processes to have no preference for the end product of order; however, there is a natural tendency2 of a system that comes close to an equilibrium state to go to that state. The evolutionary equivalent of this is the idea that variations have no preference for order: selection provides the preference; the process-equilibrium and variation-selection ideas are rough approximations to each other, and the separation into non-preferential variation and preferential selection is, perhaps, an approximate3 but useful idea which preserves the notion of “blind” nature. The fundamental mechanisms of evolution are then, variation and selection. In the standard version, variation shows no preference for order. Derived mechanisms are reproduction and interaction. The explanation of evolution is to be found in its mechanisms and in the distribution and density of stable ordered states. A fourth objective of this work is to develop evolution as a framework for understanding the different levels of design. Those levels identified so far are specific problem solving, social process, and evolutionary design Evolution is emergence of stable order; the essential mechanisms are variation and selection; in the standard version, variations have no preference for order and selection is due to causes outside the organism. These statements are undoubtedly approximate: in addition to that pointed out above, the organism is composite [gene, DNA, cell, creature...] and “outside” is ambiguous; also, in a sense, organism is part of environment. On the account of the standard version, evolution is said to be “blind” to its destiny; this also being approximation. However, even if evolution is initially blind, it evolves rationality and design that modify subsequent evolution. Perhaps rationality 1-16 and design are an alternative description of some aspects of mechanism, or perhaps both rationality and mechanism are approximations to the same actual process and perhaps rationality and design are the evolved expression of [possible] small scale tendencies of variations toward order. What is being said amounts to this: If evolution and design are defined according to their standard meanings then, although the language of the definition makes them appear distinct, and if the above considerations are valid; the actual processes are not, in fact, distinct. For, in the standard version, [1] evolution is emergence of order by [blind] natural process, and [2] design is at least partial use of rationality in variation and selection; and rationality is consciousness, knowledge [perhaps symbolic knowledge], prediction of alternate futures [variation] and choice [selection] of viable, good. Better, or best ones. Now, evolution can evolve design - our evolution has - and universal evolution therefore involves design. Therefore, the idea of design at the universal level is not paradoxical. Even if we do not need this concept to explain our experience, these factors suggest the implicit and explicit presence of design in evolution. However, if we accept that “the separation of evolution into variations that have no preference for order and selections that prefer order” is an approximation, then evolution is design. At the same time real design is [rational] variation and selection which is [the essence of] evolution. Hence “design is evolution” - meaning that the two concepts are much closer than is commonly thought. I will make a thesis that they are identical. Of course, I do not present this as a definite conclusion because of questions about the premises and the language used in forming the conclusion A fifth objective of this work is to consider carefully the meaning and truth of design is evolution; this is included in the fourth objective which can be restated: study the relationships of the different meanings of evolution and design. This naturally includes a study of evolution; and approximate meaning: evolution is emergence of order by natural process; design is use of rationality in variation and selection; and rationality includes knowledge and value choice. [Different interpretations are appropriate, as approximations, at different stages of evolution.] Although design is evolution can be questioned, there are strong similarities of their fundamental meanings, and this provides a fourth meaning of design. A sixth objective of this work is to study this meaning of design in its most general and basic sense - it includes all the other senses, for design as problem solving grows out of human intelligence, grows out of evolutionary biology 1-17 as does design as social process. Also the basic mechanism evolution is variation and selection is a basic paradigm of problem solving4 [trial and error, better called trial and selection; induction and deduction; hypothetico-deductive; creativity and criticism; synthesis and analysis]. However, a fundamental meaning of design as evolution is as follows...design immersed in evolution...evolution immersed in design...history and evolution are intertwined...values have real sources One of the ideas inherent in this discussion has been the unity of the human and universal processes. The seventh objective of this work is to study, understand, and experience5 and to display this unity. This is essentially the same as the sixth objective I now realize what I have set out to do - synthesize all worldviews of being and action. I also realize the enormity of this. I want it. It will make me happy, but [a] I must approach it intelligently and [b] I need help. This is the eighth and final objective of this work. This is essentially the same as the sixth and seventh objectives. Eight objectives of this work and four concepts of design have been stated. Out of this synthesis, I hope something new comes. In addition to insight, it seems to me that I do have points of view that have originality and that are worth sharing 1-18 1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF DESIGNIntroduction to the Concept of Design DESIGN - Resource intensive tasks can be made efficient by defining the task to be design and implementation: Process of coming up with a plan, planning Important activity: industrial design, social design, planning and reconstruction, personal planning, policy analysis, strategic planning Rational choice making and decision analysis Transition from thought to action As a verb, design is the characterizations above, the process, and as noun, is the completed plan or the structure of the implementation As an element in process and change [in human activity] is variation and selection, design works by direction variation and selection, by rationalizing selection Problem solving [objective design], search, information gathering [objective-free or general design] Aspects are management, procedural, technical, psychological [creation, invention], analytical 1.1.1 Four Levels of DesignThe list of descriptions above suggests generalized concepts of design; example, the idea of a process “thought-knowledge --> design --> action” suggests a new meaning. Design is thought --> decision --> action. Such generalized meanings will provide insight for [and into] design. Generalized definitions are needed 1.1.1.1 Level I - Problem solving and objective designProblem solving and objective design [objectives reasonably clear or can be clarified, that is, conscious design...This is the meaning above 1.1.1.2 Level II - Social and human processSocial and human process = knowledge and thought --> design --> action 1.1.1.3 Level III - Evolutionary designEvolutionary design = Level I and learning or feedback and correction = dynamic design Or, Level III = Level II and learning or feedback and correction = social change and evolution 1-19 Learning and correction are needed because of [1] imperfection in design and Knowledge6 - the problem solving element, and [2] changing environment and circumstances - the dynamic element Designs [Dionysian and Apollonian] are the fundamental social activity of Levels I, II, and III 1.1.1.4 Level IV - Design is evolutionDesign is evolution Design as evolution [pp. 11 - 17]. Similar to choice as mechanism, or design as evolution and... choice as mechanism and Design and evolution as the essential action of the universe Cosmological - physical - geophysical - chemical Biological Human - social - mind or mental - consciousness Universal Shows the origins of Levels I, II, III; provides lessons in value and method for these levels and indicates the essential nature of these levels of design Provides meaning, for the unity is anti-alienating; shows unity [interaction] of all process Meaning in process [Dionysius] vs. meaning in ends [Apollo] Design is evolution as emergence of order Levels I, II, III as localization, specialization Variation and selection 1-20 1.2 OBJECTIVES FOR THIS WORKThe “General Statement” [pp. 4 - 17] is a narrative description of my objectives for this work, how my ideas evolved through different levels to include universal process, and how this grew out of my early interests. Here: an organized, more formal statement 1.2.1 FORMAL STATEMENT1.2.1.1 Objective 1 - Design as fundamental in society and universeOBJECTIVE 1. Design as fundamental in society and universe, and for the individual. Ideas of design, development of the ideas, uses; relations, unities and transitions among the ideas and characterization [Section 1.1], and use of these relations, etc., in elucidating the different ideas; evolution, process, interaction as unifiers 1.2.1.1.1 Idea A - Practical and objective designIDEA A: Practical and objective design; design as specific problem identification and solution; design as search, information gathering 1.2.1.1.2 Idea B - Social process as designIDEA B: Social process as design; design [noun and verb] and foundation [noun and verb] of society and social - group process 1.2.1.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in designIDEA C: Evolution in design. From Idea A, dynamic design [dynamic due to incomplete adaptation and changing circumstance]. From Idea B, social evolution The process of design evolves. This is analogous to “evolution of evolution.” 1.2.1.1.4 Idea D - General evolutionIDEA D:; unity of process; design as evolution, as variation and selection; resolution of the dualisms: matter vs. consciousness, materialism vs. choice Evolution of the process of design is an example of “evolution of evolution.” 1.2.1.2 Objective 2 - Use of designOBJECTIVE 2. Use of design: process; strategy; use of the relations among the levels: analogies, possibilities, values, alienation; applications Focus on fundamental problems...the fundamental problems of humankind, of global process...material and existential problems. Focus on design in definition and resolution of these issues 1-21 1.2.1.3 Objective 3 - Design as universal processOBJECTIVE 3. Design as universal process. Criticism, synthesis, continuing development and evolution of all personal and worldviews7, intrinsic and organismic attitudes of being, action and motivation. This includes ideal religion, “dance” - play, destruction - devolution Unfolding of consequences, considerations on the fundamental problems of humankind 1.2.2 DISCUSSION AND FURTHER CONSIDERATIONSThe objectives are equipotent development of design is not different from use; development is potential or generic use; development incorporates being, in full, where, previously, in technology material considerations dominated. Practical design is not apart from universal process Design has many meanings - design as cosmic creation, design as day to day, bootstrap, hanging-on to existence. Design is responsible to the whole. Knowledge is [conceived as] responsible to itself. Therefore, knowledge can seem pure: hence its appeal as sophistication. But even in the halls of academic sophistication in the Western world, design has come of age - a return to the engineering curriculum; the development of problem solving [and its equivalence to concept formation] within cognitive science and artificial intelligence studies; the clamor within the towers of ivory to solve “practical” problems 1.2.2.1 Objective 1 - objective designOBJECTIVE 1. There is a need, from the limited point of view of objective design of different characterizations and generalizations. The unities and relations among the various levels provide insights. Some examples, [1] the generalization design --> social process provides perspective and value for 1-22 objective design and extends the range of applications of the objective design-problem solving process; shows a unity of the social processes, shows the mesh and to a degree shows each phase of social process as a model of the total process. [2] The relation objective design --> objective design implies a self-relation: what is the optimum sequencing and creative enhancement of design; what is the optimum level of resources to be allocated to design. This suggests an infinite regress and, indeed, this question must be handled dynamically as the character of the particular problem unfolds. Such questions are questions of management of design, or design of design [3] Various aspects of knowledge impinge on design; this can be seen as an aspect of the relation design, « social process, since production of knowledge and knowledge are aspects of the process; the branches of technical science and mathematics are useful in modeling behavior of systems for design; aspects of management and cognitive science - artificial intelligence are useful in modeling - enhancing design itself. [4] The concept of evolutionary design provides a perspective on the further generalization objective design --> evolution = universal process; although not always explicitly recognized, evolution must always be a part of design for two reason: first, imperfections in design and knowledge, and, second, formal completion is not actual completion. Therefore, Idea C, below, should be a part of Ideas A and B - and in actuality, it is [5] The equivalence design =? evolution gives insight in view of the meanings, evolution = emergence of order by natural processes and incorporation of rationality in variation and selection. This gives reciprocal insight into the problem-solving nature and search aspects of design and evolution. In addition, values for design are provided: e.g., variety and diversity. Others should be sought. These would include the meaning and value of a search for and cooperation among the levels of evolution and design. The relation shows the unity of the design, social process [for example, by demonstrating a common origin] 1-23 and provides new meaning for both design and evolution. Some of these meanings have been discussed in the General Statement, and in the essay “Life, Unity, Meaning”8. It is probable that we can never construct a single finite rational scheme of design that would match evolution [Gödel-type arguments]: I think not - at least in principle [considering evolutionary automata]. This means, first, evolution is “greater” than rational system [obviously]; second, organism is greater than rational system; but not, in itself, that organism is greater than rationality. Rationality = the faculty which produces rational systems _ a collection of rational systems 1.2.2.1.1 Idea A - Objective design is a fundamental human and social processIDEA A: Objective design is a fundamental human and social process 1.2.2.1.2 Idea B: Objective design generalizes to social processIDEA B: Objective design generalizes to social process; since the world and universe is a web of connections, other parts of the social process could equally generalize. However, in various senses design is natural for this: it is a more flexible concept than knowledge or value. In its original form, it incorporates knowledge or elements of knowledge. It bridges knowledge-thought and action and this leads to the ideas of analysis and experiment 1.2.2.1.3 Idea C - Evolution in DesignIDEA C: The idea evolution is intended to include non-rational and blind elements in variation and selection; incremental, new and large variations are included 1.2.2.1.4 Idea D - General EvolutionIDEA D: I am concerned to see the unity9, the universal pervasions of the dimensions of being [inasmuch as these are not mere artifacts of language], the resolution of the dualisms directly [direct vision], but also to understand them rationally. There is a rational explanation of the dual approaches to “knowledge”: there are stages of information processing from perceptual to cognitive [central]; and levels of awareness from organismic to conscious. Mystic vision has to do with processes that are closer to automatic-autonomic-perceptual and whole-organismic rather primarily than fragmentary-conscious-rational; the emotional peak related to direct vision could be universal or a result of the temporary holism of a fragmented self10. These remarks are not in any way prejudicial to the character of direct or mystic vision 1.2.2.2 Objective 2 - Use of DesignOBJECTIVE 2. Some applications include Objective design models, techniques, and use of paradigms developed in one field for critical use in others. In this sense, mathematics is a generalized design tool, and optimization and control theory are specific instances. There are many specific potential applications in product and process development, social and personal planning, and professions of engineering, economics, and medicine. Social process distinguished from objective design by greater multiplicity and ambiguity of objects and higher inclusivity of process. Application in unification of the multiplicity of social effort; special applications in social and global planning and policy, government and government agencies, health, economics, education and national policies for progress in knowledge. Evolutionary design is use of knowledge of evolutionary principles in development of “designs”, resource allocation for design. Design as evolution unification, synthesis, resolution of problems of alienation and inequity, values for more specific levels of design, long-range planning values and synthesis of possibilities and adventure, ideal motivational systems [as James: religion] 1.2.2.3 Objective 3 - Design As Universal ProcessOBJECTIVE 3. Includes all dimensions of design, dimensions of being, modes and categories of knowledge and perception, methods of advance; application to fundamental problems of humans - practical and existential and motivational - balance in dimensions of being; incompleteness of 1-25 top --> down [T --> D], generic --> down [G --> D], self --> out [S --> O], path identification, rational systems, and open [objective free] design and process - evolution - devolution - dance as resolution I realize the enormity of this – it is an adventure...there are adventures, holistic visions and unitary insights to be had to synthesize rational design-scapes. One of the objectives of the synthesis of Objective 3 is: I felt it worthwhile to offer him [the individual] that his personal design for life should include designs, as far as his power permits for his wider system; and information, as far as his knowledge permits, of that wider system. I also felt it valuable to offer for his consideration the idea of search for the broadest and highest of all possible views.11 There is adventure and action in this search. The idea applies to society 1-26 1.3 BASIC THESES AND POSTULATES1.3.1 There is a human motive to the universalThere is in humankind a motive to know and resolve its fundamental practical and existential problems at all levels of organism, individual, society and universe 1.3.2 This resolution requires visionThis resolution requires humankind to see, First, the actual unity of reality and of itself with reality; and to know the essential dimensions of [its] being and processes. This requires openness and flexibility 1.3.3 DESIGN, AS PROBLEM SOLVING IS AN ESSENTIAL ACTIVITY AT ALL LEVELSDESIGN, as problem solving is an essential activity in political process, social planning and various phases of global and local society and environment. This includes the professions, and individual life - civilized, primitive, organic 1.3.4 objective design must include holistic valuesSuch objective design can be performed as a rational activity, but must include holistic values. Good design includes arational approaches - intuitive, organismic, and direct approaches to knowing and creativity 1.3.5 Generalization of the basic design leads to more inclusive and universal processesGeneralization of the basic design process by a clear recognition of its essential elements and context leads to more inclusive and universal processes that include universal evolution. The relationships among the levels of being have significance for the levels of design. This includes provision of truer values for the objective level. The process of inclusion is ongoing and essential and has value for all levels. Understood as design, all levels have application 1.3.6 The idea evolution = design [Level IV] universalizes and hierarchizes design1-27 The idea evolution = design [Level 4] universalizes and hierarchizes design. The universalization could start from any point in the cycle: awareness --> value --> knowledge --> design --> action --> learning or feedback --> awareness. THUS, all processes and activity are synthesized. A SYNTHESIS THAT STARTS FROM OBJECTIVE DESIGN THUS provides a perspective on design and a design perspective overall. Such a synthesis does not unduly exalt design. Alternative syntheses, such as provided in this WORK and perspectives could start from any point in the cycle since each element includes the whole in micro-process form - with different emphases. These “systems” provide approaches to value, knowledge, design, and action and to resolution of the fundamental problems of humankind 1.4 OUTLINEArea 1 and Area 8 are INTRODUCTION and CONCLUSION. Evolution is the genesis of design and social process, and so Area 2, EVOLUTION, is first in the body of the work...A model of social process is: awareness and perception --> reflection --> value --> knowledge --> design and planning --> action, observation, control and implementation --> learning or feedback, evaluation and correction. Contract the first three elements to philosophy to obtain the remaining areas in order: Areas 3 PHILOSOPHY, 4. KNOWLEDGE, 5 DESIGN, 6. ACTION, and 7 EVALUATION 1.4.1 LOGIC OF THE ORDERThere is one point of explanation that deserves further discussion. Philosophy includes universal, foundational and genetic aspects of knowledge and is, in this sense, logically before the specific disciplines of Area 4. However, it would be useful to consider the specific disciplines before philosophy to provide a base on which to build - to provide substance. This is provided in part by placing EVOLUTION before PHILOSOPHY. It is also logically desirable to have PHILOSOPHY before EVOLUTION; this need is partial resolved by placing a second on Abstract Evolution at the head of Area 1. This is an account of the linguistic elements of an outline of evolution and possibilities for basis of evolution in [what is assumed to be] mechanism. This is taken up again in a later sub-area on emergence of order 1-29 1.4.2 COMPLETENESSThe contents, including discussion in this introduction, should provide a complete implementation of the objectives of this work [§1.2] and the General Statement - explicit and implicit, and a complete foundation of the theses and postulates [§1.5] Examination of the detailed outline areas shows that the objectives have been incorporated. The work should do justice to the areas outlined, the stated objectives, and the theses and postulates of this work A full treatment of the theses and postulates will include [1] their foundation; this is done specifically in the General Statement and in PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN [3.5.6]; and [2] their vitality to the objectives and to life. A general treatment of these two items is included throughout the work 1.4.3 WHERE ARE THE OBJECTIVES TREATED?Treatment is throughout the work. The indications below are a partial guide. In the current outline form, it is not the objective to present such solutions to the implied problems as are possible, but to provide a framework, an atlas, to such solutions 1.4.3.1 Objective 1Objective 1. Identifying levels of design General Statement, Areas 1.1, 2, 5 Relations among the levels All areas 1-30 Using the relations 1.2.2 Item l 5.3.3, 5.4.1, 4, 7 Item 2 5.1.0.2, 5.2.1, 5.3.1, 5.3.4.3, 4, 5; 5.3.5.4.9; 5.3.6 - 7; 5.4.1 - 2 Item 3 4, 5.3.5, 5.4.1,2,4; 5.5 Item 4 2, 5, 7 Item 5 2, 3, 5 1.4.3.2 Objective 2Objective 2. Applications of design 1.2.1 Objective 1 Idea A 5 Idea B 4.3.3, 5 Idea C 4, 5, 7 Idea D 2, 3, 6, 7 Fundamental problems Application to definition Item 2.1, 2.5 - 6, 2.8, 3.1,3; 3.5.2,5 - 7; 4.1 - 2; 5.2 - 5; 6.1, 7 1.4.3.3 Objective 3Objective 3. Synthesis 2.5 - 6, 3, 4.1 - 2, 5.3 - 4, 6.1,3 Fundamental problems- toward solution See “Fundamental problems Objective 2” above Item 5.3.1, 4, 7, 5.4.1,3,5; 6.1,3; 7 2-1 2 EVOLUTION AND HISTORY2.1 REASONS TO STUDY EVOLUTIONIn this section, I review my reasons to study and to further the understanding of evolution, personal and social. These reasons are additional to those considered in the Introduction, the General Statement, and the remaining sub-areas under Evolution 2.1.1 As the universal process of unfolding realityAs the universal process of unfolding reality12...evolution provides or can or could provide knowledge and understanding of the total picture; one of three or four ways to see unity and structure Others are direct knowledge and vision, through identity, through homology and analogy or similarity, as part of a larger and total process, through the containing of the larger and total process in micro-process, and a putting back together of the initially separated categories of rational and other process. This discussion shows and gives insight into the bounded or limited nature of rationality and the resolution of this question. The true nature of rationality and knowledge = provision of adaptation [variation, selection and replication, interaction of individual and cultural ideas and solutions] and not certitude [though evaluation of certitude has its appropriate place], as well as resolution through synthesis; and the setting of rationality and knowledge in more comprehensive processes and structures - the existential foundation of rationality and knowing and knowledge 2.1.2 To show levels of understanding:2-2 2.1.2.1 [A] Knowledge As Static2.1.2.2 [B] Knowledge as evolving2.1.2.3 [C] Knowledge As An Element Of EvolutionKnowledge as an element in a more general evolution - a connection between knowledge and knowledge and evolution 2.1.2.4 [D] Evolution Of The Processes Of KnowledgeEvolution of the processes of knowledge and of the integration of modes of knowledge and perception; examples, the model: random association and natural selection against non-adapted cultures and groups --> systematic association and process applied to sub-process and elimination or abeyance [because an idea may be fruitful later] of non-adaptive ideas and knowledge; or the model: random association --> systematic association --> experimental association in the present --> historical and evolutionary associations...an approach to the foundations of the hypothetico-deductive method or method of speculative philosophy [Whitehead] 2.1.3 To establish “the” dimensions of beingTo establish “the” dimensions of being, the categories of language - innate, natural and artificial, the categories of thought - mental and organismic, and the relations among these. I believe there to be some evolutionary convergence and, therefore, provision of at least partial basis. Evolution integrated knowledge - science, history, life, and process 2.1.4 Provides learning for designTo what extent is there evolution in design, design in evolution; to study the evolution of design; to what extent can evolution tell us about the nature of design, the nature of creativity, the “true” nature of humans and value for design; mutual natures and interactions of design and evolution; need to know nature of evolution to use it and study, analyze, criticize its theory to advance it and improve adaptivity of knowledge of it 2.1.5 To study my own life2.1.6 To understand relation of universal to human BeingTo understand relation of Universal to Human Being, the unity of humankind with nature and universe; to provide meaning; René Dubos' “transitions matter --> life --> consciousness are articles of faith and not scientific knowledge” is reasonable but discounts mystical awareness of universal pervasion of matter, life, mind and consciousness, design and choice. The religious motive in the sense of William James' “Religion is the total motivational system of men” in contrast to church, creed, dogma, or opium of the masses 2.1.7 Relation to objectives of the present workRelation to objectives of the present work and theses, characterization of design as stated in the General Statement, and sub-areas Characterization, Objectives, and Theses; specific motives provided in the sub-areas of evolution; specific relations to all the other six Areas 2.1.8 Provides insight into culture and human institutionsStudy of evolution provides insight into culture and human institutions. This includes tradition, values and morals, knowledge and art, language and so on, but this is not a substitute for cultural determinism 2.1.9 As a foundation for designAs a foundation for design 2.1.9.1 [1] Design is within evolution2.1.9.2 [2] Design is analogous to evolutionDesign is analogous to evolution - its mechanism is variation and selection. Successful knowledge and design is reproduced. Foresight can be seen as reading the future from the past or, more accurately, an ability to predict repeating patterns from having adapted to them. Even knowledge can be interpreted this way: the repeating pattern is an ability to negotiate an unknown environment whether in space or in time. This leads us to ask, because it begs the question, what - therefore - are the limitations on such human knowledge? Alternatively, foresight is the repetition of dominant behavior 2.1.9.3 [3] Design is part of evolutionHigher design is evolutionary...and is part of general evolution 2-4 2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF EVOLUTION2.2.1 Origins, continuation and destination of all entities in our physical and speculative universesOrigins, continuation and destination of all entities in our physical and speculative universes... The idea of an entity is something which on some scale of human awareness has existence13 or being. The idea of evolution is that on a longer scale these entities come into existence, maintain existence and have an indefinite-infinite or finite existence. Evolution includes origination, being and dissolution. Included in the idea of being is process. The processes of society have evolved - according to the idea of evolution 2.2.2 Processes of evolution are not different than ordinary processesWhen distinguished from creation, guidance, and destruction ideas, evolution implies that the processes of origination, maintenance, and destination are, in ultimate nature, not different from the ordinary-everyday processes. Such ordinary-everyday processes may include [1] common sense, [2] the elementary processes of physics, and [3] the basic processes of biology. Any final notion of evolution in this sense, and clear and full distinction from creation, etc., must wait for completion of understanding of the ordinary processes. An example of a difficulty is that the ordinary processes as we understand them may themselves be actually evolving. As far as evolution is to be regarded as an open chapter in a dialogue among people committed to truth, it must be regarded as incomplete 2-5 2.2.3 Evolution need not be distinguished from or equated with creation, guidance, or destructionIn general, for various reasons, evolution need not be distinguished from or equated with creation, guidance and destruction. There are a number of reasons For this: [1] knowledge of ordinary processes is incomplete, [2] ordinary processes, because of incomplete knowledge either of their nature or their implications, may have extraordinary implications; e.g., mechanism, usually regarded as indifferent to order may be not so, [3] as a generalization a language of evolution and a language of creation are equivalent; it may be argued that a language of [indifferent] evolution is more economical but it could also be argued that this language is not complete, [4] even if biophysical mechanisms are indifferent to order and biophysical evolution was initially indifferent to direction then, if these mechanisms are complete, they have evolved design. Perhaps the elements of mechanism and design pervade all being. This applies equally to consciousness, choice, mind, etc. [whichever of these concepts are essential]; perhaps they are always there as unity or plurality - sometimes latent to our observation Some of us associate ideas of creation, guidance, and destruction with dogmatism. As far as this is true, it is not essential but a function of present and recent history 2-6 2.2.4 Time and space evolveTime and space are involved in evolution; that is, they evolve. One of the unifying ideas in science, religion and philosophy is that the ordinary processes, when properly understood, on earth and the neighboring parts of the universe, and at this time and over known history extend over all space and time. This idea was used in discussing evolution [2.2.2]. It is equally valid that what we learn from the far reaches should pervade here and now. The ultimate truth is a process of approximation and acceptance based on a balance of information from all places and times in physical and inner universes. We learn from relativity that our notions of space and time are modified; they lose their complete distinction in an accurate mapping of events of reality. Space-time evolves, too, and may have had an origin and may have a destination. The original singularity does not imply an original instant. It may be more mathematical, an artifact of description, than physical - so it does not even imply loss of information. Originations and destinations of the universe we know remain uncertain and ambiguous at the boundaries of its being and our knowledge. Space-time itself need not be a final entity of reality or description but it is currently appropriate [November 1986] to include evolution of space-time or quantum-field as elements of physical and universal evolution 2.2.5 Universal processesThe processes of evolution can be recognized on a number of levels. The “mechanisms” of the levels include greater and lesser degrees of universality 2-7 Detailed understanding of the mechanisms may be approximate. This may hide some universality. Mechanisms that seem to be distinct may be related - equivalent or reducible. Reductionism holds that the mechanisms of one level are reducible to those of “lower” levels. Partial reduction may be the case. Philosophically there need be no ultimate need for assignment of hierarchy and we may regard all mechanisms as universally pervasive until the contrary is demonstrated as necessary. In practice, we recognize the necessity of practical convenience. A set of possible levels: Universal Space-time-field and evolution of physics Universe [“physical”] Galaxy clusters, super galaxies, galaxies and interstellar matter Star and planetary systems Planetary evolution; geology Geo-chemical evolution Biology Human and social evolution
Universal evolution Cartesian-reductionist compositionist-holistic-synergistic and unitarian-reconstructed-hierarchy-mystic approaches are valid and complement one another. Approaches to composition include organization, and process-evolution 2-8 2.2.6 Evolution does refer to specific set of mechanisms or theoriesEvolution - understanding, fact, and theory - is not a specific set of mechanisms or theories...although understanding, mechanisms, and theories are important. It is not some specific hierarchy, although hierarchy may be employed. For example, if we say evolution = variation AND selection and that variation is indifferent to order or adaptation and that selection is without destiny, we mean to attempt an explanation of, say, biology on these grounds; and that this principle has had some degree of success. However, an affirmative extension to the completeness of this mechanism re universal evolution, or even biology, is not intended. Yet, evolution and theory provide mutual insight 2.2.7 Evolution is not a social or political programEvolution [understanding, fact, and theory] is not a social or political program such as social Darwinism. Evolution is intended as a study of natural order and not as a justification of a social or socio-environmental order as natural or right. Undoubtedly we can learn from evolution. We can learn something about possibilities and limitations, about freedom and the use of freedom. However, this information is probably going to be incomplete and should, I believe, be used as input into our designs [and this includes morality and ethics], but not as a substitute for design. Evolution is not a theory of universal, biological, historical, social or human determinism. In the nineteenth century evolution [in the sense of Darwinism] was used as an unfounded justification for a wide variety of beliefs to the extent that “Darwinism came to mean all things to all men.” However, there is a social evolution; and this provides insight into social institutions and processes 2-9 and 2-10 2.2.8 Evolution is not a philosophical programEvolution [understanding, fact, and theory] is not a philosophical program such as emergent evolutions of C. Lloyd Morgan, creative evolution of Henri Bergson, or the evolutionary ideas of Herbert Spencer or George Santayana. The negating characteristics of emergent evolutionism are interesting: evolution is supposed to be not [1] mechanistic, [2] vitalist, [3] preformationist - actualization of pre-existing tendencies, [4] reductionist - reducible to the shuffling of a few elemental elements. Nor do I affirm the affirmative ideas of emergent evolutionism: [1] emergence, [2] levels, [3] novelty...which are, in effect, the affirmation of the process of evolution as an essential category. All of these ideas may be used in either affirmative or negative form, but I do not restrict evolution to any set of them until some completeness and its necessity be demonstrated or laid bare. Evolution and philosophy may enhance each other 2.2.9 Evolution includes emergence of order by natural processesEvolution includes emergence of order by natural or ordinary processes...processes that seem reasonable and non-exceptional. It is the emergence, continuation, and dissolution of the categories of nature and the dimensions, types and processes of being which on first sight seem static. It is implied that a full attempt at understanding of “ordinary” is required, and that the ordinary processes may be in evolution. This evolution includes an understanding of the long-time story of reality, of a record of the events of the human and universal past together. This evolution attempts to use that understanding of this record of reality 2-11 2.2.9.1 Is not essentialBlind mechanism or indifferent variation is not essential, nor is direction or directed mechanism. Mechanism, however, is the more efficient explanation - it is the weaker hypothesis! It has been said that purpose is an illusion since matter, which underlies everything, is mechanistic in its processes. The argument is made in more and in less subtle ways Grant the hypothesis of mechanistic materialism. It then follows that mechanism has given rise to design since animals including humans do design. In 2.6.8, there is much mention of the distinctions among the concepts of teleological, teleonomic and teleomatic processes. It remains that mechanistic matter has given rise to design. However while matter does not design [except when it manifests as certain animals, humans...] it must have something in it that permits it in certain combinations to design. Matter does design Rethink this Regardless, there is no refutation of cosmic teleology. Rather, Darwinism is shown the more efficient hypothesis relative to life. Combined with the success of the physical sciences, the argument is most persuasive and successful in explanatory, predictive, and pragmatic senses but not in an ultimate sense 2.2.9.2 Mechanisms includes:Mechanism - physical and chemical Description of change - variation and selection Guidance - design as in social change and evolution Creation For further discussion of nature and mechanisms of evolution, see §1, especially pp. 10-17 2-12 2.3 ABSTRACT EVOLUTION WITH EXAMPLESIn order to understand evolution, it will be useful to have a sequence or collection of modes of talking about it. None of these modes will be complete or final descriptions and models, but will be use vehicles, each at various levels of generality. This point is made [2.2.6-8, 1.4.2] and an abstract of evolution is provided in the General Statement [pp. 10-17] Models and descriptions of evolution provide examples of evolution, though not “natural” ones...but rather symbolic ones 2.3.1 SpecialCreation and evolution as independent categories 2.3.2 Linguistic / symbolicIncludes language and terminology of evolution and creation, and revisions of natural language to account for new learning regarding being, process and evolution 2.3.3 Mathematical - a special case of the symbolicContinuous Discrete - infinite or finite [von Neumann] 2.3.4 ComputerSymbolic Simulative - approximations to infinite [continuous or other]; finite automata 2.3.5 MechanisticPhysical, chemical, biological, psychosocial 2-13 2.4 HISTORY14First, I must be clear about meaning. [1] This is an account of progression of facts from origins to present, of universes of being and discourse. [2] It is done with the bare minimum of philosophical, linguistic, mechanistic, scientific, etc. base to make the information intelligible. Deviations are permissible provided they are in addition to the minimally interpreted versions. In brief, I am referring to a minimally interpreted account of the universe and not an interpreted account of humankind All levels are to be included: universal --> universal. The history of humankind is a chapter. The classic tables of universal, geologic, social, classical historical evolution are included 2.4.1 Purpose of the sectionBefore understanding, system and philosophy, comes assemblage15 Contemplation --> meditation --> action...followed by iteration and sub-iteration 2.4.2 Meaning of History16The meaning of history here is described above [2.4, 2.4.1]. For reference, a discussion of classical history is attached 2-14 2-15 2.5 ORGANIC ACCOUNTS OF CREATION, GUIDANCE AND DESTRUCTIONPREFACEThe ancients, living and evolving in the world, had powers of observation and body-Earth-knowledge [elsewhere I call this type of knowledge organic or organismic] and were capable of powerful and synthetic insight into cosmography and history - synthetic in its effect on action and social organization and interaction with nature, psyche and universe Positive - Existential knowledge forms a motivational, existential, practical system: centering humankind in the universe, in being [i.e., making humankind feel at home, as in part of and with; not necessarily above or over]; taking care of all dimensions of human existence Negative - incompleteness and dogma DISCUSSIONAn alternative title I had considered is “Mythic Accounts...” but I decided that title would have been prejudicial to an understanding and evaluation of the nature, origin, meaning and value of such accounts. Mythical is often construed as “false” and “irrational”. Of course, mythology does contain non-rational elements and this is precisely one of its values, provided we do not rationalize or make dogma 2.5.1 Reasons for studying organic accounts of creation, guidance and destruction2.5.1.1 [1] As archetypes of originsThey are suggestive of the archetypes of originations and destinations. This is a valuable learning, for further development, and other reasons 2.5.1.2 [2] As archetypes of psycheThey are suggestive of human archetypes and archetypes of psyche and imagination. This, too, is valuable 2.5.1.3 [3] Continuity with the pastThey provide continuity with the past 2.5.1.4 [4] Some functions are still validSome of the historical “functions” of the mythical-organic accounts are still valid - culturally speaking. The images of organic mythology still speak directly to men and women 2.5.1.5 [5] Organic knowledge of human originsThey are sources of organic or organismic and cultural knowledge of human origins and environment expressed in organic symbols; nor are they devoid of rationality 2.5.1.6 [6] Symbolic-organic knowledge is valuableSuch symbolic-organic knowledge has been valuable to men and women in modern times of stress when the liberal and rational approach has failed. There are, it is true, misuses of the organic doctrines, but so are there of the rational. Perhaps we could develop a valuable synthesis. It has been claimed such syntheses have 2-17 been failures or, at best, disappointments. However, by synthesis I do not think of the organic added on to the rational; but, perhaps, the expression of the rational in an organic language or a conditioning of the organic accounts to be consistent with the essence of rational knowledge. In formulating this expression, it will be valuable to remember the limitations of rational synthesis at the boundaries of our universes of experience and knowledge 2.5.1.7 [7] If science should decayIf science and the rational approach should decay, because of either inadequacy or incompleteness, disuse, or, perhaps, a failure of nerve, the organic myths would be of value 2.5.1.8 [8] Insight organic knowledgeThe study will be a source of insight into a form of organic knowledge 2.5.2 FunctionFunction. First, as suggested [2.5.1], as a source of organic or implicit behavioral knowledge [self-knowledge, too] of the total system of humankind's exterior [includes physical, social] and interior [includes rational, emotional] universes. Second, and related to the first, as a motivational system in the interior and exterior worlds. The third function is related to the first two. It is a centering or placing humankind in its place and time - empirically and symbolically. Fourth, related to the second, as a source of cultural and individual archetypes. Fifth, related to the first, as an initial flowering of language and as a source of later development of language in a culture - this would explain a lot of the power of myth and language despite their inadequacies, adaptively or comparatively: they are based, partially, in pre-rational and organic development of individual and culture. There should be nothing essentially prejudicial 2-18 about the notion of pre-rationality. Do we control the function of each cell or origin in our bodies at a rational level? There are essential pre-rational processes. Sixth, and somewhat more specifically, as “narrative expressions of the basic valuations of a religious community”. Note William James' idea of religion as, essentially, the full motivational system of the individual, to which we can add society and culture 2.5.3 Sources17Religion; pre-religion18 Myth and mythology Magic, witchcraft, shamanism, alchemy and astrology, ancestor, hero, nature worship Folklore [George Frazier and others held that the myth of creation occurred at the “highest” stage of development of a culture. This was challenged by Scottish folklorist Andrew Lang, based on accounts of cultures classified as “most primitive”] Art [includes symbolic, visual, tonal, sensual expression] History [possibly - based on analyses of generalized historical accounts] Philosophy and science [surely have organic and holistic elements, however rational] In individuals - creative combination of experience, action, imagination and criticism 2-19, 2-20, 2-21 2.5.4 Types192.5.4.1 [1] CreationCreation by a Supreme Being [masculine type, usually] Creation through emergence [feminine, Earth] Creation by world parents [combined symbols of masculine and feminine] Creation from the cosmic egg Creation by Earth drivers Note: Evolution could be interpreted as several of these creation types. Review major religions and mythical systems. Individuals form their own personal experiential, imaginative, and critical [separate or synthesized] accounts of creation, continuance and guidance, and dissolution 2.5.4.2 [2] Continuance...The kinds are similar to the kinds of creation 2.5.4.3 [3] Dissolution...The kinds are similar to the kinds of creation. Also refer to “Religious Doctrines and Dogmas” including eschatology [the doctrine of last things]. This essay includes modern interpretations - utopian, Marxist, and Revived Christian eschatologies Archetypes Final dissolution Transition Cyclic 2.6 SYSTEMATIC ACCOUNTS OF EVOLUTIONINTRODUCTION:This area is divided into a number of sub-areas. These are of two types: [1] general [as 2.6.1-2] and specific treatments of “the” levels of evolution - according to mechanism or level of organization, from universal [2.6.3] through cosmological, geophysical, geo-chemical, biological and to universal [2.6.13] again. A break in the sequence of areas on levels is 2.6.9 on evolution [emergence] of levels of organization and interactions; this is of Type 1. Interactions are interactions between “individual” to form composite; this provides a key to interactions between levels A general plan, not completely followed, for treatment of the specific levels is: History... Sub-levels; special considerations... Mechanisms... Speculations Connections to other levels 2-23 2.6.1 Reasons for studying systematic accounts2.6.1.1 [1] Centering2.6.1.2 [2] The Study Itself is Part of Human EvolutionThe study is a continuing process in evolution of humankind. Related aspects of the study are philosophy, knowledge, design, action, and evaluation; therefore, furthering of the study is relevant to the same purpose; this applies also to organic accounts of evolution 2.6.1.3 [3] As a Source of Knowledge and Its SystematizationAs a source of knowledge and its systematization in all fields, especially biology 2.6.1.4 [4] Knowledge for DesignKnowledge for design; design within the boundaries of bio-genetic and evolutionary potential in a more general sense; entering, using the evolutionary process; bio-genetic technology; evolutionary technology at other levels; “design with nature”; meaning and direction...value, ethics, morals, standards evolve, too 2.6.1.5 [5] Learning about the processes and meanings of design2.6.1.6 [6]. A continuation of the organic accounts discussion of evolution2.6.1.7 [7] Centering Humankind in NatureCentering humankind in nature; humankind comes from, is, is in, and goes to nature. Fear is natural. Time is a concept and the physical space-time-field levels may tell us about the dimensions of being that are behind the categories of space-time-etc 2.6.1.8 [8] As a Framework for a Unified Concept of EvolutionTo provide a base or framework, along with organic accounts of evolution, for a unified concept or language of evolution... Such a language would probably be very general, and could not be used for specific results, at least as a generalization. Underlying physical mechanisms of various types could be incorporated. This includes any language that would emerge from a general science of order and evolution of order [2.9] The use of unified concepts of evolution would be [1] learning, systematizing and synthesizing for the different levels of evolution and related disciplines of knowledge, and [2] learning for design and the different levels of design 2-24 2.6.2 General comments on evolution and mechanismsEvolution is emergence, continuance and dissolution of recognizably, perhaps, stable and semi-stable structure[s] by non-exceptional processes...processes accessible to understanding20 General mechanisms = uniform language = variation [simple variation from nonbeing, replication, interaction - of some level of being or organization] and selection --> mutual adaptation or evolution of ordered structures and environment. I emphasize again, evolution cannot be understood without including continuance and dissolution, processes of varying rates; although generally we expect magnitude of change to be small compared to total order, and rate of change to be slow compared to intrinsic process and life of the structures. However, we remain open-minded and expect exceptions. We saw in the General Statement that aspects of physical evolution “ simple variation and selection of stable state and to improve the accuracy of the approximation, variation must, or probably should, [based in large-scale physics] include some preference for order [stability] 2-25 Chemical evolution = simple variation and reproduction and selection; and now, with quantum states and thermal, chemical, radiation noise as drivers of variation, non-preferential variation provides [probably] a good approximation. In this context, the theory of neutral variation is of interest. Because of the universal presence of thermal noise, perhaps the bearer of order should be [relatively, perhaps] insensitive to thermally driven variation. This carries over to biology: biological evolution = simple variation [and recombination] and reproduction and interaction [and recombination] and selection. The General Statement discusses implications of interaction We see a trend: physical evolution = simple variation [in some cases replication, as crystals, convection cells] and selection; chemical evolution “=“ physical evolution and [later] reproduction; biological evolution “=“ chemical evolution and interaction. What of social and psychosocial evolution... We can see it as imposed on biological evolution: Social evolution - loose interaction of organisms and variations Arising in complexity of biosocial structure and environment and creative thought, plus possible weak effect of biological change as variation [weak because relatively slow], plus replication by memory and social institution, plus selection of stable groups and populations. Clearly there are many factors in social evolution besides bio-potential 2-26 2.6.3 Universal evolutionUniversal evolution; the unknown; the potential; a dimension of the sacred, in which good and evil remain undifferentiated; nature of being, including being behind categories: space-time-matter-field-life-consciousness 2.6.4 Cosmological evolution. Known and speculative universe211. Evolution as a whole - based on modern knowledge and speculative physics and philosophy; evolution of space-time-field; large and small scale; arrays of universes; evolution of elementary particle or atomic structure, of laws of physics as known to us; questions of origins and destinations and before and after and beyond - meaning of the real mathematical singularities and boundaries of field theory - are they not physical? Nature of space-time-matter field 2. Evolution of the known universe as a whole; origins, destinations and large-scale structure 2.6.5 Evolution of the phenomenal and physical objects of the known universeOrigins, quantum fluctuations, punctuated equilibria, and “excess” matter Super-galaxies and inter- [galactic and stellar] matter Galaxies Stars and other objects; star clusters Star systems; planetary systems Fundamental questions and speculations; stability; connections to geophysical evolution 2-27 2.6.6 Geophysical evolutionOrigin of the solar system Origins and long-term evolution of Earth Development of the layers; origin of Earth's magnetic field; developing nature of land, ocean, atmosphere and outer atmosphere History of oceans, continents and land forms; drivers of continental drift, climate 2.6.7 Geochemical evolutionEarly and continued evolution of chemical forms in land, atmosphere and waters of the Earth Origins of complex chemical environments Origins of replicating molecules Speculations; connection with biological evolution 2-28 2.6.8 Biological EvolutionThis section is long because: 1. I need to learn some of the central ideas of philosophy of biology 2. Philosophy of biology contributes to philosophy of knowledge through a number of new “paradigms” 3. Physics, biology, science of humankind and society are three fundamental sciences. I am familiar with physics and have studied some of the basic aspects of social science, psychology, and anthropology 4. It will be a source of information Some of the information is from Growth of Biological Thought by E. Mayr. Although his ideas are interesting, I do not endorse all, especially his notion of super-biological processes An outline of biology may be useful 1. Variety of life and environment; class 2. Form, process and level of organization 3. Evolution of items 1-2 4. Class according to 1-3 Outline of biological evolution... origins and continuing evolution of the following: Process [and complexity]: Life - biological environment and replicating molecules Form: viruses, prokaryotes, autotrophs, and eukaryotes Diversity: phylogenetic tree - species, kingdoms Information processes: emotion, mind, and consciousness Relations to human and social evolution; speculations 2-29 Biological Evolution: Main Discussion The complex and varied life forms on Earth, of today or of earlier times, can be approximately classified by their observable characteristics into various groupings and sub-groupings. Of the levels22 of classification, some stand out as fundamental. One is the kingdom which represents in some basic and distinctive sense one of a few, usually two to five, major divisions of life; a second is the species which is a division of [similar] individuals forming a reproductively isolated group, isolated not in the sense of geographic barriers, but to biological barriers such as genetic, structural, and behavioral. Of course, all meaningful schemes are approximate. There are exceptions to rules, unclear cases, incomplete theoretical foundation and sometimes little theoretical foundation. Although the taxa in higher categories are well delimited, it is not possible to give a non-arbitrary [objective] definition. Even the distinction population between and individual is not always clear - being relative to some purposes; e.g., level of focus in a hierarchy with varying degrees of interaction and integration. Some of the major units of biology are individuals - [1] the fundamental chemical structures, [2] cells, [3] organisms as individuals, and populations - [4] species, and [5] kingdoms. These structures and affinities have an approximate [and evolving] basis in observation and are useful in studying, understanding and advancing the basis and range of life and its processes 2-30 The major thesis of biological evolution is that the life forms came about, over the life of the universe, from a few elementary forms; a standard version holds there to have been one fairly localized Earth-origin of replicating chemical molecules - perhaps one molecule. This strictest version is not obvious, nor is it essential to any concept and nature of evolution. However, one aspect of this version is essential to one of the prominent worldviews of science; i.e., philosophical materialism. The aspect in question is the origin in physico-chemistry. The appeal of this view is the provision toward a unitary structure to the universe - and the security that such a belief brings. So much of science is so neatly explained on this unitary basis. However, this specific unitary basis has not been demonstrated in “fact” [in this context fact cannot mean certainty], either in the origin of life [yet] or in unification of all categories of science and knowledge. Should the aim of biological theory relative to philosophical materialism, then, be one of confirmation and belief or one of openness to all possibilities? I find both attitudes acceptable, each being amiable to a group of personality types and each being productive of advance, provided not held as absolute dogma The remaining discussion is divided into four parts: 1. Relation of biology and biological evolution to science and general evolution, and the nature of biology 2. Problems of biological evolution 3. Outline treatment of the problems 4. Outstanding problems of biological evolution 2-31 2.6.8.1 Relation of biology and biological evolution to science and general evolution232.6.8.1.1 Objectives of Science[1] Understand the world [provision: of explanations and predictions], [2] economic organization of understanding [patterns of relationship among phenomena and processes are organized into concepts and relations among concepts - includes law], [3] formulation of hierarchies of certitude [testability and falsifiability]: introspection ¬ reflection ¬ experiment ¬ historical evidence ¬ evolutionary interpretation; and of ambiguity: probability --> certainty; and authority --> independent verification] 2.6.8.1.2 Discovery and Method in ScienceNothing was said about discovery and or method in science: the fundamental method [I recognize] is the reflective-speculative [2.6.8.2] approach. This is the method of speculative philosophy, extended by reflection. Speculative philosophy is the formulation of a speculative system, explanation [includes prediction] of a field of phenomena [biological, physical, general] and selection of the system which currently is “best”. This is augmented by a process in which a need to resolve understanding arises, questions are asked, information is assembled. This composite process is reflection. The separations are not perfect...there are inner iterations. Neither reflection nor speculation comes first. There is an iterative-interactive process: reflection « speculation This includes as special cases the following methods and aspects of methods: Deduction... Induction... Hypothetico-deductive... Creative... And many others 2.6.8.1.3 Special Features of BiologySpecial features of biology, biological science and biological evolution, according to Mayr: Advance in understanding through concepts [e.g., in systematics - classification, species, category, and taxon; and in evolution - descent, selection, variation, fitness] Importance of comparative method compared to the experimental: comparison [observe --> compare --> classify... iterate] is a powerful approach to dealing with uniqueness and diversity The use of concepts and processes over mechanism, mathematics, and law... Concept and process is not mere classification and description Population thinking...individuals are unique; means are constructs; variances are important] vs. essentialism ...identity of individuals, variance due to measurement 2-33 2.6.8.1.4 The Problem of TeleologyProblem of teleology - resolved by recognizing four different meanings: [1] teleonomic, or goal-directed activities...due to operation of a program; not found in inanimate nature, but in artifacts - computers, [2] teleomatic processes - in which a definite end is reached “through” the operation of time-local physical-chemical law, [3] adapted systems - due to selection, an example of which is Item 1 above, but not Item 2 as far as is known; [4] cosmic teleology - there is purpose in the universe, based [Aristotle] on the false dichotomy purpose vs. chance in relation to adaptation 2.6.8.1.5 Special Features of LifeSpecial features of life, according to Mayr: Complexity - generally greater than inorganic species Organization - the subsystems or parts of an organism function interdependently Chemical uniqueness...many macromolecules are unique... that they occur in all life whenever their function is needed Quality and qualitative reasoning and classification essential [though not exclusive] Uniqueness and high variability of individuals in populations [from cells to ecosystems] Possession of a genetic program which regulates cell and individual reproduction, function and process and growth... Unlike inanimate nature [analogy: artifact - computer program]. [Perhaps, therefore, some level of outline should be “regular”.] 2-34 Historical nature - of organisms, based on inheritance from primeval form[s]; taxa recognized by descent, biological classes supposedly distinct from logical classes Selection - natural “and” sexual; unlike inanimate nature Indeterminacy - temporal prediction rare; logical prediction possible; causality not disproved but not used as much as in physical science because of the following related factors: randomness24 and uniqueness of events and entities, magnitude of stochastic perturbations, complexity of organic systems - interrelations and feedback, emergence of new or “unpredictable” features at hierarchical levels 2.6.8.1.6 Reduction in BiologyAccording to many philosophers of physical science and physical scientists, biology is “reducible” to physics25 and this restores the unity of science. This is reinforced by the claim that the only alternative to reductionism is vitalism. Mayr rejects all of these claims. He does so by identifying three types of reduction and confusion among them 2.6.8.1.6.1 Constitutive Reductionism[1] Constitutive reductionism asserts that the material composition of organisms is exactly as found in the inorganic world [it is not clear 2-35 this has a precise meaning]; further, none of the events and processes encountered in living organisms is in conflict with the physico-chemical phenomena at the level of atoms and molecules. These claims are accepted by modern biologists... and except for the vitalists, and all biologists for the last two hundred years or more. The difference between inorganic matter and living organisms does not consist in the substance of which they are composed but in the organization of biological systems. Constitutive reductionism is thus not controversial [Mayr's view] 2.6.8.1.6.2 Explanatory Reductionism[2] Explanatory reductionism is the idea that one cannot understand a whole except to reduce it to its parts and these parts into theirs and so on. This is often illuminative but there are severe limitations: where do we stop? Lower level units may be so completely integrated as to make high level function almost independent of the lower level [this seems to contradict Item 1, so what should be said is “...almost independent of the details or 'atoms' of the lower level[s]”. Extreme analytical reductionism is a failure because it cannot give proper weight to the [integrative] interaction of the components. Lower levels in systems or hierarchies can only supply a limited amount of information on characteristics and processes at the higher levels. It is misleading to apply the term reduction to an analytical method. How is analysis of complex biological systems facilitated? There are numerous ways. As an example, the study of genetics was speeded up by going to more numerous generations per year: large mammals --> fowl and rodents --> 1910 species of drosophila [especially melanogaster] --> 19302 neospora and other species of fungi [yeast] --> molecular genetics with bacteria --> viruses. Extrapolation to the higher species was successful except that the genetic system of prokaryotes and viruses is not fully comparable to that of eukaryotes 2-36 2.6.8.1.6.3 Theory Reductionism[3] Theory reductionism is showing that the laws and theories in one field of science are special cases of laws and processes of some other field. Clearly, explanatory and theory reductionism are related. Attempts to reduce biology to physics have been unsuccessful. As an example, discovery of the chemical structure of DNA, RNA, and certain enzymes fills in certain black boxes of the transmission theory of genetics [and this is illuminating and useful] but is not a reduction of genetics to chemistry. The essential concepts of genetics: gene, genotype, mutation, diploidy, heterozygosity, segregation, recombination, and so on, are not genetic concepts. Theory reductionism is a fallacy because it confuses processes and concepts: biological concepts such as meiosis and predation are also chemical and physical processes but they are only biological concepts and cannot be reduced to physical and chemical concepts. There are levels of meaning Thus, Mayr refutes reductions. It is interesting that he denies the existence, or utility, of supra-biological categories “mind” and “consciousness” as indefinable and universally present. Are his motives parochial after all, or is he simply an inadequate philosopher? Mayr claims reductionism to be futile, and this is exemplified by: Emergence is the appearance of new, irreducible, characteristics in the whole. There are two interesting aspects of wholes: [1] Hierarchy - there are levels of wholes and explanation such as macromolecular, cellular, organelle, cell, tissue, organ, and so on, or “constitutional hierarchies” and such as species, genus...kingdom or “aggregational hierarchies”; and [2] holism-organicism [an alternative to vitalism] 2-37 2.6.8.1.7 Conceptual Structure of BiologyConceptual structure of biology - historically “for thousands of years”, biological phenomena were labeled physiology [medicine] and natural history; and this division was much more perceptive than later labels zoology, botany, mycology, cytology, genetics, and such. The historical distinction corresponds to the conceptual division into proximate causes [physiological science broadly conceived] and ultimate or evolutionary causes [the subject matter of natural history]. The same systems can be studied in both contexts. The basis of evolutionary biology is comparison and observation: observation --> description --> comparison...or “qualitative”. The transition from reduction and mathematical science to qualitative, historical science is incomplete Supposedly, historical narratives, not theories, provide explanation in evolutionary biology. The ideas of central subject, and singular event are fundamental in historical narratives which are explanatory in the sense of showing causal connections [either in relation to mechanism; e.g., variation and selection, or singular events - relative to the discipline, such as extinction of the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous which vacated a large number of ecological niches and set the stage for the spectacular radiation of mammals in the Paleocene and Eocene]. Historical narratives have predictive value [in the sense of logical if not not-temporal prediction]. Some other sciences that are historical and employ observation and comparison are cosmogony, geology, paleontology [phylogeny], and biogeography. Mayr does not point out the rise of history in physics. In sciences that involve both theory and history, no aspect is understood completely until both aspects of causation have been elucidated 2-38 2.6.8.1.8 Philosophy of BiologyThe two modes are [1] theoretical-essential-quantitative-cybernetic-functional-organizational, [2] historical-population-qualitative, and program-uniqueness-adaptedness... Philosophy of biology is more a manifesto rejecting logical positivism, essentialism, reductionism, physicalism, vitalism, but hesitant and inchoate in its major theses; e.g., acceptance and reception of emergentism “Life”, “mind”, “consciousness” merely refer to reifications of activities and have no separate existence as activities. Consciousness cannot even be defined approximately. Avoidance of nouns that are nothing but reifications of processes greatly facilitates the analysis of the phenomena that are characteristic of biology. [Reification means to “make” or treat as “concrete”.] Biologists like Rensch, Waddington, Simpson, Bertalanffy, Medawar, Ayala, Mayr, and Ghiselin have made a far greater contribution to a philosophy of biology than an entire older generation of philosophers like Cassirer, Popper, Russell, Bloch, Bunge, Hempel and Nagel. Only the youngest philosophers, Beckner, Hull, Munson, Wimsatt, Beatty, and Brandon have been able to get away from the obsolete reifications and biological theories of vitalism, orthogenesis, macrogenesis, dualism, and positivist-reductionism 2.6.8.1.9 Some Principles of a Basis for Philosophy of Biology[1] A full understanding of organisms cannot be secured by the theories of physics and chemistry alone, [2] The historical nature of organisms must be fully considered, in particular their possession of a historically acquired genetic program, [3] That individuals at most hierarchical levels, from the cell up, are unique and form populations, the variance of which is one of their major characteristics [4] There are two biologies: functional biology, which asks proximate questions; and evolutionary biology, which asks ultimate questions [5] The history of biology has been dominated by establishment of concepts, by their modification, maturation and - sometimes - rejection [6] The patterned complexity of living things is hierarchically organized and higher hierarchic levels are characterized by emergence of novelty [7] That observation and comparison are methods in biological research that are as fully scientific and heuristic as experiment and theory [8] An insistence on autonomy of biology does not mean an endorsement of vitalism, orthogenesis, or any theory that is in conflict with the laws of physics [9] A philosophy of biology should include consideration of all major specifically biological concepts of molecular biology, physiology, development, and evolutionary biology [such as natural selection, inclusive fitness, adaptation, progress, and descent]. Systematics [species, category, classification], behavioral biology and ecology [competition, resource utilization, ecosystem] [10] Do not: waste time on theory reduction, laws, vitalism and other unscientific ideologies I will say again that Mayr is odd in including biology as a separate paradigm of science, making biology exclusive and rejecting meta-biology [e.g., “mind”] 2.6.8.1.10 Biology and Human ThoughtIn reference to C. P. Snow's two cultures, Mayr says Snow is right about the gap between physics and humanities; but there is a similar gap between physics and biology, and that biology being historical and closer to the nature of the human being is something of a bridge between the physical sciences and the social sciences and humanities26 Some of the supposed difference between history and science27 are [1] history deals exclusively with the unique, science with the general, [2] history teaches no lessons, [3] history is unable to predict [temporally]. [4] History is necessarily subjective, and [5] history, unlike science, involves issues of religion and morality. These claims are true only for physical science, says Mayr. Differences 1,3, 4 and 5 are largely true for evolutionary biology...and 2 is not even true for history. Therefore, says Mayr, the sharp break between science and the non-sciences does not exist Copernicus, Darwin, Freud have profoundly altered human thinking; mathematical physicists Einstein, Bohr not so much - scientists must be read by lay people to affect popular thought. Probably, since biology, psychology, anthropology will have more impact on human thought than the physical sciences since they are of immediate concern Mayr calls for a joining of biology and philosophy in a rekindling of the interest in the basic philosophical areas of metaphysics, ontology and epistemology. These areas had been abandoned in the English-speaking countries due to the Positivist influence of physical science and mathematics 2.6.8.1.11 Biology and Human ValuesMayr's points are: [1] Unlike physical science [he does not say this categorically], biology is not detached from humankind, objective, and therefore, affects human values, society and traditional belief. [Of course, physical science has affected belief - heliocentricity, etc. - and its conclusions are value laden, but biology is directly value related.] [2] Socio-political thinking developed under the influence of essentialist thinking: essential identity of members of a class; “all men are created equal”, whereas biology says “no two individuals are created equal” and therefore social provision is necessary for equality of opportunity, rights, and before the law [3] He regrets the condemnation of sociobiology over its divergence with “democratic thinking”. Mayr does not outright endorse sociobiology, but that is its thrust28. The scientific aspects of sociobiology are unresolved; but, to me, it does seem excessively in some arguments for biological determination of social behavior and anti-historical. The question is not whether biology determines behavior [homosexuality, altruism, male-female roles, violence, and such] at all, but to what extent is variation due to - and what is - individual potential, species variability and social and other input [4] The individual is not “merely on animal”, but ego is not essential: instead consider humankind, the species or culture, and resolve issues of cultural inheritance [in addition to biological], inclusive fitness29 and ethics 2-42 2.6.8.1.12 Philosophical Implications of Darwin's TheoriesMayr lists: [1] Replacement of a static by an evolving world [not original with Darwin] [2] Implausibility of creationism [3] Refutation of cosmic teleology [4] Abolition of any justification for absolute anthropocentrism [5] Explanation of “design” by non-directed variation and opportunistic reproductive success entirely outside Christian dogma [6] Replacement of essentialism by population thinking [7] Various philosophical-methodological innovations: consistent application of hypothetico-deductive method, a new evaluation of prediction. This brings study of ultimate [evolutionary] causation into science [In several of the points above, biological evolution and its theories contribute - as opposed to independently imply.] 2-43 2.6.8.2 Theoretical and Empirical Problems of Biological EvolutionNothing has yet been said about the course of and evidence for evolution and its mechanisms; these are the main conceptual problems: [1] Outline of the course of evolution, [2] Provision of evidence of evolution The two problems are interdependent. In the content of the speculative method [hypothesis and deduction], evidence is empirical and theoretical: empirical - experimental, observational and experiential, theoretical - organization of data and information through comparison, concept, mechanism, law and theory so as to permit summary representation, interpretation of old and new data, and prediction of logical and or temporal types These two problems are the main conceptual problems of biological evolution. There is another [3] Methodological problems [2.6.8.1] of biological evolution These, of course, touch upon other areas of evolution and knowledge. The three problems are elaborated further below. Although separated, the problems are interdependent 2-44 2.6.8.2.1 [1] Outline of the Course of Evolution - Evolution and Descent of the Major Biological TypesWe will probably never know, nor need to know, the full details of evolution of biology and the universe - at least in our finite manifestations. Further, what knowledge we have will not be certain and it is because of this essential incompleteness and uncertainty that theory and concept30 formation is useful...so our knowledge of the course of evolution is necessarily, and should be, in outline. Of course, degree of certainty will improve; detail will expand. Here I mention some main points of this outline: Evolution and Descent of the Major Biological Types: Remember that evolution includes origins, growth, maintenance or equilibrium, decay and death or extinction. The idea of descent refers to relations among origins of taxa. There are a number of possibilities for types of descent: [a] Common descent vs. creation or special creation - common descent is the idea that members of a taxon are descendents of a common ancestor. According to this “species descended from a single progenitor are grouped into genera; and genera are included in, or subordinate to, subfamilies, families, and orders all united into one class...” Creation is the violation of common descent through independent [and or special, that is not evolution] origin. [b] Tree like or more generalized descent - tree structure permits branching. A generalized version permits mixing of taxa. The types are: Life: complex chemical processes, environments, and replicating molecules Division I: viruses and cells, biological form and process, auto- or heterotrophy Division II: phylogenetic tree, kingdoms, and species...evolution of complexity, systems, bio-systems; independence 2-45 We know that categories above species can be fairly clearly demarked, but objective definition is not possible, nor is there yet any criteria according to which such criteria would be meaningful; close to the origins of life, under the assumption of common tree-like descent, species --> genus --> ... --> kingdom 2.6.8.2.1.1 A Four-Kingdom Scheme based On the Notion of Common Tree-Like DescentThe four-kingdom scheme of Encyclopedia Britannica is 1. Monera - the prokaryotes [bacteria and blue-green algae], 2. Protista - eukaryotic single cells and non-photosynthetic plantlike eukaryotes [protophyta - algae other than blue-greens, molds and fungi, protozoa - unicellular animals], 3. Plantae - photosynthetic multi-cellular plants [bryophytes and vascular plants], 4. Metazoa - multi-cellular eukaryotic animals [parazoa - sponges and metazoa-higher animals] The four-kingdom scheme is based on the notion of common tree-like descent. The divisional scheme is not fully clear. Even allowing for common descent [at least beyond the earliest of replicating molecules - groups of replicators may have originated independently but merged or one became dominant or chemistry was similar, so we would then have mixed descent. Even if this were true,31 the principle of common tree-like descent would operate over large portions of evolution; there could be confusion if descent, though common, had merging or convergence. Whittaker32 and Margulis33 have argued that plants evolved at least four separate times from protistan ancestors, fungi at least five times, and animals at least three times 2-46 2.6.8.2.1.2 A Three Level, Five Kingdom Scheme based On Descent, Morphology and EcologyBased on these ideas, a classification based on morphology and ecology can make sense. The following three level, five-kingdom scheme reflects these factors as well as, naturally, convergence and descent: Level 1 [Kingdom - Monera] Prokaryotic one-cells - bacteria, blue-green algae, and viruses Level 2 [Kingdom - Protista] eukaryotic one-cells Subkingdom Protophyta - includes unicellular non-blue-green algae Subkingdom protozoa - unicellular animals: amoeba, some flagellates, ciliates, Parasitic protozoa Level 3 [3 Kingdoms - Multi-cellular Eukaryotes] Kingdom - Fungi34 Kingdom - Metaphyta [plantae] - all other plants: true algae, mosses, liverworts, and ferns and related forms, conifers and allies, flowering plants Kingdom - Metazoa [animalia] - all other animals: sponges, corals, flatworms, flukes, tapeworms, wheel animalcules, round-worms, mollusks, arthropods [joint-legged animals], sea mats, arrow-worms, lamp shells, sea squirts, lancelets, all the vertebrates from lampreys to humans 2-47 2.6.8.2.2 [2] Provision of Evidence:Empirical Indirect Structural similarities Developmental similarities - embryonic Behavioral similarities - among different species Comparative biochemistry - e.g., similarity with human blood decreases along the sequence - gorilla, orangutan, baboon, deer, horse, and kangaroo according to an immunologic blood test from parasitology. The alternative explanation is that hosts and parasites were created together. Similarity of parasites confirms similarity according to other criteria Biogeographical - Buffon's evidence on difference between flora and fauna of New and Old Worlds despite climates being similar implies common descent and led Darwin to question fixed species Direct Paleontology [but only a small percentage of record remains] Genetic Theoretical Concepts - categories, functional biology, common descent, species Mechanisms - variation, selection of adapted offspring from excess, slow evolution of complexity through adaptive intermediate stages, occurrence of singular events and filling of ecological niches, mechanisms of speciation 2-48 2.6.8.2.3 [3] Methodological ProblemsSee 2.6.8.1 for discussion of reflective-speculative method. One obvious enhancement can be mentioned here: inclusion of evidence of factual nature. The reflective-speculative method is obviously applied to evidence, which is accumulated or discovered: Empirical Activity « Speculation « Reflection « Empirical Activity The nonlinear arrangement shows complex learning35 process as simultaneous or sequential interaction. The problem is one of coordinating multiple partial evidence with multiple partial hypotheses 2-49 2.6.8.3 Outline Treatment of the Problems2.6.8.3.1 Darwin's Theory and it's Five StrandsDarwin's theory is a theory of evolution of life through common descent and by natural selection. His theories had five strands:36 Evolution as such Evolution through common descent Gradual nature of evolution Populational speciation Natural selection 2.6.8.3.2 Early Criticisms of Darwin's TheoryA number of criticisms arose:37 [1] Darwin had no direct evidence for the effectiveness of natural selection, let alone for the origin of new species [2] Darwin could not show a single species that was transitional between two known species [3] Complex organs, such as the vertebrate eye, could not have evolved by stages, since they would have been useless at any preliminary stage and hence would have given their possessor no selective advantage [4] If evolution has taken place, then some evolutionary trends must have continued past the point of usefulness to the organism. Such trends could not be accounted for by Darwinian selection [5] The earth is not old enough for evolution to have taken place [6] Evolution by natural selection is incompatible with the laws of inheritance [7] There is no inheritance of acquired characters 2.6.8.3.3 Darwin's Responses[1] Darwin pointed out that direct evidence is not possible - but we now know that direct evidence of selection is available [2] The existence of polytypic species [3] Adaptation through intermediate adaptive stages can be shown by comparison and speculation [4] Orthogenesis is an unnecessary component of evolutionary theory, nor is it implied by the mechanisms of variation and natural selection [5] The earth is now known to be much older than was assumed in Darwin's time 2-50 [6] Not as understood since Mendelian-biogenetics [7] Inheritance of acquired characters is unnecessary, because of genetic variation 2.6.8.3.4 An Outline of the Theory of EvolutionNot only is natural selection adequate to explain the features discussed above, it is thought circumstantially adequate to address the problems of 2.6.8.2. The best way to show the success of evolution through common descent, by natural selection, is to provide an outline of evolutionary theory. However, it should be realized that there are unresolved problems relating to the course and nature of life. My understanding of the theory as a logical structure needs reworking. Note that for operation of natural selection, it is sufficient. [1] Some variations must occur. These will be inherited [2] Organisms produce more offspring than can survive. [3] Offspring that vary most strongly in the direction favored by their reproductive ability [ability to survive in environment, to reproduce] will propagate; favorable variation will accumulate by natural selection. However, for natural selection, not variation, to be the creative force of evolution [a] variations must not prefer adaptation, and [b] variations must be small compared to chance to a new species [if natural selection is to be responsible for speciation] Outline of the Theory of Evolution: the Process of Evolution 2.6.8.3.4.1 [1] VariationVariation is heritable in Darwin's theory 2.6.8.3.4.2 [2] SelectionThe most reproductively successful individuals selectively propagate. Sexual and natural factors are important. For selection to cause change [and not just eliminate the unfit], there must be a surfeit of offspring. If these three circumstances are true, there will be adaptation For natural selection to be the creative force of evolution, variations must be small and non-preferential or non-directed to adaptation. These processes must produce complexity, speciation, and diversity 2-51 2.6.8.3.4.3 [3] The Synthetic Theory of EvolutionIn 1930, there was a controversial situation between naturalists and experimental geneticists. Perhaps the most important differences were: The naturalists believed in soft inheritance, that evolution and species formation are gradual, due to natural selection. They minimized the importance of Mendelian genetics in evolution The experimentalists and Mendelians thought in terms of mutation as the moving force in evolution, change in species due to large mutations [saltations], hard inheritance, individual variation and recombination as unimportant to evolution, and most continuous individual variation as non-genetic A synthesis was accomplished in which the italicized states above are true. According to Mayr, [1] evolution is gradual and can be explained by natural selection acting on small genetic variation equaling changes or mutations and recombination; and [2] by considering species as reproductively isolated aggregates of populations and analyzing the effect of ecological factors [niche occupation, competition, adaptive radiation] on diversity and the origin of taxa, one can explain all evolutionary phenomena in a way consistent with the known genetic mechanisms and observations of naturalists This involved, according to Encyclopedia Britannica: Mutations can be adaptive and deleterious; most are deleterious. [This may have been an argument for negating the importance of selection.] The deleterious are nearly always recessive [because they are deleterious] Fisher showed that under a system of Mendelian gene complexes [multiple factors] for variation, selection and not mutation rate control direction and rate of evolution 2-52 Arise of apparently non-adaptive characters can be explained through changing conditions; allotropic growth [size of one part of an organism is more than proportional to size as a whole]; genes with multiple effects; the adaptive outweigh the deleterious; and sexual selection 2.6.8.3.4.4 [4] Major Stages of Evolution2.6.8.3.4.4.1 [1] Origin of life Origin of life; simple and complex unicellular organisms Complex environments Phosphates Energy Enzymes Synthesis of Complex Compounds Nucleic Acids Replication Lipids Membrane Structure --> Replicators --> Prokaryotic cells [DNA not in nuclei] --> Heterotrophs [food takers]: Bacteria Primitive sex: incomplete interchange of genetic material --> Autotrophs [food makers]: Blue-green algae [Photosynthesis?] --> Symbiosis of prokaryotes --> Eukaryotic cells [DNA as chromosomes, DNA in nuclei] 2.6.8.3.4.4.2 [2] Multi-cellular Organisms Single cells To exchange genetic material: temporary fusion of one-cells: --> Small germ cells with mobility: “male” --> Large germ cells with food: “female” --> Division of labor --> Multi-cells --> Differentiation of function 2.6.8.3.4.4.3 [3] Colonization of Land Patterns of evolution Improvement and adaptive radiation Paedomorphosis and clandestine evolution: Paedomorphosis - adults of variants are like previous young; since young are shell-less, there is no fossil record of the variants; so, later fossils reappear without “paleontological warning” Mosaic evolution occurs in transition: e.g., reptile --> part bird, part reptile [the “mosaic”] --> bird Parallel and convergent evolution 2-54 2.6.8.3.4.4.4 [4] Human Evolution Hominization: bipedalism, immaturity of newborn; and neoteny, similarity of adult to newborn Humanization: Newborn, young of other species are plastic and adaptive, not rigid and instinctual; therefore, humanization leads to plasticity of adult human beings which leads to very rapid psychosocial evolution Species - Origins Allopatric - due to geographic isolation Sympatric - due to inhabitation of different sub-environments in some geographic area; e.g., the apple moth and the hawthorn moth Phylogeny - The Lines of Descent This explanation must be uncertain as long as there is uncertainty of the phylogenetic divisions. We saw in 2.6.8.2 the existence of more than one basic scheme - a four-kingdom scheme based on common descent, and a five-kingdom scheme based on form as well as descent, and form represents uncertainty of descent 2-55 Review of Synthetic Theory In the Darwinian era, evolutionists were united in a sort of common front. After evolution had been accepted by the scientific and, to a significant degree, the religious establishment, a program of detailed analysis and verification began. It was out of this that the differences arose between the geneticists and the natural historians. As we have seen, according to E. Mayr, the synthesis included elements of both parties - a counter example of Thomas Kuhn's boring paradigm of paradigm change and more similar to Hegel's thesis leads to antithesis leads to synthesis. The main architects of the synthesis were R. A. Fisher and Theodore Dobzhansky. Other names were those of Julian Huxley, Ernst Mayr, George Simpson, Bernhard Rensch, and G. Ledyard Stebbins who, in major publications, constructed bridges among the fields. Other evolutionists who prepared the scene for drama: in USSR, Chetverikov, Timofeeff-Ressovsky; in England, Fisher, Haldane, Darlington, Ford; in USA, Sumner, Dice, Sturtevant, Wright; in Germany, Bauer, Ludwig, Stressemann, Zimmermann; in France, Teissier, L' He'ritier; and in Italy, Buzzati-Traverso. Two multi-author volumes also contributed to the synthesis: Heberer's Die Evolution der Organismen [1943] and Julian Huxley's The New Systematics [1940]. Probably the most central publication in the synthesis was Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origin of the Species [1937] 2.6.8.3.4.5 [5] Post Synthesis DevelopmentE. Mayr, in The Growth of Biological Thought, identifies four periods: 1859-about 1895: Proof of evolution and mainlines of descent; phylogenetic research 1895-1936: Period of controversy resulting in evolutionary synthesis of hard Mendelian genetics, gradual change due to natural selection, etc 1936-1960s: Working out of fine details in light of evolutionary synthesis; population thinking, interest in population and species level diversity; adaptational aspects of variation due to selection forces, but all genetic interpretations dominated by gene-frequency concept 1960s-present: Diverse - 1. Stochastic components of variations, 2. Molecular biology, 3. Issues in natural selection - types of selection, 4. Modes of speciation, 5. Macroevolution, human evolution, and 6. New controversy and unresolved problems The fourth period is the post synthesis period. Mayr identifies six post synthesis developments 2.6.8.3.4.5.1 [1] Population Genetics Experimental and stochastic study of natural selection in populations 2.6.8.3.4.5.2 [2] Molecular Biology 1953 - Watson and Crick...precision of replication, self-correction of errors. Identity [on the whole] of genetic code is additional evidence, pointing to a common and relatively localized origin of life, complex chromosomal structure of DNA in eukaryotes different from simple structure in prokaryotes, structure of genetic code 1961- Nirenberg and Matthaei, threshold of possible new discoveries - control of evolutionary trends, stability of phenotype in many evolutionary lines, rapid shifts to new evolutionary grades in genetic revolutions 2-57 Many kinds of DNA - enzyme genes, structural protein genes, regulatory genes, transposable genes, “introns” that are not copied to MRNA and “exons” that are spliced together. Are introns parasitic or do they help regulate gene splicing? Drastic differences in repetitive DNA, etc., between closely related genera or species without much visible morphological change or sometimes even loss of ability to hybridize, enormous differences of amount of DNA seemingly unrelated to complexity Origin of life - identity of genetic code leads to “all organisms now living on earth unquestionably had a common origin; perhaps there was competition of molecular stock?”...Origin not spontaneous, many different intermediate molecular stages between inanimate matter and life would not be “eaten” and or oxidized but would survive in the primeval reducing atmosphere...of course problems remain. What is the origin of the symbiosis between nucleic acids and proteins? 2.6.8.3.4.5.3 [3] Natural Selection - Evidence A. Selection in experiments and work of plant and animal breeders, B. refutation of soft inheritance by geneticists leading to natural selection is the only alternative to explain gradual evolution, C. refutation of claim that most attributes of an organism are without selective value; many thought to be neutral, turn out selective on close observation, D. calculations of Norton, Fisher, Haldane, and others show even very slight selective advantages over many generations, E. population thinking shows discontinuities among species and higher taxa can be explained as originating gradually through geographic speciation and extinction, hence not requiring saltations. Dobzhansky's work in this area, Genetics and the Origin of Species [1937], was central- 2-58 He demonstrated selection as a process observationally, removed the conflict between gradual adaptive geographic variation and selection, and so eliminated the need for Lamarckian explanations. Mayr in Growth of Biological Thought [1982] discusses five problems of selectionism: kinds of selection- stabilizing, directing, diversifying; statistical nature of selection; target of selection - individual [including population as individual since gene pool is the same] and holism of the internal-external; product of selection as a compromise among parts of a whole, one cannot discuss selection of one feature in isolation; and, selection as a creative force 2.6.8.3.4.5.4 [4] Modes of Speciation Mayr's theory is that “Decisive evolutionary events occur most often, by way of genetic revolutions, in peripherally isolated founder populations.” Mayr claims that the evidence [as of writing about 1982] supports this. This is allopatric speciation. Geographic isolation can be due to rivers, mountains, and vegetation. In geographic isolation, under different conditions, there is selection pressure and change from a heterozygous individual can spread rapidly through a small founder population. Sufficient change results in reproductive isolation [by which Mayr means genetic incompatibility]. Polyploidy is a process in which the chromosomes double in number and a new species can originate in a single step. However, chromosomal rearrangement is not a normal mechanism. Some speciation can occur without visible change in chromosomes. There is mounting evidence that there are special genetic mechanisms and or regulatory systems that control the degree of reproductive isolation, and it is possible that just a limited portion of the DNA controls isolation...but enough to make speciation gradual. Genetic change and geographic isolation go together. They are not alternate mechanisms. There is a question as to why genetic revolutions occur in some and not all founder populations 2-59 This might have to do with which parts of the DNA are affected by the selection pressure on the founder population. Some genes are, perhaps, less susceptible to genetic revolution Clearly, geographic isolation is not essential, just the opportunity for the heterozygyte to establish. This could occur [1] due to isolation in geographically coincident ecological-subsystems, [2] when the original population is very small, [3] when the initial population is or becomes sparsely distributed and isolates into a number of founder populations [without “expatriation”]. Replacement of a species could occur by [2] or by any other mechanism and subsequent competition between two or more populations in which one of the new ones “wins” through some sort of pressure for resources 2.6.8.3.4.5.5 [5] Macroevolution - the Subject of Paleontological Study Mayr proposes that it has been demonstrated that, for purposes of all evolution, including macro-evolution - that is, evolution of higher taxa, above species level - are explainable on the notions that [1] saltations are unnecessary in explaining the origin of new species and higher taxa; small variation and gradual selection is sufficient, [2] autogenesis - that is, the built-in drive to increasing perfection - is not required to explain the degree of complexity and adaptation, [3] inheritance is hard 2-60 Some of the topics considered are evolutionary novelties, behavior and evolution, phylogenetic research, role of essential character and grades. A central topic is origin of macro-evolutionary diversity - the answer had been available since Mayr's work on species origin but had to wait until Eldredge and Gould's [1972] model of “punctuated equilibria” which amounts to Mayr's idea that new species originate in isolation. In this connection, Eldredge and Gould propose, in effect, that the change in a founder population is through a single step saltation-like. Mayr maintains gradual process in founder populations: the process may seem saltational on a geologic time scale. Since regulatory systems may be involved, their breaking up makes way for new ones and rapid acquisition of new adaptations. The rate of evolution is perhaps several orders of magnitude faster than in traditional phyletic, evolutionary thinking but still very slow on a human time scale A related problem is extinction. This is a complex problem. Why did a whole taxon of, say dinosaurs, become extinct in a short period? Some people have suggested catastrophic events. One of my ideas is the burden of success. Mayr has expressed this very tentatively by suggesting a genotype [for the taxon] that is so well integrated that the rate of mutation or variation is not sufficient to produce departures from the norm that might permit a major switch in resource utilization or in answer to a challenge from a competitor or a pathogen. Of course, says Mayr, we must first learn more about the eukaryotic genotype and its regulatory system. Mayr discusses the periods of equilibrium and explosions of numbers of species [due to specialists versus generalists?]; mass extinction [due to catastrophe? - he questions this; why did mammals, birds, non-dinosaurian reptiles, and angiosperms survive?] 2.6.8.3.4.5.6 [6] Human Evolution Mayr discusses [1] the fossil evidence; recounts the well-known data; observes that a complete story awaits further evidence; [2] molecular and chromosomal similarity between humankind and ape-kind- an example of mosaic evolution with varying rates of evolution; [3] knowledge of the steps; bipedalism, tools, hunting, level of intelligence, integration of perceptual systems, language and language-based culture 2-61 rapid changes to this state 100,000 years ago...no further evolutionary change, but psychosocial development. Mayr states his belief that these processes are consistent with gradualism Finally, Mayr discusses: Mayr says [1] there are two types: negative - reducing the deleterious genes... positive - enhancing the reproductive capacity of “superior” human beings. [2] It is politically-socially impossible to discuss eugenics rationally. [3] It is impossible to apply artificial selection because, first, we do not know to what extent nonphysical characteristics have a genetic basis, and, second, we do not know what mix of talents and characters are good for humankind and society [nor do we even have fully developed criteria for such]; but, third, we do know that diversity is good 2.6.8.4 Outstanding Problems of Biological EvolutionSome problems are explicit or implicit in the earlier sections 2.6.8.4.1 [1] The Problem of MechanismsThe fundamental problem: of mechanisms; variations - ordered? Indifferent? Natural selection as the creative element; common descent, tree-like descent. Rates of evolution appear to have been resolved. However: [A] the essence of information --> reflection --> speculation --> is knowledge as probable, [b] an open mind is appropriate in all situations - to alternatives, [C] continued search for loopholes will suggest alternates or confirm the current theories 2.6.8.4.2 [2] Questions of InteractionQuestions of interaction: interaction of genes, regulation, genotype as an active system, evolution through colony --> individual, co-evolution, evolution through symbiosis, sociobiology as interaction of biology and society, ecology.38 2.6.8.4.3 [3] Genetic Variability in PopulationsLevel of genetic variability in populations. What proportion of variability is due to selection and what to stochastic processes - “Random walk evolution.” 2.6.8.4.4 [4] Rates of EvolutionRates of evolution, extinction, and mechanisms of speciation and formation of taxa. Why is the rate of extinction so high? 2.6.8.4.5 [5] Origin of LifeOrigin of life [symbiosis of nucleic acids and polypeptides], origin of viruses, prokaryotes, details of prokaryotes --> eukaryotes, functioning of eukaryotic chromosome, classification of different kinds of DNA and roles in evolution and speciation 2-63 2.6.8.4.6 [6] Relationship and Phylogeny of Major Types of Plants and InvertebratesRelationship and phylogeny of major types of plants and invertebrates; roles of inter- and intra-species competition in evolution; evolution and roles of behavior in evolution 2.6.8.4.7 [7] Interaction among Fields and Levels of EvolutionInteraction of biological evolution with other fields and levels of evolution. Development of a philosophy and language of evolution 2.6.8.4.8 [8] Specialist QuestionsThere is a multiplicity: pluralism and multiple pathways, evolutionary constraints, and fusion of ecology, evolutionary, and behavioral and molecular biology 2.6.8.4.9 [9] The Question of Gradual ChangeThis is related to Item 4. Mayr emphasizes, throughout, gradual change due to natural selection. Darwin had emphasized uniform and gradual change. Paleontological evidence is at odds with some of these ideas, and Eldredge and Gould [1972]39 have given a model of punctuated equilibrium to account for the paleontological evidence. I have two observations: [1] the source of the conflict is the concept of uniformity, not gradualism, and [2] the word “punctuated” is apt. Explanation: I have introduced the idea [General Statement] of natural systems evolving to or through stable states; let the natural system in question be a major bio-ecological system consisting of various species, environment; the more stable, the more likely we are to have evidence; equilibrium remains the order for a long time until some major change or singular event - break-up of continents, ice age, perturbation due to comet, pathogen, etc.; the stability is so well self-adapted that recovery from minor de-stabilization is probable but improbable from major destabilization; the singular result results in mass extinction and there is room for much new adaptive evolution 2-64 until a new equilibrium is obtained; relative to human, social, and biological time scales the “explosion” is slow [very little change per generation], but on geological [paleontological] time scales, it is very rapid; the equilibrium state is gradual [zero = gradual and is a special case of, not the opposite of, change40]; the whole situation is gradual on biological scales; and so on. Other “explosions” could be due to preparatory events - setting the stage. For instance, the Pre-Cambrian development of eukaryotic cells permitted [real] sex, diversity and multi-cellularity, which set up the Cambrian explosion Supplementary information is included on evolutionary terminology; and phylogeny: major systems, chordates, and mammals.41 2-66 2.6.9 Evolution or emergence of levels of organization and interactionsAs pointed out in the General Statement, interaction is a mechanism of evolution. Further, also pointed out in the General Statement, interaction leads to complex structures or levels of organization. The typical route may be: very weak interaction - populations --> weak interactions - societies --> intermediate interactions - colonies and symbiosis --> strong interactions - organisms. Here is another example of emergence of novelty through gradual process: population --> organism is a large step and unlikely, but the introduction of intermediate steps removes this from being unlikely Examples of interaction are in the General Statement and 2.6.8. Some are [1] nucleic acids [replicators] and enzymes [synthesizers] and phosphates [perhaps] [energy releasers] --> viable replicators; [2] replicators and lipids and ... --> prokaryotes; [3] genetic interactions between bacteria --> primitive sex; [4] symbiosis between prokaryotes --> eukaryotes; [5] [possibly] genetic interactions between eukaryotes [and differentiation] --> sex [and male and female]; [6] --> societies --> colonies --> multi-cellular organisms --> societies and schools of multi-cellular organisms...and from this final stage, possibly, humans and human society Society is also an “individual” [species and common gene pool] and one may speculate whether there is any evolution to stronger interactions between humans Comparison between society and organism is interesting: Organism - Tendency to central control, reproduction, strong interactions, structure and longevity definite and coded [programmed] Society - Tendency to decentralized control, “tradition”, weak interactions, structure and longevity indefinite and not coded 2-67 2.6.10 Human and psychosocial evolution: descent and developmentDescent: Kingdom: metazoa [higher animals: subkingdoms parazoa, metazoa] Subkingdom: metazoa Phylum: chordata Subphylum: vertebrata Class: mammalia Subclass: theria Order: Order: primates - prosimians, monkeys, apes, ape-men, and men Suborder: anthropoidea - monkeys, apes, ape-men, men Super-family: Hominoidea - apes, ape-men, men Family: Hominidae - ape-men, men Genus: Homo - men, archaic and modern Species: sapiens; race: Homo sapiens-sapiens 42 Relations to social evolution Development: It is not thought that the development of Homo was uniform. There was a sequence and the sequence probably had “elements of cause”. The earlier steps were instrumental in the subsequent ones. Primary in this scheme is bipedalism leading to increased cranial capacity. However, it should be noted [1] social factors were significant in development, and [2] the sequence is not strictly linear but contains feedback and interactive elements. The development contains elements of conjecture 2-68 Stages of Development: Hominization: Bipedalism, immaturity of newborn = plasticity Neoteny - adults are more like newborn = more plasticity in adult stage Humanization: Hominization of adults --> adult plasticity --> very rapid psychosocial evolution Speculations: This sequence is conjectural, based of study of psychology, society, and religion Psychosocial evolution Arboreal life --> descent and bipedalism --> gather --> social organization --> hunt technology [tools] – emotivity adaptive integrative of perception --> large brain adaptive --> neoteny and plasticity --> adaptability --> language and language [general] – based culture climatic adaptability nomadism psychosocial evolution agriculture and leisure --> culture and civilization 2.6.11 Evolution of human societyEvolution [origin, maintenance, decline] of Social groups Social organization and chance Social institutions [problems of stability vs. quality and equity] Speculations; relation to evolution of the individual 2-71 Social institutions Economic, political [and military], legal Technological Self evolution of computer systems Molecular technology Cultural institutions Development, application [objective design] and transmission of knowledge through educational and academic institutions, and the like; includes Art and religion Discussion: The technologies mentioned here represent a novelty - a new manifestation of evolution that can interact with biological levels of evolution. The cultural institutions are also involved 2.6.12 Evolution of individuation and independenceOrigins In biological evolution In evolution of humankind In evolution of human society Dimensions Plasticity vs. hierarchy Emotionality Brain-mind-cognition Consciousness Awareness of dimensions of being - construction of categories of existence - schemmas - atlases Concepts: Knowledge [a history of origins and speciation of organismic and symbolic knowledge is useful in foundations] and design and their modes, integration-unity, replication 2.6.13 Possibilities and speculations: universal againActuality of self-directed evolution arising from intelligence and ability to plan Ideals as provided by philosophy and knowledge [including sociology, psychology, anthropology, politics, religion]...constraints of material science Unknown or sacred; extrapolations to the unknown based on the known Possibilities - evaluations Relations to organic accounts [2.5]; ideal religion [includes motivational systems] [4.2]; action philosophies [6] Teleology... the will to the unknown, sacred, universal. Search for such a will [as an intrinsic phenomenon]. Criteria of recognition Connections between universal and biophysical evolution Begin by assuming that only matter exists and is governed by mechanism. Then materialism has evolved life; this includes human life, and so design and choice. Hence, materialism, mechanism and design are certainly consistent in immediate nature. As a generalization, materialism, choice and design are not inconsistent. What of good? In immediate nature, good has [at least partial] origin in evolution = variation and selection, and the same must be true in any universal design. If 2-73 immediate nature is part of universal evolution and design, the good at the two levels must have some connection - there will be such connections for any interacting levels. However, evolution is not perfection and divergence of perfection, and there will always exist evil-bad-detrimental as part of the condition of emergence. Thus, we expect good and evil in universal design In this way, without justifying any specific organic system of cosmology, we see the connection between system and myth. A systematic universal evolution provides a general framework for mythology Scientific, rational conclusive evidence for universal design has not been given, nor is this the intention. However, we have demonstrated that we may speculate on this and related issues without being irrational. Such speculation is an aesthetic and rational adventure at the boundary of our universes of matter and knowledge. It is also an ethical adventure if we choose further evolution as a higher value than security. Further, in making this choice and related valuations, we remember that while there are risks in evolution, there are also risks in the refuge of security Further speculations: In addition to universal good and evil; universal recurrence - simple vs. complex cycles; relation between such recurrence and universal good and evil Related to this discussion is an interesting comparison between some of the ideas of theism and materialism. This is natural, given that the superstructures of philosophical positions have similar motivations; indeed, materialism43 arose as an alternative to theism in the wake of the rise of science. Now, the comparison:
Table 1 Theism and Materialism 2-75 2.6.14 Open and fundamental problems of evolutionContinue search for: Mechanisms and language...see §2.6.2 Reality and what is realizable...see §2.6.3 Physical reality: its nature - behind space, time, matter field...see §2.6.4 Phenomenal descriptions of space, time, matter field...see §2.6.4 Evolution of nature; boundaries of nature - “space”, “time”- and beyond these boundaries...see §2.6.4 Origins of replicating molecules; Dyson's concept of fault-tolerant chemical systems predating genes...see §2.6.7 Descent; origins of bipedalism, neoteny, cranial capacity, language; origin of social interactions...see §2.6.10 Origin of civilization - agriculture...see §2.6.11 Origins of social institutions and groups - economic, political, and legal; and of cultural, mythic, traditional, and rational knowledge expressed in religion, art, tradition, philosophy, symbolic, and scientific knowledge Origin of consciousness...see §2.6.12 Phylogenetic and ontogenetic learning Evolution of knowledge Development Education 2-76 2.7 EQUILIBRIUM, DECAY AND GROWTH IN EVOLUTIONOrigins are not the whole story to evolution. There is also equilibrium and decay. The sequence, or cycle of life of an evolutionary structure or process, could be expanded to origins, growth, equilibrium, decay and death. Alternate words and ways of thinking are, for origins - creation, genesis; for growth - progress, fulfillment of opportunity, radiation; for equilibrium- balance, stability [unstable equilibrium cannot be sustained], guidance; for decay - decline, retrogression, fulfillment of evil; and for death - destruction, dissolution, fulfillment of nonbeing or latent existence. I am not subscribing to these definitions I do not imply the cycle of life in a deterministic sense. Rather, the phrases are states or processes in which entities may be; a given phase may be recognized as another; regular progression can be interrupted by catastrophe or a change to a new order. It seems to me that the alternative to static being is change, and the consequence of no change non-constancy is non-being --> being; static being --> growth or decay, but initially growth and so on. Thus any philosophy of change must imply origin --> growth --> equilibrium --> decay --> death, not deterministically or in any regular or smooth way, but surely or essentially 2.7.1 Why study these aspects of evolution?1. Scientific and philosophical reasons - understanding 2. Religious, psychological and social reasons - understanding, acceptance and design 2-77 3. As possible elements in growth of understanding State --> process --> reality that transcends and integrates time [time --> time and space as relationship] 4. An elaboration of Item 2: openness to, joy in Equilibrium, decline and death Preparation for decline and death New beginnings 5. Completion of understanding of physical, biological and social cycles 2-78 2.7.2 Evidence for origin and growth, equilibrium, decline and death1. Religion Hinduism - Creator Brahma, Maintainer Vishnu, Destroyer Shiva, cyclicity Buddhism - Web of causation, every thing that has a beginning has an end, ends, too Christianity - God guides the world, Apocalypse and revelation 2. Philosophy Philosophy of change implies Non-being --> Being, Being --> Non-Being, --> cyclicity Comment: Life cycle is complex; cyclicity is complex cyclicity and interaction Criticism: Philosophy of change has its origin in the empirical observation of being 3. Observation Elementary particles, cosmological objects, many geological forms, organisms46 [cells, higher forms], species [birth, long equilibrium, extinction - most], ecosystems [most], societies [not implying determinism], ideas and ideologies [many - until now] 2-79 2.8 EVOLUTION AND CREATION: CONFLICTS, ANALOGIES, SYNTHESES2.8.1 Conflicts and resolutionsGod created the world and the classes of living things as they are. Life has evolved from the primitive earth-universe. Surely, these two statements are contradictory, surely creation and evolution are incompatible. Evolution and creation could or ought to be synonymous, because creation does not necessarily imply absence - or presence - of evolution, and evolution does not necessarily imply absence or presence of a creator, designer, or guide The conflict between creation and evolution can be resolved: even in “creation” we recognize grades and class of structure, and evolution can be understood by an open-minded creationist who looks at the world and says, “What is God's design?” The Bible can be interpreted to fit or to negate evolution. There is no fundamental conflict with evolution, except that “evolution” is perhaps conducive to economy of thought and creation to “needs” of some psyches. The “facts” are equally conducive to open and generalized notions of evolution and creation - but to different aspects of evolutionary theories than of creationist ideas. Only due to dogma or ego is there conflict. These comments are a beginning. [1] A better convergence of science and religion is possible. [2] An improved interpretation of creation, evolution and design is possible 2.8.2 The ultimate nature of thingsWe think we do not know the ultimate nature of things, and I suspect we do not either. However, some observations are possible. Above, a creationist interpretation of evolution was made; improvement is possible. Is an evolutionary interpretation possible? Evolution 2-80 evolved humankind; humankind can plan for the future; therefore, evolution has evolved design. At least it is conceivable that design can be a universal dimension of being and of category of explanation. Questions remain 2.8.3 Analogies and conceptual synthesisOrganic accounts of creation --> archetype [metaphor, simile, essential model] --> Systematic, adaptive, and open [science, philosophy] accounts --> Organic accounts 2.8.4 Value synthesisOrganic accounts provide moral and motivational systems [or attempts at such], which are missing in the scientific47 accounts which provide hierarchic Organizations of certainty [or attempts at this] which may be missing in the organic ones...although factual syntheses are possible as are motivational ones. There must be some motivation to the scientist from within science; e.g., relation to the world and universe. A proper synthesis will be one that recognizes that the two types of account provide complementary things. This might be preceded by internal changes in each, or eclectic selection from each 2-81 2.9 PROBLEM OF EVOLUTION OF ORDER: A SCIENCE OF ORDER2.9.1 Generalized characteristics models of systems undergoing evolutionary CYCLESGeneralized characteristics and models of systems undergoing [a] evolutionary cycles that include the phases of origin --> growth --> equilibrium --> decay --> death, and [b] the phases...that follow Mechanistic: Physical [classical, quantum, and statistical; relativistic - space, time, field]; chemical, biological, psycho-social and social; general and special ad hoc mechanisms Mathematical: Differential equations, oscillators, stability, catastrophes, chaos, and automata Philosophical, linguistic, general symbolic 2.9.2 Requirements for modelsExplain: variation, reproduction and recombination, interaction, selection; nature of stable or relatively stable ordered states; growth and equilibrium and decline, and also origin and death of systems 2.9.3 Problems to be modeledSpecific patterns of growth, equilibrium, decay and conditions; e.g., sigmoid growth; problems of success and centralization; evolution and inherence of design, relations between evolution and design; explanations and reductions of various types; relation to different levels of actual evolution, and relation to whole 2-82 2.9.4 Relation with type of causation1. Deterministic 2. Probabilistic 3. Causal - classical and relativistic 4. Synchronistic 5. Future depends on present: [a] State, [b] State and rate of change; Hamiltonian systems, [c] other Ergodic, mixing character 6. Future depends on past [history] or on past and present Nature of physical and symbolic reality which corresponds to these relations 2-83 2.10 EVOLUTIONARY DETERMINISM AND INDETERMINISM2.10.1 General questionsIndeterminism “due” to ignorance vs. essential indeterminism [at all levels of evolution] Interaction of levels, explanations and theories [reductions] [2.6.8.1] Determinism vs. potential Constraints [and possibilities] Necessity and contingency of cycles and or growth, equilibrium, and decay Punctuated equilibrium as determinism with inessential indeterminism [possibly] 2.10.2 Specific theoriesMaterialism [quantum vs. classical concepts, relevance of quantum “fluctuations” in cosmological evolution] Dualism. Ontic and epistemic - similar to the ontic and epistemic categories of subjectivity i.e. consciousness is ontologically subjective but epistemologically subjective Social Darwinism Sociobiology and psychology A. As biological determinism B. As interaction of material-biological and social elements Social determinism [of individual nature, potential, and values] Historical determinism Marxism vs. capitalism 2.10.3 Does evolution approach perfection?My present opinion is that I do not think so This is only an opinion What is perfection? Within the standard concepts, perfection does not have a clear meaning To have a meaning there would have to be a reference framework of metaphysics and values 3-1 3 PHILOSOPHYPhilosophy seeks ultimates and endeavors to display these as clear, transcendent or universal, connected and simple48. The notion of clarity is that the ultimate should be shown as immediate, evident without recourse to excess demonstration. In actuality, philosophy will be related to individual and culture. The ideal of transcendence is to seek universals. A condition of connectedness is that all existence - being and process; experience, expression, knowledge; value and design - should appear as a unity, as interdependent aspects of the ultimate. Simplicity is that the notions of philosophy will not contain too many elements. Philosophy seeks these ideals; actuality may fall short of the ideal. Understanding and nature are always changing. Philosophy, however, incorporates this dynamic element; this may be the key to realizing the ideals In its search, philosophy considers and uses all elements: evolution, philosophy itself, knowledge, design, action, evaluation. In its concern for clarity and for validity, a form of clarity, philosophy seeks the essence and truth of each element. Therefore, philosophy provides a critical function, with value to knowledge. However, philosophy also seeks to synthesize the elements and to go beyond them. This is the essential value of philosophy: for the individual elements of experience, which in original being were a unity, have become separate and thus are incomplete truths; and the mere collection of half truths does not provide truth It is valuable to emphasize that philosophy contains, in addition to the critical element, a creative one: in criticism itself, in synthesis and in going beyond original circumstances It is also valuable to note that, in its ultimate form, philosophy is not exclusive; all aspects of experience, reality are included, all points of view - and ways of viewing - merit consideration: in order to use them as potential elements in the creative function and to subject them [or the ideas that they suggest] to the criteria of clarity, transcendence, connectedness, and simplicity 3-2 3.1 REASONS FOR INCLUSION OF PHILOSOPHYWhy include philosophy in considerations for design? In the General Statement, I have indicated four levels of design. These levels are nested. The hierarchy starts with a very specific type - simple objective design, and generalizes by degrees to the fourth level: design = evolution. As the hierarchy generalizes, objectives proliferate and lose specificity, control decreases, and design by planning, analysis and foresight decreases. Objectives have become as diffuse and numerous as the phenomena of the “ecosystem.” At the very simplest level, there is a single clear objective subject to complete control by analysis; such cases are trivial. In realistic cases of design-by-objectives, there is more than one objective. These objectives may be hard to define, and design includes analytical and actual trial and error. At intermediate levels - social process - the objectives are not completely clear; only partial control is possible, and trial and error is an essential part of the process: design for a viable society, as an example. There must be room for trial and error. At the most general level there are, it seems49, no objectives - at least no clear objectives; there is no apparent control, no foresight, no planning Perhaps the most general level, evolution, should not be called design since there seems to be no designer, according to standard biological and physical evolutionary theory in 1986; yet the levels do interact, all levels involve evolution, the most general level includes the more specific. If there is no high designer then design itself evolves - there is foresight in natural systems: human, insect colonies as wholes. Further, we cannot rule out design at universal levels. Use of the word design is certainly valid at all levels provided it is accepted that, consistent with current 1986 understanding of physical and biological evolution, design is manifest at the specific levels and latent at the general levels. This latency may later turn out to be essential or, instead, it may turn out to have actual manifestations at the general or universal level - or it may not There are unresolved philosophical issues within the specific levels of design: for human designers - on the nature or existence of mind as a manifestation or separate metaphysical category; in 3-3 biology the following questions arise: “what is evolving and what are its interactions, and can read evolution be read into the universe?” On the question of interactions between levels, there are clear philosophical issues: to what extent, and by what criteria, are the specific levels “contained” within the general; how is foresight identified - related to this, is there foresight in insect colonies - not in individual insects but in whole colonies: perhaps, but not as flexible and “free” as in “higher” animals; in what sense can we justify use of the concept design at a level of evolution; is humankind to be considered a part of nature - I think so, obviously; to what extent are languages of design and evolution possible apart from mechanism; are these languages identical - e.g., design = generation and selection of ideas and artifactual actualities, evolution = variation and selection of natural actualities; should the distinctions generation vs. variation and artifactual vs. natural be essential; are these languages “precise”, adequate approximations; how will we decide whether latency is essential? Other questions, of course, remain Additionally, as discussed in the introduction [3], the elements of social process, which link together in evolutionary social design, have partial foundation in philosophy A more specific statement is given next [3.1.1]. Other values to inclusion of philosophy are given in the subsequent subdivisions 3-4 3.1.1 NATURE AND FOUNDATION OF ASPECTS OF DESIGN AT DIFFERENT LEVELSThis includes evolution, value, knowledge, design, action, and evaluation...definition of evolutionary philosophy...knowledge, all dimensions of being and process...foundation of the parts [processes] and subparts and their interrelations, especially as processes Objective design is immersed in a social process or an individual's life: knowledge [awareness, value, being and disciplines] --> design --> action --> evaluation. Philosophy provides an understanding of the nature and foundation of the different aspects of the process and of the total process, and similarly to other interacting levels of design and evolution. Philosophy also contributes to the sub-processes - the branches of knowledge, modes of action, and so on. The provisions of philosophy should be in interaction with the individual disciplines but while focusing on totality, purpose, meaning, and setting The contribution of philosophy is complementary to the understanding provided by evolution and, if we choose, we can contribute the lessons of evolution and organicity into evolution. Thus philosophy and evolution enhance each other and these enhancements interact, making it legitimate to introduce an evolutionary philosophy 3.1.2 FOUNDATIONS OF THE OBJECTIVES AND BASIC POSTULATES...of this work have been stated [1.2, 1.3] 3-5 3.1.3 APPLICATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO DESIGN VALUESAll levels of design are included and therefore all areas of human endeavor. Examples are philosophy of science, political philosophy, philosophy of “life” Philosophy includes general schemes of understanding, knowing, being, predicting and choosing and, as such, is useful in design. For example, in engineering or social design, we would like to know something about what values are relevant and how they affect choice. Such questions are considered critically and creatively in philosophy. The creative element is valuable because design is not merely reflection of values but also calls values into question certain general philosophical criteria: coherence, logical connectedness, adequacy, and applicability are relevant, with appropriate interpretation to design models. In personal design, there is a need to know the accessible dimensions of being. “Complete” answers to such questions would include a philosophical one Given the pace and tempo of modern 1986 design and change, we can question the value of philosophy. Philosophy questions the pace itself, for the pace is a philosophy - of action. One way, a reasonable way, to counter such a philosophy is with a philosophy of reflection; and, certainly, there are sufficient warnings and signs to warrant the question of pace. Philosophy provides a context for understanding pace, its interrelations and values, implications of change. More generally, society has long left the arena of mythic and intuitive philosophy of action and being; and while such philosophy remains durable, the more reflective and independent forms of philosophy - critical and creative - are essential The input from philosophy will be general and further considerations will come from specific experience and disciplines. Philosophy through personal philosophical reflection, 3-6 accumulated and generalized experience of others; indeed, through the experience of evolution itself, will provide a general framework that will avoid the circular and self-referential logic of special disciplines In short, “philosophy first” is an aspect of top-down design How practical! 3-7 3.1.4 TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESSES OF HUMANKIND, SOCIETY, AND NATURE AS A UNITYThere can be but one process [3.1.1]; we classify, see and know sub-processes and aspects. The following representation is foundation for further development: Being and process ¯ Evolution [Creative evolution] ¯ Awareness and manifest process or Design and action ¯ Knowledge [awareness, fact, value] --> design --> action --> evaluation This structure includes whole social process - and not merely cognition and related institutions; and life and nature. Evolution shows the connections through knowledge, which is also evolving; these elements are essential to complete design Philosophy can understand the nature and provide a foundation for this composite as a unity, directly through critical and creative contribution to the elements of understanding and through provision of a foundation for evolution. Philosophy can encourage direct vision of this unity, for nature itself has no assumptions, axioms or contradictions. One of the tasks of philosophy is to remove the vagueness in origins [and hence axioms], and the contradictions of our modes of thought and feeling, of our separate realities, and provide eclectic synthesis. In addition, as philosophy shows the incompleteness of our thoughts, it clears paths to direct vision, which includes cognition. In this way, through reflection on being and process as a unity, we become open to the whole of existence. This is valuable - and the pragmatic and the sacred combine in this value because the future is unknown, and, perhaps, largely unknowable to any static system 3-8 3.1.5 AS AN OUTLINE or FRAMEWORK FOR STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY, BASED IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGNHowever, why is a framework for philosophy of value in design? As understood here, philosophy is a part of design. Here we are considering all levels of design. Philosophy founding philosophy is design founding design. The general study is an essential complement to the specific studies; for the latter, while paying essential attention to specifics, can, in their involvement, omit the more global connections. Philosophy provides a framework for [1] the large-scale connections at levels corresponding to all appropriate dimensions of being, and [2] the interconnections between, and appropriate balance among, degrees of scale and level Integration of social process, and design and evolution is an organic framework for understanding and seeing nature and the induced unity on our understanding of the process is of a philosophical character...out of this, and together with other philosophical approaches such as organicity, evolutionism, we can develop a philosophy of knowledge, design, action, evaluation and of philosophy. To this end, it will be useful to understand existing philosophy. The objective will be to include whatever is valuable in existing philosophy, knowledge, art, religion, and so on and to add to the relative truths50 of these systems by founding in original existence [being and process] 3-9 3.2 THE NATURE OF PHILOSOPHYApproaches to definitions should not be ad hoc or based merely on accumulations of old definitions and ideas on the nature of the concept involved. Two rational approaches can be used: [1] a general one is which a whole context is delineated, studied, classified, compared and applied; repeated use of this approach including historical and evolutionary principles available from a study of such repeated use. For a topic as general as philosophy, no final definition can be given but only contributory characterizations as a part of changes in culture [history] - while such changes occur; and [2] specific or specifiable definitions rooted in specific contexts or related to specific purposes or conceptual schemes. Such definitions will be useful but limited, at least somewhat, to the specific time and purpose. These definitions will be among those that contribute to the general, evolving concepts The full objectives of this work include all of philosophy. This becomes clear when it is noted that evolution, knowledge and design, action, and so on, are included. Philosophy includes synthesis and foundation of these aspects of life. However, there is value to a consideration of the nature of philosophy in a way that is independent of the slant and objectives of this work. This independent consideration may be synthesized with a philosophy that is slanted toward the objectives of this work...some specific purposes were given [3.1]. General purposes are implied by “nature of philosophy”. While the explicit design objectives here cannot be used as the basis of a full understanding of philosophy, they can provide a start: the content of 3.1 suggests the following characteristics of philosophy 3-10 3.2.1 SOME ASPECTS BASED IN DESIGNA. Philosophy is [or should be] grounded in and useful for life [application], but seeks a whole picture and avoids over-concern with immediate application. These features, in combination with more immediate disciplines and arts, make philosophy useful and adaptive to the general situation of humankind. Philosophy provides a general framework for action and design - including all aspects, levels, organismic and symbolic knowledge - as they interface the unknown and the known. This is a motivation for the development of philosophy B. Philosophy provides general schemes of understanding, knowing, being, acting, predicting, choosing; inclusive generality partly motivated by large unknowns and partly by need for holism and inclusion of organic knowledge, including evolution, in such understanding C. Complemented by special disciplines; implies [1] philosophy does not get into details where accurate specialized disciplines are available - unless there is some special need [e.g., understanding, suggestion, testing]; and [2] can get into analysis of details where special disciplines have not been developed and, perhaps, given the nature of the aspect of experience under consideration, are not likely to be developed. This is the origin of physics and biology, psychology, sociology and social studies such as political, educational analysis, logic, linguistics, analysis of religion, value, art and esthetics. At any given time it is difficult to say which specialized disciplines are emerging; possible modern 1987 examples are cognitive science,51 evolutionary analysis - since Hegel and Darwin - including foundations of knowledge [and value], design, action, synthesis of idea, religion and general evolutionary synthesis of the elements of social process - not to the exclusion of the biophysical; further, philosophy remains important in frontier studies as in the interactive meaning of space and time and the pre-perceptual and cognitive foundation of these concepts, foundations of science, meaning and possibility, and nature of human motivation 3-11 D. Study of true or ultimate nature; generally and in special disciplines, even where accuracy is available; accuracy itself is not understanding E. Study of foundations, criticism of knowledge whether special or general; unified understanding of separate dimensions or aspects of reality by eclectic syntheses of the corresponding disciplines - phenomenology as a basis of synthesis; thus includes concern with consistency and logic These views are preliminary and partial characterizations with respect to both accuracy and completeness. Below, sections 3.2.2 through 3.5, are a number of other characterizations and observations to complement and correct the ones made above 3-12 3.2.2 PHILOSOPHY AS A METHOD VS. PHILOSOPHY AS KNOWLEDGEA number of characterizations of philosophy are considered in an article by J. Passmore52 The characterizations in this article range from Plato's to Russell's. Most are rejected as inadequate; but are interesting and valuable for their insight and contribution. Finally, philosophy characterized as “theory of critical discussion.” This is a good characterization of one philosophic tradition [method] [English-speaking philosophers; analytic and critical philosophy], but leaves out much that is valuable. Much original Western philosophy, modern 20th century Continental philosophy, and Eastern philosophy are excluded. Entire traditions in philosophy are omitted; e.g., speculative philosophy which provides the content which can be critically formulated, and examined critically and empirically [from data including specific theory]; and the more direct approaches to knowledge such as intuitive, mystic, transcendental. The speculative method [3.4.3] is a more complete model of philosophic method than the critical method; the speculative method is a generalization of hypothesis-deduction and verification or selection [which includes “falsification”].53 It is trial and error and includes the critical [more algorithm like] as well as direct approaches. A more complete characterization of philosophic method is the speculative-critical approach - a synthesis; this includes all standard varieties of scientific method, especially the hypothetico-deductive method as special cases Also omitted from the idea of philosophy as method is the whole of philosophic knowledge. There is a sense in which all knowledge is philosophy but, to be useful, restriction should be made to knowledge that is in some sense ultimate, eternal, general, synthetic, the result of critical analysis and so on. While it is true that the content of philosophy is evolving due to creative speculation, criticism, evolution of culture and knowledge generally; and while it is also true that specialized disciplines break away 3-13 from philosophy as their content crystallizes and becomes more secure; there is still a place, within philosophy itself, for knowledge. For, the importance of method is, in addition to its being a process, in its ability to provide content, as both method and content intertwine and evolve. At any time philosophy is, perhaps, best characterized by some happy, “best” combination of methods and contents [3.3-3.5]. Further, it remains that there is a core of philosophy, the sacred or eternal problems [3.3.1-2, 3.5.2] whose contemplation transforms individuals by a centering in the greatness of creation and which is constant or changes very slowly 3-14 3.2.3 GENERAL CHARACTERIZATIONSome of the observations of 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 will be repeated for their relevance to a general characterization of philosophy. In any analysis which is a part of evolving “knowledge,” “culture” and so on, concepts are modified [and introduced] even though, often, the words remain the same. Introduction of new meaning is through seeing new connections - in this work particularly, from holism [knowledge in nature and organism], organic holism [organism in nature], whole process and by metaphor, speculation, trial construction. The old words are both necessary [to connect the new to the old - except when the old must be completely discarded], and a hindrance [I must carefully attend to specification] A. Includes generalized knowledge; whole world, universal views B. Has an inclusive function; holistic: organism a whole, organism and environment a whole; knowledge has many dimensions including intuitive, emotive, feeling, organismic, and knowledge a part of organism and environment, of evolution; is open to entire universes of experience and knowledge. Inclusion includes polarities and continua, polarities within continua - polarities as opposites or discrete entities, as “actualities” and ideas. In many situations a polarity is most economically and beautifully understood as a continuum with one pole a special case, not opposite, of the other - examples: knowledge, and therefore philosophical knowledge, as separate from nature versus knowledge as a part of nature, that is of organism, ecosystem; and, therefore, of evolution. Knowledge and nature as discrete are largely ingrained in modern 1986 naive thinking - knowledge is information, found in libraries but not process. This discreteness is related to Descartes' mind and matter; corresponds to the “critical” theory of knowledge and philosophy which accepts, as given, some ultimate form of discourse which is complete - though not completely discovered [Platonism] - and within which assertions, theories are clear in their meaning and true or false. In contrast there is the “speculative” theory of knowledge and philosophy which does or should root knowledge in organism, environment and evolution - either through “hardwiring” or potential - knowledge and organism are part of the same whole, accepts no current mode of discourse within which meaning is absolutely clear and assertions and theories are characterized by ambiguity and probability [the actual situation is complex since theories have philosophical as well as factual content; see 3.3.2 and 3.5.6]: meaning itself evolves as knowledge and society [and organism evolve]. Examples: [polarity]: fact vs. theory.54 3-15 C. Is open to criticism at the deepest levels, for philosophy and language often labor under the inadequacies and misconceptions of ancient thought. This is more a problem in the more “developed” cultures in which [1] language is the primary medium of philosophy and [2] philosophy is a profession D. An approach to the “problems” of polarity, inclusion or exclusion, ambiguity and probability is to start with the most inclusive scheme of philosophy of knowledge possible. In such a scheme all experience and potential experience, fact or potential fact, and assertions and potential assertions about such would be included. Then a number of criteria for classifying, grading, or hierarchical organization would be specified. In cases where a criterion is applicable with ambiguity or inapplicable, this could be specified. System would then be introduced into the schemes. Since time will be one of the means of grading, evolution is an implied concept. For the selection of criteria, and specification of experience, fact, and assertion, some primitive theoretical-empirical system is used. The meta-scheme is tested by appeal to the panorama of available fact, experience, and theory. This approach is not greatly different from conventional except: [a] level of inclusion, [b] flexibility in grading, [c] explicit recognition of elements of the process The basis of a meta-scheme upon a simpler scheme is a model of evolutionary process including [a] variation and selection, [b] reproduction and interaction [carefully thought out], and [c] emergence of levels. Basis in social [knowledge] is immediate and basis in primal evolution is not apparent55 except as knowledge makes contact with such evolution and through levels of social evolution, Levels I and II E. Uses the “speculative approach” to constructing language and systems of understanding, explaining, generalizing, predicting, and choosing. This consists in using formal, algorithmic, heuristic, intuitive means to constructing such systems and testing for consistency and truth by application to factual and theoretical systems 3-16 F. Philosophy provides its own motivation: [1] As an attitude toward knowledge philosophy includes - or attempts to develop and include - an invariant language which is unaffected by sciences and science, knowledge, psychology. This seems like a resurrection of the critical function as the whole of philosophy and as such seems antithetical to evolutionary-speculative philosophy. This is not so. There is value to the critical attempt in that it attempts to provide an independent reference for knowledge. But such a reference probably falls in between the ideal [and perhaps nonexistent - even potentially] ultimate and invariant and the ephemeral nature of science; and it is undoubtedly, in this way, part of some implicit evolutionary-speculative system, and some actual and explicit, if forgotten, speculative scheme. Perhaps all symbolic knowledge, even symbolic expression of intuitive knowledge, begins as speculation; futile speculations are discarded, fertile speculations “become” knowledge To the degree that an invariant language, perhaps a language of thought, is possible, it is useful and provides one characterization of metaphysics:56 whereas the speculative cosmology of the scientist describes the world in terms of elementary physical objects and processes [to what degree this is no longer true in modern 1987 physics, is problematic]. The speculative cosmology and descriptive metaphysics of the philosopher is expressed in terms of logical concepts as thing, individual, process; but note that the language of metaphysics, however distanced from some original physical real or class of reals, is not totally devoid of reference to reals [3.5.6] and therefore we can have hierarchies of descriptive metaphysics which may find universes of application. If a descriptive metaphysics is abstracted from some real and intuitive physics [etc.], it may apply to imagined processes [2] As an attitude toward life: There are philosophies of life and action [Area 6]; these are philosophies by virtue of advocating some view other than consensus value and showing by discussion literary exposition, or example how the alternative value provides a good basis for life, thought, action, creation. The “normal” value system could also be treated in this way - and often is; philosophy is not anti or pro “norm.” 3-17 G. Philosophy and language are related. Whitehead:57 “Every science must devise its own instruments. The tool required for philosophy is language. Thus, philosophy redesigns language...At this point appeal to facts is a difficult operation. This appeal is not solely to the expression of facts in current verbal statements. The adequacy of such statements is the main question at issue...” Hence, the essential nature of speculative philosophy. [Algorithms for developing adequate general languages are probably impossible.] The relation between language and analytic philosophy is clear [Whitehead was never merely an analytical or critical philosopher]. However, there are questions as to whether language is the only vehicle for philosophy. In addition to symbolic communication, there is sensual communication - visual, tonal, etc., aesthetic and artistic communication, communication by example and action. An important point is - while knowledge and philosophy are incomplete, new forms of communication and expression are needed H. “Schemes of speculative philosophy dominate the sciences; one aim of philosophy is to make such schemes explicit.”58 I. “In philosophy, the merest hint of dogmatic certainty is exhibition of folly.” The value of this assertion may be questioned. [Does it include the transcendental? Is the transcendental communicated or implanted without physical and temporal communication? Does the transcendental evolve? Why should transcendental be different? Is not transcendental knowledge self-communication between symbolic and intuitive modes...?] The point: The evolutionary, speculative, probable natures of philosophy, knowledge are underlined again J. One aim of philosophy is “self-correction by consciousness of its own initial excesses of philosophy.” 3-18 K. Analytic knowledge and philosophy, expressed in symbolic language, work by recording and abstraction from nature. Abstraction is essential to avoid eternal concern with detail, to provide clarity and understanding, to make it “easier to conceive the infinite variety of specific instances resting in the womb of nature.” However both recording and abstraction involve incompleteness and inaccuracy; therefore, analytic knowledge can never be fully complete or correct - unless the universe is actually much simpler than we commonly think it to be - except by accident. [Does this apply to the transcendental? I think so, but am not sure because of my uncertainty about the nature of transcendental communication as reported.] In the speculative model advance is evolutionary = variation and selection and speculation and test [critical and empirical]; in fact, I question whether “the function” of knowledge is absolute meaning, clarity, certainty; rather the function, in all circumstances, is adaptive to some purpose. Such purposes include but are not restricted to evolutionary “purposes.” Because of freedom within physical-bio-psychosocial constraints, we are free to choose perfect accuracy as a value, except that the speculative model questions the final meaning of accuracy L. There is in addition to descriptive metaphysics, a real metaphysics. Aristotle, in Metaphysics: “There is a science which investigates being as being, and the attributes which belong to this in virtue of its own nature. Now this is not the same as any of the so-called special sciences, for none of these treats universally of being as being. They cut off a part of being and investigate the attributes of this part.” 3-19 3.3 DIVISIONS OF PHILOSOPHYThe discussion of 3.1 and 3.2 has suggested the nature of the divisions of philosophy. It includes what there is in the universe [metaphysics] and how we know it [epistemology]. Metaphysics includes existence as a whole and those parts of existence which are not covered within “established” knowledge - the special problems and applications of philosophy. Epistemology seeks a critical approach to understanding and knowledge. Epistemology is a study of the processes [reason] and apparatus [perception] by which knowledge is obtained and is closely related to method. Metaphysics and epistemology are at least partially inclusive of each other. Despite these connections, I will show metaphysics, epistemology and method separate in classification tree below It is not my intent to justify this scheme of Philosophy
Table 2 The Divisions of Philosophy
Table 3 The Divisions of Philosophy - Applications and Special Problems Links to Charts on the Divisions of Philosophy The Divisions of Philosophy [10 Kb] Applications and Special Problems of Philosophy [6 Kb] 3-20 3.3.1 METAPHYSICSNature of existence, reality, being as being; in full; as a whole; the ultimate nature of things... “We hope to find in experience and elements intrinsically incapable as examples of metaphysics”61 The metaphysical characteristics of an entity are those that apply to all entities: include descriptive metaphysics as the appropriate language for analytic metaphysics. Speculative metaphysics is the speculative and speculative-critical method applied to being and results in analytic metaphysics if language is the medium of expression of the speculative system. Transcendental metaphysics is direct knowledge of ultimate being Metaphysics includes all special sciences but the special sciences do not imply metaphysics. There is one reality; the analytic-rational process - of necessity - takes this apart descriptively and analyzes each part. The parts can be synthesized in a number of ways; such syntheses reflect some aspect of their original unity. Syntheses are possible because of the original unity that is manifest in evolutionary convergence of “mind and matter.” The unity is seen through the existence of hybrid sciences: biophysics, physical chemistry, and molecular biology. Re-linking is one approach to showing unity - and a special case is hierarchy; an alternative to re-linking aspects of being is to reconnect sub-processes. In this way [1] the number of connections is smaller, and [2] the dimensions of being need not be sought. Yet, this is not, in itself, a guarantee of fullness. Perhaps there is an evolutionary path to fullness, evolutionary metaphysics Divisions of metaphysics: ▪ General Metaphysics: Being and process as a whole. Speculative and or critical and transcendental metaphysics - approaches ontology: ultimate nature of being Values are [1] as a source of insight, and [2] provision of an invariant language or descriptive metaphysics62 or general framework of understanding 3-21 ▪ Cosmology: The science that includes all sciences; based in physical, biological...constructs. Includes speculative and critical cosmology Cosmology is satisfied by explanations and theories; metaphysics by ultimates ▪ Epistemology and Psychology: Epistemology pertains to the relationship between knower-and- known, and [1] so includes the relevant aspects of psychology. Among these are psychologies of perception and value, including affect; and [2] both epistemology and psychology could be considered as part of metaphysics since knower-and-known is part of the universe The value of epistemology to metaphysics is clear, for [a] it is not obvious that there are ultimates in nature, but, if there are, epistemology has something to say about recognition of the ultimates; and [b] irrespective of whether there are ultimates in nature, epistemology has something essential to say on perception and knowledge, and whether there are any ultimates in perception and knowledge In other words, regarding knower-and-known as part of a composite system of interactions, there may be ultimates in states of knowledge and processes of knowing and perception. These ultimates may be inherent in composite nature everywhere or accessible through a process of evolution. If such ultimates do not exist then epistemology still has much to say on the results of the processes of knowing; i.e., on knowledge and metaphysics We are thus lead to a dual view: [1] Metaphysics as the knowledge of ultimates includes epistemology, or [2] Epistemology as the science of ultimates in the composite relation or process of knower-and-known includes metaphysics There is an identity between metaphysics and epistemology. However, in their psychologies, emphases and approximations, they may be different and there may be practical reasons to prefer one set of emphases, etc. over the other in actual situations. Some preferences are as follows. Individuals with object emphasis - prefer metaphysics; those with subject-object emphasis - prefer epistemology 3-22 ▪ Evolutionary Metaphysics and Epistemology: Metaphysics is the attempt to deal with final truths behind knowledge and epistemology includes the attempt to elucidate final forms of knowledge. Both include and occur within a cosmological scheme. Evolution is emergence of order; current knowledge of biological evolution recognizes no finality or end but the same is by no means truly known of universal evolution Advance in epistemology and metaphysics may occur because of [1] evolution or growth of an individual, [2] evolution of the social and ecological framework within which individuals live, [3] biological evolution of species and life, and [4] evolution of the universe or cosmological63 evolution. The latter includes the material substrate. We cannot predict or limit knowledge with finality - at least within analytic rational frameworks as currently understood. However, it may be possible to predict and secure advance by reading evolution To understand the need for metaphysics - as, metaphysics of Western philosophy, an individual must understand the motive to perfection and finality in the enterprise in general, including knowledge. Even if this aim is not possible, the motive to advance and progression remains. Direct or indirect involvement in the advance of a single discipline, or synthesis of more than one, provides an example and motivation toward metaphysics; thus there is elegance and economy in advance and synthesis. Additionally, by analyzing the evolution of one's own growth and thought, insights into the growth of metaphysics occur. This, too, fashions the growth of metaphysics. Similar advance occurs through analysis of the remaining processes and interactions among all four. Physics is beginning to have insight into the evolution of the universe and its structure as we understand it. [There may come a time when we understand the dynamics of this evolution and then this dynamics will become part of the “the” structure of the universe.] The insight of physics may give us insight into new frameworks for metaphysics. There is a role for philosophy here but those who develop it will have to have a deep understanding of science and philosophy The first process above [Item 1] occurs on a time scale about that of a human life span. The time scales of the remaining processes increase in order of presentation. We may learn about metaphysics by reading progressions through the levels of process. If the gaps between levels are too high, there may be intermediate levels. Such progressions may be dynamic and causal; others may be analogical 3-23 An example of analogy follows. Evolution of the physical universe is thought to have occurred through a number of phases. Cosmologists liken the transitions to phase changes. We can also liken the transitions to emergence of new types of order. The evolution of the universe could then be compared to the punctuated equilibrium model of biological evolution ▪ Comparative Metaphysics and Epistemology: Analogy, similarity and difference form the basis of comparing studies. In addition to introspection and evolutionary study, metaphysics may be advanced by studying the cosmologies of all sciences, religions and so on ▪ Metaphysics of Design and Choice: Most biologists accept biological evolution but reject mentalism. Most scientists would reject mentalism saying that mind is not a thing but a process This latter observation is actually an argument for mentalism - in the sense of mind as a process. Many “things” that one thinks of as things “are” processes; this does not mean I adhere to process philosophy. In some sense mind [the process] must be inherent in the “inert” nature that is the substance of biological evolution. An assumption of materialism is more wonderful than mentalism [mind as matter]: the processes of nature evolved mind The same applies to the consciousness, choice making, design and planning faculties. It does not do to explain these concepts away. These faculties are among the primary64 facts of our experience, even when they cannot be verbalized. The materialists and biologists and neurologists who would explain them away, would do so on the basis of secondary and tertiary facts of analytic or linguistically expressed science If nature is “inert”, “blind”, or “material” then it is this nature which has evolved mind, choice, design. We have no logic that will rule out design on other scales of space-time-being. Perhaps design and choice are part of the ultimate or progress to the ultimate in being and understanding; material being or process is a special case and not opposite to design 3-24 ▪ Content and Process: Some modes of description employ a language of entities. These emphasize the constants of nature or of perception and knowledge. Other modes of description employ a language of process. These emphasize flux, change and shifting. Perceptually content is recognized through contrast in extension and process is recognized through contrast in time. Psychologically, content emphasizes permanence and security; process emphasizes transience and openness. Both modes of perception, knowledge and psychological being exist and have their place, The distinction is not intrinsically political, but it could have political implications It is desirable to incorporate both modes and perhaps better to fuse and unite them where possible. In some sciences this is done as follows: Content and Interaction = Dynamics --> Process; Process = Variation [includes Interaction] and Selection --> Emergence of Content Perhaps the two types of contrast are interwoven; beginnings in this direction are part of relativity theory We can recognize local patterns of contrast and global patterns. The local patterns have been called “proximate” and the global ones “ultimate.” We expect the ultimate to be “built up” [in the analytical method] out of the local. Out of convenience, we do use different languages - in biology the distinction has been interpreted as the distinction between functional and evolutionary biology ▪ Nature of Metaphysics - Again: We “learn” about the modes and dimensions of being and their processes, especially in the more [most] universal [mechanistic, evolutionary, and so on] and general forms; also the modes of description of this metaphysics makes contact with epistemology. The multiple categories of knowledge do not imply a duality of nature 3-25 ▪ Sources of Metaphysics. [1] In written works. The writings and records of philosophers, religious leaders and mystics, the great works of science and knowledge are sources of metaphysics - through either content or suggestion. The concerns of philosophy and the visionaries of ideal religion include the boundaries and unions of the known and unknown, and so the metaphysical The sciences, too, are concerned with metaphysics. Within the domain of science there are two metaphysical questions: first, the question of unification, and second, of validation. This is metaphysical at the same time that it is epistemological. The discussion of these questions must include metaphysical notions to progress. Unification requires concepts belonging to no science; validation brings us face to face with the general lack of certain proof. The character of scientific assertions is probabilistic in a specific sense; the generalizations incorporate all the relevant known information. At the boundaries of science, metaphysical notions are essential. Even the established notions of science point to a reality quite different from the naive one. It is, perhaps, psychologically necessary for the practicing scientist to eschew metaphysical ideas as “dangerous”; but without a history of metaphysics behind us, we would be without language, culture, civilization, science, and technology [2] In evolution. See especially the Area 1, and refer to sub-areas 2.6.1, .2, .3, .9, .13... and items in this area that pertain to evolutionary-comparative metaphysics and epistemology [3] In attitudes of openness, adventure...in the wish to live on the edge of creation. The antitheses of these are closed-mindedness and dogma, conservatism, the desire for security. Of course, reality requires the presence of balance and all progress is an alternate tipping of the balance in the directions of openness and contraction 3-26 ▪ Authors of Metaphysics in Western Philosophy.65 Many of the great Western philosophers are [were] metaphysical thinkers. We see from the writings of these individuals, the value of metaphysics as an invariant framework of thought. Heisenberg was able to appeal to Plato. This does not imply the absolute nature of metaphysics and metaphysical knowledge. The Western world still labors under the errors and omissions of its linguistic and metaphysical traditions. This points to the value of metaphysics and metaphysical thinking and reconstruction, as well as linguistic reconstruction in at least two ways: [1] the hidden and implicit foundation [in addition to the explicit ones] of Western civilization and thought, including common sense, in Western metaphysics and language, including corruptions of the same, and [2] the deprivation and poverty of the Western tradition in comparison with its own origins; this includes attitudes The authors can be divided into a number of periods: Greek Parmenides Aristotle Plato Middle Ages Boethius John Scotus Erigena St. Anselm William of Champeux St. Bonaventure Peter Abelard Revival of Classical Philosophy Aquinas Duns Scotus William of Occam 3-27 Rise of Modern Philosophy Descartes Spinoza Leibniz Locke Hume Kant Post Kantian Philosophy Evolutionary Pantheism Hegel Pragmatism C. S. Pierce John Dewey Origins of Logical Positivism Ernst Mach Ordinary Language Philosophy Russell Phenomenology Henri Bergson A. N. Whitehead Existentialism Martin Heidegger J.P. Sartre 3-28 NOTES. Ordinary language philosophy - the notion that ordinary language has more to it than philosophers have formally recognized, and that ordinary language is sufficient for philosophical discourse; logical positivism - science is a convenient summary formalism; phenomenology - observational science and ordinary sense presuppose a primitive experience that can be grasped by a deliberately naive description of actual entities; existentialism - metaphysics is a reality which cannot be described in an emotionally neutral way, but is in some sense possessed or encountered in commitment to a cause, or in facing the certainty of one's death 3.3.2 EPISTEMOLOGY - the THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE3.3.2.1 The Nature of Knowledge...and of Truth, Logic and ReasonThere is a close relation to metaphysics: theory of reality - for theory of knowledge includes nature of knowledge of reality, ways in which such knowledge is arrived and verified individually, socially. In fact, in the last section we saw how metaphysics and epistemology could be formally seen as including each other: metaphysics includes knowledge and knowing because minds, brains, memories, processes and their evolution are part of reality; epistemology includes the valid processes of knowing and therefore, potentially, all metaphysics [for the unknowable, when we include the organic processes of knowledge either directly or through their communication with thought, is not part of the universe of metaphysics]. However we regard this mutuality, we can make a distinction of emphasis: metaphysics emphasizes content and process of reality in general and in which mind66 is a chapter; epistemology emphasizes content and process of mind and metaphysical content and process is a topic. As suggested in 3.3.1, there may be advantages in regarding epistemology and metaphysics - knower and known - as a composite system of interacting and or inclusive states and processes; this will go toward understanding the natures of being and knowledge in general and the question of the unknowable and unknown in particular Relevant to the nature of knowledge are the notions of truth and of logic.67 Truth, rationally, is the agreement of a proposition with the facts. In analytic philosophy, a proposition is expressed verbally and this brings in to question the ability of each linguistic system to adequately express each, or all propositions. Some argue that a proposition is its linguistic expression; this would be so if each level of evolution proceeded in exact synchronicity with one another, and this includes the case of no evolution. However, I do not believe this to be true; actual language and actual mind66 evolve at different rates Classically, a proposition is true or false: there are only two levels of agreement - agreement and disagreement. In reality, we can recognize degrees of agreement, and so there is a role for extending the notion of truth to incorporate degrees of truth [or falsity]. This is an 3-29 everyday situation. In more complex areas of thought and activity, agreement between the propositions of thought [conscious and organic] and facts cannot always be complete. However, it is valuable to know whether a proposition is close to true. We can introduce a measure of quantification as a basis of comparison or a relation such as “more true” or, if that seems contradictory, “closer to truth.” ▪ Logic:68 Analysis of relationships between truth - or degrees of truth - of propositions. Classically, the only truth-values were “true” and “false”. Multiple-valued Logics pertain to relationships between degrees of truth of propositions. When different criteria of truth are used within the same system, we have “modal” Logics; example, a system of propositions in which we recognize both necessary and contingent truth When truth pertains to fact [the “I am”], the logic is “declarative.” When truth pertains to value [the “I should”], the logic is “imperative.” Herbert Simon, in The Sciences of the Artificial, has shown the reduction of imperative logic to declarative logic through optimization theory. This reduction depends on the applicability of a particular class of optimization theory. Perhaps the reduction can be formally extended. However, we have existential reasons to believe in the identity of the nature of fact and value [simply, if “I should do this” is true, then “...” is the proposition of a fact; of course not every value is “I should...” “or “...should...”?] The identity of fact and value has been called a pragmatic notion - I do not agree, because I do not think of all facts as material, biological, and the like; that is, I am not being a reductionist in this issue The idea that proof is central in philosophy has been criticized. If philosophy is to talk about notions beyond the special disciplines, proof cannot be central. One of the aims of philosophy is to provide notions, general analytic, rational, mystic, and so on; 3-30 Philosophy can provide frameworks within which fruitful discussion about world, knowledge, affect, aesthetics, ethics, and such can be conducted. In addition to logic, meta-logic, and various philosophical principles, there are various suggestive, illustrative, analogical direct69 - mystical and other - ways of knowing or reasoning to truth. These types of “logic” can be called heuristic,70 as distinguished from formal logic. Of course, the heuristic includes the formal. Heuristic pertains to discovery - and more, as explained - and formal logic to verification; and so existence is objection to excluding direct from formal In connection with the previous comments, Whitehead [Process and Reality , p 10], has said: The primary method of mathematics is deduction; the primary method of philosophy is descriptive generalization. Under the influence of mathematics, deduction has been foisted onto philosophy as its standard method, instead of taking its true place as an essential auxiliary mode of verification whereby to test the scope of generalities. This misapprehension of philosophic method has veiled the very considerable success of philosophy in providing generic notions that add lucidity to our apprehension of the facts of experience. The depositions of Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Kant, Berkeley, Hume, Hegel, merely mean that the ideas which these men introduced into the philosophic tradition must be construed with limitations, adaptations, and inversions, either unknown to them, or even explicitly repudiated by them We begin to see philosophy as process ▪ Epistemology and Logic. Logic is clearly connected with epistemology, but excludes the empirical aspect. It is often regarded a part of epistemology even when it is treated separately. Clearly, in so far as philosophy and knowledge are processes, logic is an essential part of epistemology. For logic plays a role in the production of knowledge through the coordination of information as proposition[s] into concepts and the development of consequent knowledge and information through suggestion [and pattern], generalization and deduction. Whitehead's exception to the use of formal deduction is not an argument against this essence if we include heuristic as an aspect of logic 3-31 ▪ Direct and Transcendent Modes of Knowledge. In a direct mode of knowing, the “medium” of knowledge - the knower [e.g., the “mind”] - directly apprehends the object of knowledge. It is not implied that there is no processing. Intuition is a form of direct knowledge In a transcendent mode, there is no processing, or process is not accessible either subjectively or rationally. The direct and transcendent modes include organismic and “feeling”; e.g., the body knows itself kinesthetically, but this kinesthetic knowledge of self includes knowledge of gravity, ground, water properties, and such Other modes of knowledge discussed are analytic, rational, and symbolic ▪ What Is Knowledge?71 I prefer not to tackle this question first under “epistemology.” I do not feel it sufficient to consider a single approach to explanation. There are four approaches below. These are not intended as exclusive [1] Knowledge - not process, now definition - as justified true belief. This is a definition of knowledge by reduction to constituent concepts. The concepts should be explained. We take truth as agreement of a proposition with the facts. If we agree with Whitehead [Process and Reality, p 11] that “there are no self-sustained facts, floating in nonentity” and “every proposition refers to a universe exhibiting some general systematic metaphysical character...a proposition can embody a partial72 truth because it only demands a certain type of systematic environment which is presupposed in its meaning,” then we must ask what these environments are. Explanations 2, 3, 4 following are approaches to this environmental question. Four is, perhaps, the ultimate answer to this question, if not to the actuality of knowledge then to the potential for knowledge. Note that Whitehead is not saying that propositions are essentially partial, but that they are partial when the systematic environment is partial. He does imply elsewhere that such environments must always be limited. Certainly, evolution provides an environment that is systematic. It is not obvious however, that it is total even though evolution can be traced back to cosmic sources - for the order that has, or could or may have, emerged elsewhere or even in our own environment, may be different - we do not quite know 3-32 Of course, speculation on the possible may lead to a more “positive” type of thinking. This possible includes completeness as well as incompleteness, the metaphysics inherent in [our] evolution. Either way we may imagine blocks to process and breaking through. [This can be a subject of metaphysics [3.3.1]] Another question in relation to truth: “are” propositions necessarily linguistic, analytic, symbolic? Other modes: preconscious, emotional intuitive, organismic...learned, innate or “learned” during evolution [e.g., instinct] Belief is the “feeling”73 that a certain proposition is true. But we can remove the distinction between feeling and analysis as seen above, and so a somewhat alternative approach to knowledge would be to identify different modes; e.g. “thinking,” “feeling” - and regard individual knowledge as agreement among the individual modes: rational-empirical, intuitive, “feeling”-empirical and feeling, etc Justified means according to some criterion. In relation to an individual, we can regard rational-empirical as justification, and “feeling” as believing. For some, “feeling” is justification. See previous parts of this section and 3.2 and 3.4 for further observations on rationality. Criteria for justification are not absolute and universal, but can be arranged according to ideal and hierarchy. There is individual knowledge and “public”: justification accepted by some type of majority. However, it is not preferable to define public in some unthinking statistical criterion, such as 100%, 99.9%, or 50%. I would rather have some criterion “intrinsic” to the general metaphysical-epistemic universe, such that when used the “actuality” of the resultant knowledge has value - a quantum jump in quality - for significant numbers of people and purposes; examples: ideal science, ideal religion. Such knowledge[s] are not necessarily universal or universally “better.” They are adapted differently, to different universes - “general” attitudes to such systems are issue involving more than “pure” epistemology We can thus formulate the idea behind the definite “justified true belief” somewhat differently. There are systems of public knowledge: art, religion, and science...involving various modes of knowledge 3-33 These systems, though not exclusive, do not refer to identical data. The truth of ideal science [in a limited sense] does not conflict the truth of large parts of ideal religion because it cannot; religion and science [limited senses] refer to largely different data. An individual has access to these modes and systems; forms his or her personal interpretations and special systems in reference to experience that includes the public systems. He or she forms fusions from experience, public systems, and imagination. These fusions include inclusion, synthesis, generalization, and extension. These are subject to personal criteria, public criteria. Some fusions, advances “succeed.” No stage is absolute. Each stage is progress toward a general metaphysics or knowledge without qualification [because it satisfied all appropriate qualifications]. Thus, knowledge is knowledge when it satisfies sets of criteria; justified true belief [with publicly-individually justified truth according to rational-empirical74 criteria and at least individual belief] is a wide spread and for many purposes an appropriate set This approach to definition, formally unpolished, is an analytical approach based on a minimum of assumptions on the nature of reality. It is justified as such. However, it makes no reference to objectives, the knower, or origins of knowledge. These considerations may provide alternates, modifications, improvements, restrictions, and generalizations [2] Knowledge as a Goal Directed Activity. Begin by breaking the achievement of a goal into stages: pre-execution and execution. Pre-execution can be divided into intentional - the stage in which the execution toward the goal is a definite objective and pre-intentional in which the individual has other goals and or more diffuse or generalized “goals” but no special emphasis or awareness of the specific goal in question 3-34 Of course, there is no perfectly sharp break between activities - at least not in all situations. With this proviso, and abbreviating “activity not directed to any specific goal” to “being,” we have: goal achievement = being --> intention --> execution. Being includes activity not directed to any goal as well as activity directed toward general goals which arise from “primal being” through evolution. The activities directed toward general goals include storage of “resources” and related activities of environmental [social and natural] “modeling.” Such generalized activities are advantageous and it is natural that they should “feel good” to individuals. These processes come to be of value in themselves, but must remain in balance - in society as a whole. Now: Goals = primal being75 --> “resources” and “modeling” --> intention --> execution --> actualization Resources provide the base for specific activity. Modeling provides the base for specific and later for general activity. Specific goal achievement is, in general, contribution to general goals - of course, variety and multiplicity of approach is also of value: hence, the advantage of evolution of generalized potential as contrasted to specific capability. Modeling, models, generalized models and the capability for such are “knowledge”; organismic, intuitive modes are not excluded. We can now say: Goal achievement = primal being --> “resources” and knowledge --> intention --> execution specific general Dashed line: provides base; not “explicitly,” as I recognize it, part of the process 3-35 So, achievement of specific goals = knowledge --> intention --> execution --> pre-intention --> pre-execution The first meaning of execution is “physical” action, but we find that pre-execution activities can themselves be the subject of knowledge and intention; hence execution does include action, does not exclude knowledge and intention - even the mental aspects. Knowledge includes cognitive as well as emotive, intuitive aspects and physical action. Intention includes the same aspects as knowledge but more specific and directed toward execution. Intention includes planning and design This entire discussion is descriptive rather than deductive or axiomatic Summary: Knowledge = any generalized modeling through simulation or conceptualization and pattern recognition of total environment and process: physical, natural, social, mental; includes Empirical activity Intention = Design and planning; similar to knowledge but related to specific goal Execution = Direct activity towards specific goal - includes physical, and mental Discussion: The modeling activities include learning [from nature] and the result of this learning is knowledge. We cannot “know” all the facts and, so, knowledge must include concepts as its entities and patterns as its contrasts [spatial structure, temporal process] 3-36 In the sense of the present concept, knowledge is related, but not subject to a purpose, is adaptive, though not to any specific purpose and not solely to survival: the purpose of well being is included. Well-being is included but not limited to proliferation; abundance and inner defined values are included - within bounds and in balance. What additional criterion of truth [as in “justified true belief”] does the present concept provide - it is of adaptation to generalized purposes of “being” and “well-being” [i.e., survival, security, and happiness: perhaps belonging, status, actualization, transcendence; the mulberry bush: transcendence --> evolution] and adaptability to specific purposes of themselves [value of variety, diversity, special purposes --> survival and expansion and emergence] and as they contribute to general purpose The present discussion contains circular elements on a strictly logical level and can be tightened up - though primitives - conceptual atoms and processes would remain76 - since description, information and understanding have been provided [3] System Theory of Knowledge. The idea is that knower [“mind”] and known [“mind and universe or sub-system”] are regarded as a composite system in which the subsystem mind has states and processes which correspond to states and processes of the universe [including mind]. This does not distinguish conceptual nature of knowledge, but could. This theory explains the nature of symbols and symbolic atoms, but does not give them a foundation or explain their origins. The origins of knowledge are not explained, but its operation as a steady or, perhaps, near steady process are [4] Evolutionary Theory of Knowledge. The origins of knowledge are explained through emergence. Here is an approach to a full and complete foundation of knowledge - rational and descriptive. There is a possibility for deduction that is finite [if reality behaves in a finite way]. Here is a full approach, potentially, to the origin and nature of knowledge 3-37 It is not clear how deep into evolution to go: certainly to the first point of symbolic knowledge; probably to the origin of organic knowledge and organic and organismic information processes for we shall probably need to explain the origin of symbolic atoms on this or some related, simulated, similar, or simplified basis; perhaps to the origin of biological evolution for here is the origin of organic evolution and reactivity, that is original knowledge, but only “perhaps,” because it does not seem to matter that we go back quite this far - cellular level may be adequate. Then, again, the explanation may be simplest and most obvious at the molecular level with DNA, RNA and nucleic acids staring us in the face. It may be necessary to go before chemistry to the elemental physical level, but this seems very improbably. However, if it is necessary, the explanation would be simple, probably too simple and hence the improbability of the explanation at this level. It may be necessary to invoke some model of consciousness as well, as some subset of total process, pragmatically, because the need for autonomic organic processes are essential because knowledge is generalization “The” evolutionary theory does not maintain that survival is the only object of knowledge; nor does it or any adaptive theory necessarily deny that any of awareness --> knowledge --> design --> action --> evaluation --> feedback lack value [in face of complexity, uncertainty] as separate or integrated institutions. The previous meanings - justified true relief, goal directed activity, and system theory - are included, at least potentially, and even with truth, certainty. Bio-environmental interactions bring out the development of potential [in social context - society and organism being part of environment] and potential is developed in a socio-environmental context [within bio-potential limits, but not necessarily to the extremes of the limits] ▪ Location of Knowledge. State and process descriptions are relevant. Where is knowledge [noun] stored? “Memory”! Where does knowledge [verb or process] occur? “Intelligence”! Words of this type are anathema to behaviorists and to those who recognize misuse. Also, memory is not static - it decays and underlying these slow and fast decays are micro-processes. Where does knowledge reside? Who, what originates [starts] the process? Clearly, the location of knowledge is a diffuse thing if we take the adaptive, systemic and or evolutionary theories instead of the human-cognition 3-38 centered point of view of “justified true belief” - the latter is a specialized version of the former. We find diffuse elements of mind and intelligence everywhere. In nature , all life reacts adaptively to information in a way that includes some acquired or inherited state [of “knowledge”] and or processing of information. In advance organisms there are the organismic, diffuse-feeling, centralized emotional, and the conventional intuitive and symbolic-cognitive-rational modes. The conventional modes and centralized emotional and, perhaps, certain pre-limbic aspects, are highly centralized or focused, highly specialized, very complex and powerful, related to “consciousness” - another word that makes pseudo-sophisticates bristle or cringe, and a central element of civilization. For these reasons, as well as the anthropocentric ones, we tend to focus on the specialized modes. However, there may be essential loss of information in suppressing the feeling-organismic modes [as knower or known] and so these modes are important in themselves and for their interaction with the more centralized-conscious modes. In addition, the organismic-feeling modes exist in all of life with which we are interdependent and which fact tends to be suppressed by excess emphasis on the “higher” modes Where else do we find intelligence and mind? In artifacts of life: libraries and books [very static], modern information systems [less static], societies - human and other; and in institutions and certain artifacts of societies or, better, in the social structure that enhances production of artifacts: beaver colonies producing beaver dams In inert matter as it is? Potentially, insofar as “inert” matter is the progenitor of life, yes; and mystics claim to see mind and consciousness pervading all of creation - and there is a point to this. We might well ask ourselves when we “rationally” judge inert matter as without “mind”: are we confusing rationality and egocentrism? Of course, and even though this would be neat, I do not expect a stone to solve a differential equation. However, we may consider whether an inclusive hierarchy of intelligence, mind, consciousness attributed to all “creation” or “being” is a more accurate description than the simple polarization: conscious-unconscious What about computers? They are inert - but, whatever we feel about our experience now, I do not think we can say that they will not progress, evolve, or self-evolve to the point of being intelligent in the multifaceted, flexible way of humans. And what of evolution in the universe? We cannot logically [or any way that I know of] rule out large design 3-39 Philosophy of Mind and Nature. Philosophy of mind is important in relation to the nature of knowledge and its theory. Hence, I think it is appropriate to discuss mind as an issue in epistemology. However, I do not think of mind and nature as separate. Mind is equally an issue in metaphysics. The distinction “mind” and “matter” beginning with Descartes, permitted development of a science of nature independently of church doctrine, and continues, in modified form to modern times [1986]. I believe this distinction to be a convenient one for certain purposes, but a misleading one for others [for example, parts of psychology]. Therefore, it is inessential Those who regard [or have regarded] the “mind”-”matter” distinction as essential have been unable or unwilling to distinguish between actuality of being and descriptive categories, and or have been motivated by religion or politics. However, I do not think, as do some empirical-positivist-analytic philosophers and scientists, that the concept of mind should be banished. I believe that such opinions originate in some combination of reaction, fear, ego, extension of linguistic forms [language, logic, mathematics, etc.] and science beyond their domains of descriptive and predictive ability Banishment of concepts and essential dualisms are irrelevant to understanding - except in the sense that strident statements and rigid positions can spark development. Concepts and understanding evolve even when words remain unchanged. Concepts and understanding are dynamic and shifting in spite of apparent stability due to psychological [need] and social [political, cultural - example, in a society largely dependent on material technology, science may seem to be more real than life]. If a concept is outmoded, it will usually die a natural death The distinction between mind and nature is a particularization, in the human context, of the distinction between epistemology and metaphysics. However, discussion in 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 indicates the essential connection of epistemology and metaphysics - of mind and nature 3-40 Mind and nature are part of a composite system-process and, no matter the scientific disposition to nature or mind as matter, it is not the function of philosophy to mimic science. One function of philosophy, the critical function, is to found and explain science. Another function, part of the speculative one, is to maintain an independence from science [and any specific discipline or specific group of disciplines]; among other things this provides balance, understanding, framework for development and evolution of the specialized disciplines, wholeness and integration of the full dimensions of humankind and nature, adventure and essentiality in thought. This diversity of approach is appealing and perhaps so because it is also an adaptation against an unknown future; and this is called an argument for balance in thought and “other” function, such as action. This may be provided by design. Perfect balance is never obtained - nor is it ideal. “Nature” permits, within limits, and encourages variations; and the human institutions in which this process is most dynamic is also a mixture of balance and variation We need a composite philosophy - mind and nature rather than a philosophy of mind or a philosophy of nature. Such a philosophy would begin as a neutral composite of all elements thought to be irreducible. Various combinations, reductions and “consequences” would be considered - a theory structure approach to philosophy. The structural relations of different “schools” will be included as “meta-philosophy” - although “meta” in this term is superfluous. Aspects that are similar to the metaphysics of existentialism will be included - but the psychological and political doctrines of existentialism will not be essential Earlier in 3.3.1 I have suggest analytic, adaptive, system theory, and evolutionary approaches to a theory of knowledge 3-41 A philosopher of the speculative tradition might object to the adaptive, system, evolutionary approaches as excessively restrictive, pragmatic and anti-philosophy. This is not so - and this follows from the type of composite approach just suggested...and to be explained further. We could view the derived [by philosophic generalization] systems: pragmatism from adaptation, organicism from system theory, evolutionary emergentism from evolutionary theory and other speculative systems such as spiritualism, materialism, etc., as well the more specific doctrines, disciplines and sciences as mutually restrictive. This would be due to a need for dogmatic belief. The specific philosophic schemes can be viewed as a hierarchic system arranged according to inclusiveness and generality - with sciences as the specific forms and philosophies etc. as the more general ones. The various philosophical hierarchies so obtained will be seen as mutually restrictive when analyzed as antithetical. However, the generalized versions of the different schemes will begin to show similarities, which will be the basis of synthesis; further, since each specific discipline can be the source of more than one vertical line [resulting in a “hierarchic tree”] of generalization, experimentation will be an element of the process. We may wish to consider a subset of the totality of syntheses. The different philosophic schemes will be seen as mutually expansive when seen as coherently synthetic. In addition to generalization and imaginative synthesis, some schemes will coexist as descriptions of independent [as such, or at the level of understanding] aspects or categories which are not antithetical [a theory structure] or incompatible. In view of the non-ultimate [tentative] nature of some of our categories of description etc., a “theory” of partial incompatibility [partial logic] will be useful This approach encourages a view of language, idea, word, proposition, logic, syntax, knowledge that is dynamic, adapting, adjusting 3-42 ▪ Types of Theories of Knowledge ▪ Intrinsic vs. relational Relational leads to developmental approaches Reflective-empirical-speculative Evolutionary ▪ Dualistic [knowledge separate from and therefore about nature] vs. monistic [knowledge is part of nature, or is nature, and therefore “about” knowledge-in-nature] ▪ Transcendental vs. understanding ▪ Certain vs. probabilistic Aspects 1. Knowledge is accurate [at least in principle, in part] 2. Knowledge is accurate within domains of validity 3. Knowledge is highly certain, accurate [in principle, in part] 4. Knowledge is highly certain within domains of validity 5. Knowledge is probable [this is not in reference to quantum theory which refers to probability of the data of knowledge] - not inconsistent with Items 1 through 4, depending on the nature of the distribution function Items 4 and 5 are more compatible with the reflective-empirical-speculative, hypothetico-deductive method. Hypothetico-deductive is a form of reflective- empirical-speculative; empirical includes testing against theories - with respect to data and concept ▪ Dynamic vs. structured theories [See 3.3.3, Philosophy of Mind and Nature] ▪ Combinations 3-43 ▪ Origins of Knowledge can be sought in a variety of causal patterns and locations: ▪ In the individual ▪ Genetics as a source of innate knowledge and bio-potential for acquired learning; effect of biological environment on development of the biological organism. Levels of such knowledge: organismic and centralized ▪ Effect of physical and social environment on acquisition of knowledge; levels: feeling, emotion and symbolic-emotional, cognitive ▪ Individual and universal motivation ▪ In society ▪ Social institutions explicitly for transmission, “storage” and development of knowledge [“wisdom” not included] and learning; formal educational systems and institutions, informal groups and institutions - family ▪ Other institutions as sources for transmission, storage, and development of knowledge and learning ▪ Social evolution of institutions and systems of knowledge; symbolic systems - language, logic, mathematics, algorithmic and heuristic systems - formal deduction, computers, creativity, special disciplines - philosophy, sciences, humanities ▪ In biological evolution ▪ Origins of individual capabilities for learning and development, and innate capacities of the types mentioned above, in biological evolution; levels chemical, cellular, organismic, centralized, conscious and “psychological” levels ▪ Pre-chemical levels [perhaps] ▪ Interactions ▪ Biological constraints on psycho-social evolution ▪ Effect of society, social evolution on biological change 3-44 ▪ History of understanding and development of nature and processes of knowledge [related to previous point “In society.” 1. Random association 2. Systematic introspection; origins of logic 3. Systematic observation; origins of experiment 4. Synthesis of 2 and 3; hypothetico-deductive [includes comparative and predictive schemes; concept formation, induction], reflective- empirical-speculative method; controlled, designed experiment; science 5. Extension of 2 and 3,4 to history; evolutionary theory Art and religion as knowledge [not prejudicial, restriction to meaning of art, religion since knowledge is interpreted very inclusively; not pragmatic, for the same reason]; parallels to the sequence 1 --> 5; a common sequence ▪ Evolution and intelligence; some observations 1. Intelligence and rationality are apparently limited in their ability to provide understanding; there are numerous ways in which there is limitation: comprehensiveness, accuracy, and others 2. However, intelligence arose in evolution where its primary object was not “perfection” but advantage, flexibility, improved accuracy, enhanced probability of correctness. This is not to question the value of ideas in knowledge and other enterprises, but to emphasize that such ideals are not absolutes 3-45 3. The proper workings of intelligence include adaptivity, observation, feedback and correction, in addition to the ideal; in other words, intelligence incorporates evolutionary features - on the social, physical levels. The question of “best” or “appropriate” mix adaptation and ideal is a valid one 4. We can probably enhance intelligence by understanding its evolutionary bases: ▪ As a process; the Hegelian, adaptive and punctuated equilibrium models ▪ As a component of social evolution ▪ As a factor in individual evolution and growth ▪ As a product of biological and bio-social evolution By understanding these bases, we can make proper designs; however, these understandings are to be taken as potentials and possibilities and not determinisms; much is unknown in our universes of being and by feeling back into the depths of origin and merging with them we add true rationality to our destination; this includes adventure and risk 3-46 3.3.2.2 The Universe of Being, Action and Thought▪ Propositions, Language.77 This is a “very” preliminary and rough, but formal, description. I am not trying to present precise definitions or complete systems; nor am I assuming that such are possible or necessary There is a universe U of Being within which actions -or processes- occur and relations exist. Within U there are beings x, y,...that [1] are centers of independent action, [2] have a type of internal structure and relation whose elements PR potentially map or model some of the relations and processes of U, [3] have types of interactions G, P with U resulting in the creation of potential maps PR, [4] have a type of internal action T involving transformations of PR, which provide atlases of U in the following sense - Collections [PR, T] - atlas the beings, relations and actions of U. We can now identify:
Truth has been defined as agreement of a proposition with the “facts” [data and datum]. But a fact is a certain structure [being], relation or process in U. The relation [e.g., a G or P] between a PR and a fact, cannot be defined in terms of anything else78 3-47 at the present level of discussion since the perceptions are not simple maps. What we are talking about when we are talking about truth is an agreement among the different propositional expressions of a fact: organismic, feeling, emotional, cognitive, symbolic, and empirical-observational-experimental. Thus, in relation to simple facts, the distinction “knowledge” vs. “truth” is void. Also, we can introduce an evolutionary, adaptive definition of “knowledge” and “truth”79 but these also involve a type of propositional expression. Therefore, perhaps, an appropriate definition of truth is agreement [consonance, coherence] between the different propositional expressions of a fact - which may alternatively be expressed as the synthetic unity of the single [total] proposition What is being said above includes that truth of propositions can be arrived at by a synthesis of elementary perception, thought [reason, defined below] and an active combination of elementary perception and thought: experiment, observation, empiricism and the hypothetico-deductive method. In other words, truth is also affirmed through knowledge. Perception and thought are not completely independent, are fairly dependent and interdependent. There is a certain continuity between perception and thought Learning is the growth of truth and knowledge that is not “innate.” Learning is the growth of adaptivity. The growth of innate knowledge can be regarded as evolutionary learning. Philosophically we do not have to distinguish the acquired from the innate. Beings x, y are in transition whether they are thought of as individuals or as populations In the discussion above, I have used the term “expression of a proposition.” Perhaps “manifestation” or “location” or “locus” of a proposition is more suggestive of the “intent.” I want to use “expression” slightly differently 3-48 Language is a symbolic mode of expression, representation, and communication of propositions. Just as there is a truth of propositions [agreement with facts, consonance among the manifestations, adaptive to action, evolution, and so on], there is a truth of thought and this is another reason why perception and thought are interwoven and form a continuum. We can think of logic in two ways: [1] Reason or logic of thought is the relation between truths as propositions [by processes of thought]. [2] Formal logic is [study of, science of] relations between linguistic expressions of true propositions. [In this sense, some informal Logics are formal.] The ideas expressed earlier, relating to degrees of truth [multiple valued Logics], different conceptions or standards of truth [modal Logics], probable validity of logical process instead of certain validity [heuristic Logics of discovery and reduction are relevant here - also the imperative and declarative]. One of the implications of the present discussion is that the distinction of truth from logic is not perfectly sharp Commonly, in logical theory, “proposition” stands for a type of linguistic expression. However, a proposition is a map or a collection of maps of a “fact,” and the linguistic proposition is a symbolic expression of the proposition. Hence the question of the adequacy of language80, or of a language, to express propositions arises: is the language broad enough to express all [or a sufficiently large class of propositions and is the expression of each proposition accurate, faithful - or, perhaps more appropriately, do linguistic propositions fit in with the overall scheme of truth of propositions? A similar question arises regarding the adequacy and validity of formal logic. As before, the question of separation of propositional and logical process arises; in axiomatic logic they are separated, but in general, analysis perhaps not; additionally the symbolic scheme, language and logic, may be thought of as fitting into the existential scheme of proposition and reason. Reason is the truth 3-49 function of thought; i.e., study of, systematization of, feel for relations among true propositions. All that was said about types of logic [multiple-valued, etc.] is inherent in reason.81 Just as perception and thought, linguistic [propositional] truth and logic are interwoven and form a continuum, so are propositional truth and reason The question regarding adequacy and accuracy of language-logic is in regards to breadth and accuracy as a model of proposition-reason ▪ A language of thought. Because of the inadequacy of formal languages of thought, it is valuable to speculate a pre-formal language of thought. For retention of word language, the language would have to be symbolic. Formal languages are a possible basis. Much reasoning about “reality” occurs as reasoning about language and much perception is translation into symbolic form. It has been suggested that there is inborn, in all humans, a native language of thought Note that formal languages are symbolic and iconic; this is also true for any natural pre-formal language There is an artificiality, prejudicial to [poor] reason, to an essential split: formal and pre-formal 3-50 3.3.2.3 Perception, Reason and Knowledge...and their Modes▪ Perception. According to the discussion immediately concluded, it is an approximation to analyze knowing --> perceiving and thinking [reasoning]82 or epistemology --> perception and reason [theory of] However, there is some value to this scheme. Perception “is the process from fact to proposition.” Note: Knowledge is knowledge of knower x about universe U that includes x. Therefore perception includes “self-perception.” ▪ Modes of perception Sense Kinesthetic Feeling Direct or mystic Transcendent Organismic or genetic Chemical Ritual Symbolic - visual, tonal Internal-external Entering - the perceptual aspect of intuition Linguistic ▪ Modes of reason83 Rational Analytic Logical Intuitive Mystic, direct Symbolic Instinctive Emotional Integrative Organismic ▪ Modes of knowledge83 - Again, includes synthetic combinations of perception-reason 3-51 3.3.2.4 Issues in EpistemologyIssues raised by science; classical, quantum, relativistic Dimensions of being; categories Ultimates vs. evolution Ultimates and unity Value of unity; holism; economy: anti-alienation; adequacy Multiple categories do not imply dualism Approaches to unity84 Identity Part of a whole [being-process] Evolved from unity Synthesis of the analyzed categories and concepts85 Intuition Direct-mystic Theories of scientific truth, advance Certainty --> probability --> evolutionary Issues discussed in Area 3 3-52 3.3.3 PHILOSOPHICAL METHOD. CRITICAL AND SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHYCritical and speculative philosophies represent two broad classes of philosophical method Simply stated, speculative philosophy seeks advance by expanding the framework of understanding as well as the system of facts that are coordinated by the framework. Critical philosophy accepts a certain framework [a particular level of vocabulary, language, and logic] as final and coordinates facts within the confines of the framework [“the perfect dictionary”] There is a critical school of philosophy, which requires that all analysis must be critical analysis; there is also a speculative school that allows speculative analysis. The word “speculative” is liable to misinterpretation. Speculation does not mean wild, uncontrolled opinion. A speculation is a tentative formulation; speculation is necessary when we have no formal approach to coming up with such formulations. We do have heuristics. There are heuristic approaches: insight, philosophic generalization; but the speculative method is rigorous in its testing of its schemes. It is analogous to the hypothetico-deductive method in science, and others To me the choice [if there must be one] is speculative philosophy for it can explain the origin of philosophy; the critical approach cannot Critical philosophy is analogous to “problem solving” [search in a fixed space] while speculative philosophy is like “creative analysis” [search in a space which is generated as part of the solution process]. In this connection, recall the space of philosophic systems generated by hierarchic generalization and multiple theories; this space is not well defined Critical philosophy is conservative, safe; speculative philosophy is openness, adventure. Critical philosophy is not evolving, and does not accept or understand evolution as applied to philosophic method; the speculative method is evolving There are problem areas that can, over periods, be analyzed by the critical method; however, a foundation of philosophic method requires something more general - the speculative method is one approach to rational foundation 3-53 3.3.4 PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY:86 AN OUTLINEThe problems indicated by ▪ have not yet been considered in this work. They will be briefly discussed in 3.5 3.3.4.1 Speculative PhilosophyWhat is the nature of philosophy? Coordination of the disciplines; metaphysics Understanding and developing frameworks for knowledge; epistemology ▪ Eternal problems of philosophy [God, nature of being...] ▪ Value problems [axiology, aesthetics, and ethics] 3.3.4.2 Critical PhilosophyAspects of all problems can be analyzed by the critical approach, but the problems mentioned above cannot be adequately treated ▪ The specialized disciplines of knowledge can be adequately treated by the critical approach - to a point; this is because the foundations of the disciplines can often be analyzed and revised within a fixed set of philosophical concepts and ideas. However, when the revision of the specialized disciplines is significant, it may be necessary to modify concepts at the philosophic level of generality Within critical philosophy, fact and value are often regarded as distinct. Pragmatism, acting within the critical framework, can identify fact and value by reducing one to the other; e.g., value is a biological imperative arising out of bio-social evolution and is therefore factual. The utility of this observation can be criticized: value may be fact, but we do not and cannot necessarily always know the facts. We can also criticize the reduction that speculative philosophy can answer both objections: [1] knowledge is not regarded as absolute according to the speculative 3-54 approach, [2] there is no necessary reduction in the speculative method. Given a state of knowledge-data [“raw” perception], speculation proceeds: questioning, reflection --> speculation - raw [source of concepts], philosophic generalization [expansion, modification of concepts], synthesis [eclectic] --> test against data-knowledge expansion of field of application --> new knowledge data 3-55 3.4 FURTHER CHARACTERIZATION OF PHILOSOPHY: ITS OBJECTIVES, VALUE AND METHODThe process of understanding is tied to the process of creating and so, in a changing cultural environment, understanding is always incomplete. This discussion continues my characterization of nature and value of philosophy and philosophic method 3.4.1 OBJECTIVESWhen knowledge became an independent institution, it developed internal criteria for validity. One objective of philosophy is the understanding and foundation of these criteria, and of the disciplines of knowledge However, knowledge forms a whole; the disciplines are part of a general framework and a proper framework is not founded as a whole by mere founding of the components. Thus philosophy endeavors to provide criteria and foundation for knowledge as a whole, and is, at the same time, concerned with the content of such knowledge. As A. N. Whitehead claimed, “The useful function of philosophy is to promote the most general systematization of civilized thought.” Thus, philosophy reflects upon, founds and provides civilized knowledge, at its general level, and philosophical reflection, indirectly, a base for affect and action Knowledge is part of a larger scheme of processes. First, the concept of knowledge itself is appropriately expanded to include affect, feeling, and intuition. Second, knowledge is part of a larger adaptive process: awareness --> knowledge and value --> design --> action --> evaluation --> feedback.87 Thus there is, in addition a philosophy of existence [being-process...], a philosophy of human existence, recognized in the simplicity, true economy, equanimity and grace of the individual, or alternately in the passion-selflessness which unites individual and whole - or results from such unity 3-56 In this connection, education is important. Some of the considerations: Top --> down Content Method = attitude Open, non-dogmatic Rhythm of development 3-57 3.4.2 VALUE OF PHILOSOPHYValue and objectives are closely tied together. Briefly, philosophy provides foundation for knowledge, belief, and action. In this connection review previous discussion in Area 3 and see, particularly, 3.4.1. See also 6: Action As pointed out earlier, philosophy includes an attempt to provide an invariant language or framework of special disciplines, etc. It includes provisions of mind and introspection in “creating” or discovering and evaluating knowledge. Though such attempts are incomplete, they are valuable Philosophy has “applications”: See 3.3.4, and 3.5 3.4.2.1 Comments From Whitehead's Process and Reality“Metaphysical categories are not dogmatic statements of the obvious; they are tentative formulations of the ultimate generalities.” “Rationalism never shakes off its status as an experimental adventure. The combined influences of mathematics and religion, which have so greatly contributed to the rise of philosophy, have also had the unfortunate effect of yoking it with didactic dogmatism. Rationalism is an adventure in the clarification of thought, progressive, and never final. But it is an adventure in which even partial success has importance.” “One practical aim of metaphysics [descriptive metaphysics] is the accurate analysis of propositions; not merely of metaphysical propositions, but of quite ordinary propositions. It is merely credulous to accept verbal phrases as adequate statements of propositions. The distinction between verbal phrases and complete propositions is one of the reasons why the logicians' rigid alternative, “true or false”, is so largely irrelevant for the pursuit of knowledge.” “A precise language must await a completed metaphysical knowledge.”88 “Philosophy frees itself from the taint of ineffectiveness by its close relations with religion 3-58 and science, natural and sociological. It attains its chief importance by fusing the two, namely religion and science, into one rational scheme of thought.” 3.4.2.2 An Advertisement for Philosophy by Bertrand Russell in relation to the eternal questionsFrom “The Problems of Philosophy”: “Philosophy is studied not for the sake of answers but for the questions. These questions enlarge our imagination and our knowledge of the possible, reduce dogmatic assurance against such speculation which closes the mind but, above all, because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind is rendered great and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good.” From “Why Men Fight”: “So long as we think of the immediate future, it seems that what we can do is not much...We cannot destroy the excessive power of the state or of private property. We cannot, here and now, bring new life into education, in such matters, though we may see the evil, we cannot cure it by any of the ordinary methods of politics. If we have courage and patience, we can think the thoughts and feel the hopes by which, eventually, men will be inspired. For this reason, the first thing we have to do is be clear in our own minds as to the kind of life we think good and the kind of change that we desire in the world.” “The ultimate power of those whose thought is vital is far greater than it seems to men who suffered from the irrationality of contemporary politics. Religious tolerance was once the solitary speculation of a few bold philosophers. Democracy, as a theory, arose among a handful of men in Cromwell's army. By them, after the restoration, it was carried to America...the power of 3-59 thought, in the long run, and greater than any other human power.” “Without some willingness to be lonely, new thought cannot be achieved, and it will not be achieved to any purpose if the loneliness is accompanied by aloofness, so that the wish for union with others dies, or if intellectual detachment leads to contempt. It is because the state of mind required is subtle and difficult, because it is hard to be intellectually detached and yet not aloof, that fruitful thought on human affairs is not common, and that most theorists are either conventional or sterile.” “In seeking a political theory which is to be useful at any given moment, what is wanted is not the invention of a utopia, but the discovery of the best direction of movement...in judging what is the right direction, there are two general principles which are applicable 1. The growth and vitality of individuals and communities is to be promoted as far as possible 2. The growth of one individual or one community is to be as little as possible at the expense of another.” “Men's impulses and desires may be divided into those that are creative and those that are possessive...'Take no thought, saying what shall we eat? or what shall we drink, or wherewithal shall we be clothed?' Whoever has known a strong creative impulse has known the value of this precept in its exact and literal sense: it is preoccupation with possession, more than anything else, that prevents men from living freely and nobly.” 3-60 “The supreme principle, both in politics and in private life, should be to promote all that is creative, and so to diminish the impulses and desires that center round possession.” 3.4.2.3 Social Change and Creative Personality3-61 3.4.3 Philosophical Method89At the mythic level knowledge and culture are intimately intertwined; the life of some piece of mythic knowledge continues as long as the culture or society continues. Mythic “knowledge” does have survival value even when it is not “true” - it bonds culture; more generally mythic knowledge may have adaptive value even when “false” or neutral. In this sense, the overall cultural system is “true,” in some appropriate sense, because of mythic knowledge. It is not implied that all mythic knowledge has such value. It should be remembered that [1] mythic knowledge may satisfy rational criteria, or be suggestive of truth, and [2] rational knowledge may have mythic value At a certain stage in cultural development, knowledge detaches itself from the cultural milieu. This detachment is always present in some degree and is never complete. As a rough approximation we can call the detached knowledge science-philosophy or pre-science and pre-philosophy. The knowledge that remains bound to culture can be called “value.” The distinction is not clear for: [1] not all “science” is true, [2] some value may be “true,” [3] some knowledge may serve both functions In order to serve an adaptive function, knowledge [potential knowledge] which is detached from mere cultural expression is judged by its “truth.” The process of selection that applies indirectly to mythic knowledge through the selection of the mythic cultures is, in modified form, applied to knowledge itself in post-mythic cultures. This is very close to the problem solving, design methods of the artificial intelligence and design literature; is an adaptation of the overall social process [evolution] in microcosm. A number of different descriptions apply [but not equally]: 3-62 [1] Evolution = variation and selection = creation and invalidation90 [2] Creation = induction = search in a dual space of concepts and laws and of instances [3] Hypothetico-deductive method = formation of hypothesis [concepts, laws] and deduction of consequences and test of consequences [4] Speculative Method = formation of speculative systems [propositional, linguistic, action, conceptual frameworks] and drawing of consequences and testing of consequences against sub-conceptual systems - [theories] and facts The speculative method is most general. It includes scientific method, philosophical construction and artistic creation. What is the “essence” of the method? This depends on the inclination of the individual; some emphasize the creative. Some the deduction-explanation, some the testing and discarding of invalid systems; some eschew method altogether 3-63/64 3.4.3.1 Brief Criticism of Invalidation TheoryThis is also known as falsification91 theory. It is not falsifiability per se that makes a theory “scientific” or a scheme “philosophic,” but its survival of attempts at falsification and its prediction of positive information [for a coherent domain of experience] The main criticisms of falsification are [1] it is a pessimistic approach or implies a pessimistic approach in which certainty is overvalued, [2] in its limited sense it rests on narrow notions of truth and falsity - and is appropriate for aspects of science and mathematics, but not for all mathematics and science or for all knowledge and philosophy, [3] related to [1] and [2], as a philosophy it devalues mythic and intuitive knowledge in situations where such knowledge is “proper” and adaptive and overextends the application of rational knowledge, and [4] for various reasons, knowledge is hard to falsify These criticisms can be overcome, at least in part, by providing a hierarchy of notions of unacceptability Popper later replaced the idea of falsifiability with testability or the property of being selectable. In other words, knowledge is an evolutionary category 3-65 3.4.3.2 Whitehead on Speculative Philosophy. The following quotation is from Process and Reality:“Speculative philosophy is the endeavor to frame a coherent, logical, necessary system of ideas in terms of which every element of our experience can be interpreted...Everything of which we are conscious as enjoyed, perceived, willed, or thought, shall have the character of a particular instance of the general scheme. Thus the philosophical scheme should be coherent, logical, and, in respect to its interpretation, applicable and adequate. Here “applicable” means that some items of experience are thus interpretable, and “adequate” means that there are no items incapable of such interpretation “'Coherence', as here employed, means that the fundamental ideas, in terms of which the scheme is developed, presuppose each other so that in isolation they are meaningless ...In other words, it is presupposed that no entity can be conceived in complete abstraction from the system of the universe, and that it is the business of speculative philosophy to exhibit this truth “The term 'logical' has its ordinary meaning, including 'logical' consistency, or the lack of contradiction, the definition of constructs in logical terms, the exemplification of general logical notions in specific instances, and the principles of inference. It will be observed that logical notions must themselves find their places in the scheme of philosophic notions “ ...This ideal of speculative philosophy has its rational side and its empirical side. The rational side is expressed by the terms 'coherent ' and 'logical.' The empirical side is expressed by the terms 'applicable' and 'adequate.' However, the two sides are bound together by clearing away an ambiguity that remains in the previous explanation of the term adequate. The adequacy of the scheme over every item does not mean adequacy over such items as happen to have been considered. It means that the texture of observed experience, as illustrating the philosophic scheme, is such that all related experience must exhibit the same texture 3-66 Thus the philosophic scheme should be 'necessary ,' in the sense of bearing in itself its own warrant of universality throughout all experience, provided we confine ourselves to that which communicates with immediate matter of fact. But what does not so communicate is unknowable, and the unknowable is unknown; and so this universality defined by 'communication ' can suffice “This doctrine of necessity in universality means that there is an essence to the universe which forbids relationships beyond itself, as a violation of its rationality. Speculative philosophy seeks that essence.”92 “Philosophers can never hope finally to formulate these metaphysical first principles “There is no first principle which is in itself unknowable...But, putting aside the difficulties of language...the difficulty is in the empirical side...We habitually observe by a method of difference “The metaphysical first principles can never fail of exemplification. We can never catch the actual world taking a holiday from their sway. Thus...the method of pinning down thought to the strict systematization of detailed discrimination...breaks down...In natural science this rigid method is the Baconian method of induction, a method which, if consistently pursued, would have left science where it found it. What Bacon omitted was the play of a free imagination [variation and selection], controlled by the requirements of coherence and logic...The negative judgment is the peak of mentality...conditions for the success of imaginative construction must be rigidly adhered to “...The first requisite is to proceed by the method of generalization so that certainly there is some application...beyond the immediate origin. In other words some synoptic vision has been gained 3-67 “...The term 'philosophic generalization' has meant 'the utilization of specific notions, applying to a restricted group of facts, for the divination of generic notions which apply to all facts.' “In its use of this method natural science has shown a curious mixture of rationalism and irrationalism. Its prevalent tone has been ardently rational within its own borders, and dogmatically irrational beyond those borders. In practice such an attitude tends to become a dogmatic denial that there are any factors in the world not fully expressible in terms of its own primary notions of void of any further generalization. Such a denial is the self-denial of thought “The second condition of the success of imaginative construction is unflinching pursuit of the two rationalistic ideals, coherence and logical perfection “Logical perfection does not require any detailed explanation “The requirement of coherence is the great preservative of rationalistic sanity “Incoherence is the arbitrary disconnection of first principles, in modern philosophy Descartes' two kinds of substance, corporeal and mental, illustrate coherence The attraction of Spinoza's philosophy lies in its modification and Descartes' position into greater coherence. He starts with one substance, causa sui, and considers its essential attributes and its individualized modes; i.e., the 'affectiones substantiae.' The gap in the system is the arbitrary introduction of 'modes . ' And yet, a multiplicity of modes is a fixed requisite, if the scheme is to retain any direct relevance to the many occasions in the experienced world 3-68 “The philosophy of organism is closely allied to Spinoza's scheme of thought. But it differs by the abandonment of the subject-predicate forms of thought, so far as concerns the presupposition that this form is a direct embodiment of the most ultimate characterization of fact. The result is that the 'substance-quality' concept is avoided; and that morphological description is replaced by description of dynamic process. Also Spinoza's 'modes' now become sheer actualities; so that though analysis of them increases our understanding, it does not lead to discovery of any higher grade of reality. The coherence, which the system seeks to preserve, is that the discovery that the process, or concrescence, of any one actual entity involves other actual entities among its components. In this way the obvious solidarity of the world receives its explanation “In all philosophic theory there is an ultimate which is actual in virtue of its accidents. It is only then capable of characterization through its accidental embodiments, and apart from these accidents is devoid of actuality. In the philosophy of organism this ultimate is termed creativity; and God is its primordial non-temporal accident. In monistic philosophy, Spinoza's or absolute idealism, this ultimate is God, who is also equivalently termed 'The Absolute.' In such monistic schemes, the ultimate is illegitimately allowed a final, 'eminent' reality, beyond that ascribed to any of its accidents. In this general position the philosophy of organism seems to approximate more to some strains of Indian, or Chinese, thought than to Western, Asiatic, or European thought. One side makes process ultimate; the other side makes fact ultimate.” 3-69 3.4.3.3 Speculative Method93 - An OutlineThe following outline incorporates some of the ideas of the discussion and quotation in 3.4.3, so far. Also included are: the process of questioning - of existing schemes; reflection; decisions at the level and degree on inclusivity; collection of “information” - assemblage; and entry into evolution. The method includes a constellation of special methods A flow of the method: doubt --> reflect --> scope --> assemblage --> speculate --> evaluate --> application and selection --> entry into culture and evolution. As with any flow scheme: further evolutionary levels could be included. The process is iterative - any level of feedback and forward is possible [interactive process], but the stated sequence is a first approximation. The process is cyclic [or spiral-helical] Outline 1. Doubt. Question everything - fact, being, knowledge, nature of these, because: ▪ There is no final system ▪ Specific need ▪ Origin of process ▪ Learning is only possible when one accepts that one's believes can be false Doubt is not merely “rational” - includes intuition, emotion, and mystic 2. Reflect. On need; possibilities 3. Define scope. Decide on inclusion [level and extension]. Fact, being, evolution, knowledge 4. Assemblage. Gather information, facts, and theories, ideas...guided by 1, 2, and 3 3-70 5. Speculate. Form concepts and hypotheses-systems ▪ Primitive humankind speculates and symbolizes the speculation. More - the speculation includes the formation of symbol-meaning systems; internal sources of validity - encoding, through evolution, of pre-linguistic and pre-logical structure into organism and the linguistic capacity of the organism. By no means does this guarantee certitude of speculation but, perhaps, there is some identifiable built-in selectivity - natural language or logic which is “learned” in pre-cultural evolution by race, species, life ▪ Two forms of growth of such speculative systems: addition and success. Surely there is pre-formal internal selection even if minimal. Building of meta-schemes - with the primitive scheme providing meaning and cultural evolution. Before thought separates from its mythic origins, this is a primary selective force ▪ Includes variation to zero of philosophical and general knowledge and language because they labor under the inadequacies of ancient thought...however there are limits on how far back in evolution raw variation can go, perhaps Means-methods [includes science, art and religion] of speculation in post-mythic cultures: ▪ Initially random association and classification; repetition ▪ Reason and perception; and introspection ▪ Creativity and imagination-mythic thought; includes heroic thought ▪ Variation to zero; raw speculation ▪ Modification ▪ Juxtaposition ▪ Direct insight ▪ Transcendent-mystic ▪ Philosophic generalization ▪ Synthesis 3-71 6. Evaluation. Philosophy begins when criticism begins, but ends when speculation ends. Philosophy is knowledge-process become aware of its own [excess] subjectivity and lack of adaptation Modes of evaluation: Empirical - Against fact [experience, observation, experiment] and fact embodied in knowledge Rational - Logic, coherence Evolution of Evaluation: Random Speculative [coherence?] Introspective [includes experience] [logic?] Observation [beginnings of empiricism-applicability] Experimental [adequacy] Historical [extension of adequacy] Evolutionary [extension of adequacy, perhaps] 7. Application. New realms of experience. Evaluation through application 8. Entry into evolution. Thought is never completely de-mythicized; and even post-mythic thought serves actual [in addition to psychological, which is actual] mythic function: thought remains relevant to selection 3-72 3.5 SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY...AND ITS APPLICATIONSThe central problems of philosophy are outlined in 3.3 and 3.4. Subsection 3.3.4 includes a brief outline of problems of philosophy; here a more detailed listing of the special problems [of history, nature, scope, methods, divisions, philosophical schools and doctrines] and applications 3.5.1 PHILOSOPHY OF THE SPECIAL DISCIPLINES AND ACTIVITIES: OUTLINEThe following aspects are included: Method and content of philosophy is applied to disciplines and activities Philosophical concern is with the half truths and assumptions, fact, method, logic, coherence, completeness; with foundations and interactions Implications for philosophy are considered; examples, approach to metaphysics through “philosophic generalization”; implications of modern physics and biology94; action and experience
Table 4 Origin of Special Disciplines and Activities Knowledge includes value, religion, art. Design includes planning. Action and evaluation each include control Comments Being and process: includes all dimensions: corresponding to levels of knowledge - Area 4, personal dimensions96; processes include particularizations of awareness 3-73 Evolution: See 3.5.6; also General Statement, 2, parts of 3.1,2,3,4 Knowledge: See 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.5.4, 3.5.6, and 3.5.7 This section includes science and its disciplines, humanities - including art, philosophy, religion; technology; corresponding symbolic disciplines. See 4 and reference materials Social institutions: anthropological - groups; cultural - art, religion, knowledge and science, education; organizational - economic, political, legal Design and planning: See 3.5.6, General Statement, 1, 5 Action: See 6 Evaluation: See 7 By the very nature of philosophy, each philosophical consideration spills over into other philosophical considerations and we soon begin to contemplate existence. This tendency and the opposite tendency to proliferation of detail remain in balance 3-74 3.5.2 ETERNAL PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHYThese are problems of a universal, fundamental and general character, which retain their problematic nature. As Russell said [3.4.2.2], it is the questions themselves which are valuable, for through them we are led to consider the greatness of the universe and so derive some greatness As knowledge, science, and religion progress, understanding is obtained; as the ethos of an era gives way to a new one, the focus of intensity shifts. Yet the intellectual or existential nature of these problems remains The eternal problems: freedom, choice, will, determinism, fatalism, cause action; mind, awareness, consciousness and sentience, Atman-Brahman, God and Godhead, metaphysical nature of being and process; reality, truth, reason, unity, value 3-75 3.5.3 VALUE: AXIOLOGY, ETHICS AND AESTHETICSThe study of value, the good, is traditionally a separate field of philosophy. It is often held that value and science are separate, but even if this is not true, there is a contribution in understanding from a separate and independent discussion of value. Although I argue that process, evolution, interaction, organicity and holism show a unity of value and knowledge, this does not imply that value is determined by “science.” Philosophical reflection is capable of providing insight into the true relations and ensuring a level of judgment that is commensurate with available knowledge Traditional Fields Axiology - The Good Aesthetics - Beauty Ethics - The Right These distinctions are flexible. The good refers to ends or desirable situations and the right to actions...both are both analyzed within ethics 3.5.3.1 Types of Ethics and Ethical Study3.5.3.1.1 Meta-ethicsThe meaning of ethics [vs. normative = “actual” ethics] 3.5.3.1.2 Metaphysical ethicsEthics as a branch of metaphysics: ethical notions are derived from metaphysical notions 3.5.3.1.3 Deontological ethicsAny ethics that do not make the right depend entirely on value 3.5.3.1.4 Teleological ethicsTeleology: theory of purpose, ends, final causes, opposite of mechanism; teleological ethics: rightness depends on probable conduciveness to some end 3-76 3.5.3.1.5 Evolutionary ethicsAny ethical theory in which the doctrine or theory of evolution plays a leading role is an evolutionary ethics. Typical moral standards of evolutionary ethics are adaptiveness, conduciveness to life. The problem is a difficult one because evolution [if true] has given humankind significant freedom from the environment, and this freedom has a generalized adaptivity. Also: should we regard mass extinction and punctuated equilibria as part of evolution? The point is that there is much flexibility in choice of evolutionary phenomenon or other phenomena 3.5.3.2 General Foundations of ValueEpistemological and metaphysical: any one of a number of philosophical doctrines can form a basis. These include experience, action Evolutionary Constraints: Physical, biological, and psychosocial Possibilities: Origins of aesthetics value dimensions in evolution and relation to constraints. Possibilities in general; growth and emergence Choice: Relating past to future. Creating values 3-77 3.5.4 SOCIAL PHILOSOPHYRelevant topics are considered in 3.5.1, 2, and 3. However, social philosophy has traditionally been a division of philosophy. In some periods certain philosophers held: that social philosophy was philosophy. Organization of a field of social philosophy is useful. In addition, social science cannot be considered as complete 3.5.4.1 Philosophical AnthropologyThe philosophy of humankind 3.5.4.2 Philosophy of cultural institutions - Art, Religion, Learning and Discovery, EducationArt Religion Learning and discovery: Knowledge, humanities, science and sciences [as form and process]97 Education97 3.5.4.3 Philosophy of social organization and relation of individual to the group3.5.4.3.1 Political philosophy3.5.4.3.2 Economic philosophy3.5.4.3.3 Philosophy of law3-78 3.5.5 PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE...As distinct from “academic” philosophy3.5.5.1 The Well Lived LifeTells humankind how to live and provides values and maxims to live by; facing the choices and conditions of life; being one's highest being. This is better interpreted as dialog than as instruction and is sometimes interpreted as the meaning of life 3.5.5.2 ExistentialismPhilosophy of Nietzsche and other existentialist thinkers who assert-imply that the “solutions” - such as they are - are inherent in the individual's being 3.5.5.3 Religion and the Philosophy of ReligionClearly related to religion conceived as a motivational system; consistent with Nietzsche's opposition to much of Christianity; and related to philosophy of religion 3.5.5.4 Philosophy of actionSee Area 6 General motivational analysis Hinduism, the Bhagavad-Gita, Buddhism Philosophy “should” contain its own motivation Philosophy as an adventure Generalization of the previous item philosophy as The Adventure What is happening here? The field of being is an adventure in which every concept is dismantled and rebuilt, in which every being may enter the dynamics of the real 3.5.5.5 Role of instinct, mind, spiritRussell 3.5.5.6 Role of truthUnity, truth and all true philosophy relevant in some measure 3.5.5.7 Relationship to psychologyRelated to psychology, especially existential psychology 3-79 3.5.6 PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGN MATERIALISM, MECHANISM, CHOICEWe have seen that design and evolution are related. Each concept has levels of meaning; there are relationships and unities among these meanings. I have given reasons to identify the most inclusive levels: design = evolution, but have attached to this equation a “?”. Philosophical reflection and analysis adds to understanding of the levels of meaning and their relations; its contributions include speculation and suggestion, analysis of concepts and language. Clarification of assumptions, contradictions, and paradoxes, provision of general conceptual frameworks: when “proper” understanding is obtained the different meanings and frameworks coalesce in unity, inclusion [instead of hypercritical exclusion], and coherence. Philosophy includes - or adds to - the scientific and empirical side. In return, understanding evolution - and design - contributes to understanding of nature, knowledge and philosophy. This enhanced understanding is profound and deep, for the universe embodies the signature of its past; it cannot be understood either as whim or as comprehensively planned perfection Since human action and aspirations are intimately connected with understanding, and this includes belief, this deep progress has momentous consequences for aspirations, designs and plans, and action The statement in this sub-area [3.5.6] is supplemented by observations, ideas, discussion dispersed throughout this volume [General Statement, Preface, 1,2,3 and 5]. My own understanding is itself evolving, and the content of this work is a preliminary statement. In this sub-area, I include, first, an outline of the evolutionary levels for which a framework is to be provided and then some considerations for a philosophical framework 3-80 Evolutionary Levels for Which a Framework Is Provided Change in “mechanism” from level to level: evolution of evolution ... =? Mechanism » raw variation and? Selection ... =? “Physical” and? Reproduction The concept physical is in quotes because [1] I want to point out that pre-chemical physical evolution sets the scene and provides constraints for chemical evolution; [2] there is also a pre-reproduction evolution that is chemical. [3] I am not implying that chemical evolution is not physical. Similar comments apply to subsequent stages, with appropriate modifications Reproduction includes reproduction of variation and this sets the stage for life and evolution of complexity and diversity. Note that reproduction evolves too, and this is an example of evolution of evolutionary mechanisms ... =? “Chemical” and interaction Combination of reproduction and interaction permits evolution of complexity: chemical reproduction [hypothetical pre-genetic fault tolerant reproduction concept of Freeman Dyson [Origins of Life], or genetic-structured pre-DNA reproduction] --> genetic-DNA reproduction --> ? Prokaryotes --> photosynthesis... --> eukaryotes --> multi-cellular organisms --> Diversity and complexity. This sets the stage for complex perceptual and information processing forms Evolution of the physical and chemical environment continues as a system that [1] includes life, [2] regulatory mechanisms: ecosystem concept...Earth as an ecosystem, perhaps 3-81 Social evolution begins very early, conditioned by and conditioning biological evolution and, later, being a significant factor, especially in evolution of psyche: pre-limbic, affective, and cognitive Human and psychosocial evolution Descent of humans is an interesting and valuable story; well before appearance of Homo sapiens - psyche and society are important; with appearance of Homo sapiens [but not necessarily only Homo sapiens] a relative independence of social evolution from the pressures of physical, chemical, biological evolution becomes possible. This does not mean there are no constraints from physical, chemical, biological nature - there are; and this does not mean that there are no interactions between social and other levels of evolution. There are and will be. However, these are long-term compared to social change As a rough concept I will define cultural evolution as the free play, independent of immediate interaction, with physical, chemical, biological and pre-human levels but within the constraints of such levels, of social structure and its physical [technology and such], biological [husbandry, agriculture, and so on], and psychological [religion, art, knowledge, tradition] artifacts, and interactions of such artifacts, made possible by specific developments of psyche [pre-limbic, affect and conative, cognitive and perceptual, and so on], homeostatic flexibility, bipedalism, manual dexterity and interactions of such developments. Concern is with origins and development of socio-culture. Interaction with pre-cultural levels is slow but [probably] important. Evolution of language and symbolic information and knowledge are important aspects of cultural evolution and 3-82 are probably an example [if not “the” example], dating back to origins of culture, of interplay of culture, society, biology History has a number of senses; at this point, I mean the recorded tradition of history of culture and society. Questions of accuracy, interpretation, meaning, significance are of debate. The recorded tradition is related to development of language and script. It points to some phase of chance. An important question is whether that phase represents progress - the interplay of cultural, societal, biological and physical evolution has implication for that concept of progress and its evaluation concerning existence and value By historical evolution, I do not mean progress; I mean to ask whether history has mechanisms of evolution. Although in any interpretation the “mechanisms” are evaluated through a cultural filter, there is a phase of change and the question is whether we can find a variation and selection principle that is independent of any cultural filter. The question of how we can know or deduce the independence is a valid question, and must be answered before the knowledge can be validly held or deduced. However, it is not the same question as the one being asked here. Further, although “relativism” can validly assert the existence of cultural filters, it cannot 3-83 validly assert [because it is subject to similar limitations] the absolute nature of these filters. This leaves open the possibility of indirect intellectual means or, possibly direct means of some type, of answering the question on evolution in history. Whitehead [at least implicitly: see 2.4] and Hegel have asserted the existence of evolution in history What is “the” relation between progress and evolution in history? I treat this separately, because some considerations on the possible natures and consequences for such evolution is given, in 3.5.6.1 Evolution of the processes and institutions of society See 3.5.6.2 ...and the concept of the individual; evolution of the individual: personal growth - see 3.5.6.3 See 3.5.6.4 See 3.5.6.5 3-84 Mechanism and “Paradigms” of Modes of Change ...immediate mechanism - physicochemical “How” does mechanism evolve over the “life” of the universe “?” Purpose and design as essentially different from mechanism Purpose and design as expression of mechanism Purpose and design as expression of evolution As expression of mechanism, and or purpose and design Evolutionary descriptions and mechanisms: Items 4, 5, 6, and 7 = variation and selection = raw variation [mechanism?] and reproduction and interaction = absolute, preferential e.g., absolute --> “death”; preferential --> in abundance of reproduction ...of systems and environments: ecology 8. Gradualism - synthesis vs. saltation 3-85 9. Uniform change vs. punctuated equilibria98 Punctuated equilibrium: relatively rapid [on geological, not evolutionary scales] change occurs when niches are opened up due to emergence of new possibilities due to change in environment and or mass extinction or due to new levels of organizations; other periods are evolutionarily quiet --> explains facts [reasons for extinction open and interesting, 1987, but not an obstacle] Punctuated equilibrium and gradualism not contrary since change is not necessarily rapid on evolutionary scales Uniformitarianism: the idea that change in geology [Lyell] and biology [Darwin, perhaps] is “uniform.” This does not seem to be supported by the evidence New meanings of uniformitarianism: natural law or mechanism is constant and acts throughout evolution. But, is it constant? Perhaps natural “law” evolves and according to a punctuated equilibrium model. Uniformitarianism - is the ideal of search for uniform explanations 3-86 Levels of evolution have been interpreted as though there is some new essence at each level. If this is true then each level could be completely independent of previous levels. A new essence is only necessary at a level if the level is completely independent. New levels do not seem to be essentially and completely independent so I do not find it necessary to invoke any new essence[s]. Emergent evolution entails certain apparent dualisms. Modern “sociobiology” on the other hand provides for determinism of social behavior in bio-genetics. More than this is said. The following type of claim is often made: for behavior y, there is a biogenetic gene x that determines y; and, y is optimum. Further, if all behavior is determined bio-genetically,99 such genetics cannot “really” bear the mark of social influence, for such influence is itself the expression of biogenetics [except that conditions could be different in periods of rapid change] Thus, emergent evolution and “sociobiology” represent further extremes. There is a middle ground, which includes each extreme as a possible special case, according to which biogenetics determines much, and in which a significant portion of the determination, especially that of socio-cultural traits, is of constraints or potential In some sense, each level of evolution offers freedom, but within constraints, from the earlier levels. The earliest level is the material or natural level and hence the freedom is, in significant measure, freedom from the natural environment Thus, while “natural” selection is the chief selective mechanism for biological evolution, it is not the primary selective mechanism of socio-cultural evolution; here selection acts on the group and its mechanism of bonding and interaction. This is one theory [P. Munz, Our Knowledge of the Growth of Knowledge] and one type [Encyclopedia Britannica, “Social Structure and Change”] of cultural change 3-87 Irrespective of which theory of social change that is adopted or true,100 it seems that there is progressive freedom from the environment in levels of evolution, and in later stages of cultural evolution. The situation is so well within environmental, material, biological constraints of the past101 that most of the change is due to socio-cultural factors. At the same time, there is biological change that may be due to environmental selection, which now includes cultural factors; this change must be much slower than cultural evolution and is different from selection of culture. The interaction of these two elements and the question of biological determination of social behavior is, to me, an open question but within the following general observations: [1] pre-social [chemical, biological] evolution determines human potential in much of social behavior, and [2] a wide range of potential and plasticity seems to be one of the fundamental adaptations of humankind The more independent the levels of evolution are of the environment, the less they bear its signature; thus we should be able to tell more about the environment from human biology than human culture except, perhaps, for the phase of cultural development in which knowledge is de-mythicized [see 3.5.2.1] and even then it is only certain types of knowledge. Therefore, through knowledge, humankind can re-exploit nature...and the universal The change from less to more freedom from the environment is: physical evolution and chemical evolution before reproduction: perfect constraint, no trial and error, systems are the environment --> reproduction and biological evolution --> natural selection, systems provide incomplete information on the environment --> cultural evolution: environment has little effect on cultural evolution in so far as it is not a selection mechanism - in most modern theories the mechanism of culture is to provide a bond and it is the groups that are selected; 3-88 since the function of culture is the bond, culture is selected for its cohesiveness and not its content. This theory contains elements of truth but seems somewhat simplistic. Certainly the content of culture in Level II cultures is selected for content [se3.5.6.1 - though the selection is still not natural] I am not convinced that this principle has content. However, I include it because it seems to have relevance to “evolution of evolution.” My reading of its content: results of evolution are due to mutual constraints of systems and environments that condition and determine the direction of evolution 3-89 ▪ The language should reflect the mechanisms. Physical evolution? Variations and selection...? Emergence...consciousness, plan, design? [See General Statement, Preface, parts of 1, 2, 3, 5.] ▪ Reflecting existence or otherwise of ultimates ▪ Metaphysics of description; synthesis and balance ▪ In an ultimate sense how = what ▪ As a framework of evolution, diachronic reality, culture, value, knowledge ▪ As a framework for the history of the universe [which is recorded in cosmic “fossils”]; and the history of the substructures 3-90 3.5.6.1 Evolution as a Framework for Knowledge...and Method3.5.6.1.1 Value of such a frameworkBecause the structure of the universe, nature, life, culture, value includes diachronic elements, change builds on existing structure and is not afresh for each existing structure; i.e., not synchronic. Evolution must be included in study for otherwise structure cannot be understood. Because change builds upon existing structure, evolution does not produce what would be the “optimum” organism for a given circumstance. Knowledge without evolutionary study is incomplete Knowledge itself is diachronic. New knowledge builds upon existing knowledge. Rationality includes an attempt to overcome the limitations which knowledge has as a consequence of it diachronic nature. However, this attempt is limited by the diachronisms, sometimes predating culture and recorded thought, of the instruments of rationality: mind102 and language whose unrecorded and unremembered origins are pre-rational. This sets a barrier, though not necessarily an insurmountable one, to the ability of rational thought to fathom its own foundations. Further, there are pre-rational forms and instruments of knowledge. In a sense, pre-limbic and emotional types are pre-rational instruments - although they develop along with cognition and rationality. Instinct is a pre-rational form. Such pre-rational forms and instruments developed, not in response to learning of an individual, but in a culture [tradition], a race, a species...a kingdom and so on, as “learning” over its own “life time.” Such pre-rational [or rational] learning, when it occurs over the life of a species [and is biogenetically encoded, tradition not included] is “phylogenetic” learning, and the resulting knowledge is “phylogenetic” knowledge. Knowledge that is learned by an individual is “ontogenetic.” 3-91 Thus it may be that knowledge can never be fully “ontogenized”; i.e., synchronized. The reason is that knowledge is so deeply interwoven into the chemical-bio-psycho-social structure of organism-society. Synchronization, especially into consciousness, of knowledge requires too much explicit structure and diachronism overcomes this act: diachronism may not seem “optimum” but it may in fact be the only way to emergence, to complex organic structures and knowledge systems. Rational knowledge can aspire to overcome the barrier of pre-cultural, pre-linguistic and pre-rational origins, but rationality has its own limitations Even the learning of an individual includes pre-rational and a-rational elements of cognition and affect. This includes the type of intuitive knowledge involved in the direct expression of thought and action without the intermediary of symbolic processing. Some intuition is pre-rational, some is a-rational [kinesthetic, for instance]. Some is post rational: the development of intuition of the structure and process of rational thought: this makes learning of knowledge as a whole and creation possible. The evolution of individual learning and its relationship to phylogenetic learning is interesting and valuable Can intuitive knowledge be complete? Intuition involves an ability to function in absence of “complete” knowledge. Recall the four “definitions” of knowledge - in 3.3.2 - one definition was adaptivity to a “purpose”: this does not intrinsically require completeness o certainty. Intuition provides holism by recognizing this fact; i.e., intuition provides holism without certainty or completeness. Now rationality, too, can recognize this “fact” - by itself, through introspection, through study of evolution and by reference to intuition. It is not an aspect of rationality to seek completeness, certainty, or security. This is an aspect of a certain type of psyche or a certain type of culture 3-92 Now this does not imply that security is undesirable. There are certain areas in which the drive to completeness and certainty is valuable. It is the excess dependence on such security that is undesirable, [1] because it takes the culture out of evolution - static and decaying; [2] because it is probably based on evolution of the nature and objects of knowledge only relatively realizable - despite success in logic and physical science. What is probably desirable is balance: the right range of security in which culture can thrive - evolve and survive Diachronism gives us a chance to overcome the implied limitations of synchronic thought: all experience is a part of knowledge: no one will deny that realism, idealism, choice are valid - not psychedelic - aspects of experience. However, there are contradictions in our descriptions of these experiences. Pre-evolutionary philosophy has overcome some of these contradictions by eclectic synthesis [which includes discarding]; others by seeing them as different aspects of reality - not actually contradictory. Only superficially so; and he remaining by understanding them as due to incompleteness in knowledge and not in nature itself. Some of these remaining contradictions and incompleteness will be overcome by understanding and revealing reality as diachronic Use of an evolutionary framework does not exclude form and structure and process, holism and interaction, unity in structure, process, and unfolding; but rather enhances understanding of true nature.103 3-93 3.5.6.1.2 Nature and evolution of knowledge3.5.6.1.2.1 Role of knowledge in cultureWe recognize two levels of socio-cultural evolution beyond origins of social process: 3.5.6.1.2.1.1 Level I: Mythic Cultures Pre-critical stage: “knowledge” invented, created by mythic speculation. There is no criticism of knowledge - or criticism has been abandoned. The function of knowledge is group bonding, perhaps. Knowledge is maintained by “contract” and cultural indoctrination beginning at a pre-linguistic and pre-rational stage of individual development and reinforced by the structure of individual psychic needs. Such “knowledge” and “thought” can be called mythic knowledge and mythic thought. Individuals not biogenetically different from individuals in post-mythic cultures [see below] and therefore, occasionally and or for periods, there will be “rational” developments, but such development does not become institutionalized. Selection of knowledge is by fate [selection] of group-culture 3.5.6.1.2.1.2 Level II: Post-mythic Cultures Critical stage: Knowledge created by similar processes; criticism of knowledge possible [see 3.4.43] and selection by critical process. This overall process = variation and selection = evolution = social process applied in encapsulation to knowledge itself104. Process now applicable to study of knowledge itself and to other design. Similar to selection by falsification: selection by eliminating invalidated knowledge; Popper “Our ideas die instead of us”; reproduction of successful ideas by education, use of established principles; bonding by other means, including areas of “knowledge” not yet subjected to criticism: aspects of value, religion, areas of thought not important to adaptation; acceptance by overcoming attempts at invalidation and by success105 in helping individual and society negotiate “life”; critically “accepted” areas as relatively good representation [signature] of society and environment 3-94 As implied by the foregoing discussion, all cultures incorporate aspects of mythic and post-mythic thought. In mythic cultures individuals-groups occasionally “break out” of mythic thought but this does not become institutionalized. It becomes part of the norm in post-mythic cultures. In post-mythic cultures [1] mythic thinking remains a part of actual rational thinking, [2] there are areas of thinking which remain mythic [often, though not always: dogmatic religion, value] but which may be given a rationalistic dressing. [3] There are areas that are and should be mythic or validly retain elements of mythic thought [art, ideal religion]. [4] Mythic thought is a phase of growth. [5] Some individuals and groups remain immersed in mythic life; this is sometimes valid. [6] Such thought and life remains a valid and potentially powerful part of the experience in the life of each individual.106 So what is the difference between mythic and post-mythic? The essential difference is, no doubt, in state of being-mind. Possible measures are [1] extent to which criticism is a habitual reflex in the mass of people, [2] extent of institutionalization of critical function - but not in absence of valid mythic experience and institution. Also: expression of life, joy and being cuts across the mythic divide as does expression of death, denial and decay 3.5.6.1.2.2 Further comments on evolution of knowledge. Models of changeThe following will be in telegraphic form 3.5.6.1.2.2.1 Origins of knowledge Levels and processes: goes back through cultural, psychic, biological, down to chemical level; nature and unity-diversity of knowledge [see 3.3], origins of feeling, differentiation into emotion, cognition...symbolic...forms 3-95 3.5.6.1.2.2.2 Changes in the process or mechanism of knowledge at the socio-cultural level This is more or less the transition from mythic --> post-mythic thought; also see 3.2, 3.4]: random association --> introspection [include rational process, which does include contact-abstraction from data] --> observation and comparison --> directed, controlled, designed experiment --> historical and evolutionary study [old elements are not eliminated in the --> transitions] . . .knowledge frees itself from mere subservience to cultural pattern . . .as pointed out above [“actual cultures”] this process is never complete in areas of “fact”-science vs. value. There is a duality [psychic need-factual persuasion] in individual psychology in relation to “reality” and further this duality has relations to social-individual interaction. There is a tendency to objectify, make concrete, theoretical constructs, to place them on the level of intuitive-organismic knowledge; there is a cycle of confusion in these associations and the consequent refutations 3.5.6.1.2.2.3 Changes in socio-cultural knowledge Two mechanisms according to changes in cultural pattern at levels I and II [mythic and post-mythic]; actuality is a combination of mythic and rational creativity [creative imagination as enhanced by its association with creative-critical thought] and selection by cultural and critical selection 3.5.6.1.2.2.3.1 Models of change at level I - mythic thought Social evolution, social interaction, social contract...theories; at this level, the mythic traditional level, and according to an increasingly accepted body of theory,107 the “survival” function of knowledge is formation of social bonds and cohesiveness - whether the knowledge refers explicitly to such cohesiveness, to the gods, or to nature. It should be remembered that actual cultures are a combination of levels I and II 3.5.6.1.2.2.3.2 Models of change at level II - post-mythic thought Mythic thought is not absent - this is not linear progress. Rather, post-mythic thought is superposed on mythic thought. This is not to be thought of as negative. First, this is not an axiological issue. More importantly, the proper integration of the two phases of thought is an efficient response to the construction of modern culture in a world that remains rooted in nature Theories of history and history of knowledge [including art, ideal religion [which is open to but not dominated by rationality]], history of science; concepts of pro-knowledge; Marxist theories of history and knowledge as ideology; Wittgenstein-types of knowledge as absolute within their own spheres; models of change; theories of Whitehead, Nagel, Feyerabend, Popper, Lorenz, Delbrück, Kuhn, Lakatos... Whitehead and speculative philosophy;108 generalized speculative method; Popper on selection [selection as a generalization of Popper's idea of falsifiability as a criterion and a selective mechanism]; creativity, culture, 3-96 world and universe as sources of variation [and types of variation], mythic and organic accounts of creation and phenomena and other sources of archetypal behavior; “optimum” combinations of variation [and types] and selection [and types] [relation to liberalism and conservatism in cultural pattern]; relation to psyche: variation, creative imagination as optimistic, extravert, selection, critical thought as pessimist, introvert, combinations [wheels within wheels], balance and balanced psyche: variation and selection, imagination and critical imagination and criticism and imaginative criticism 3.5.6.1.3 Further comments on the selection or evolutionary theory of knowledge and scienceKarl Popper109 has presented the following model of advance: P --> TS --> EE --> P Problem --> Tentative Solution --> Eliminate Errors --> New Problem. “Eliminate Errors” includes selection and falsification How does falsification-invalidation work? To simplify, consider a finite sequence of numbers. Our problem is to discover a rule that generates the numbers. In simple cases, especially if we have experience at rule induction, we sense the result immediately. Let us suppose that sequence is sufficiently complex that we need to proceed systematically: we can analyze the process. We guess at rules and if a single instance does not satisfy the rule, we reject the rule: it is falsified. [Falsification is not as simple in science-knowledge where the data are potentially the data of experience and interpretation.] If all instances satisfy the rule, we accept it: it is verified. The first observation of interest is that rules are not unique: actually they are in the sense that the sequence = the rule but the expression, or formula is not unique. On the manifold on which the sequence is defined, all valid formulas are equivalent. Off the manifold110 they are or may be different. The simpler rules will be easier to falsify or to verify. Rules can be guessed haphazardly or by “heuristics” or “algorithms.” 3-97 In nature, the collection of instances is effectively infinite; heuristics [but not algorithms] are still available or can be created, discovered. Guesses [i.e., hypotheses] or candidate laws-theories can now be tested against the data. The data is all of experience. It is not possible to check guesses against the whole data. Thus, theories and laws can never be verified by checking against data. They can only be falsified by observation and experiment. More generally, they can be invalidated. When a theory passes many attempts at falsification, it grows in stature. Also: falsifiability provides a test of realism: if a law-theory is, in principle, falsifiable by the outcome of an experiment, or more generally in relation to the manifold experience-of-reality [as a unitary concept], this informs us that the law-theory does in fact say something about nature beyond the obvious, beyond tautology. Further, the easier it is to falsify a law or theory, the fewer are the excuses-evasions permitted and the simpler is the law or theory. This is a very brief summary of Popper's falsifiability notion of science and scientific method. Science [and knowledge] is open In addition to the criticism of 3.4.3.1, there are further criticisms [and some replies] and comments 1. Falsifiability is not a theory or understanding of creativity, or of motivation - but it is not intended as such. Nor is falsifiability a theory of the nature of invalidation. However, falsification is difficult and many theories are never actually falsified. They are merely discarded, forgotten. Popper has generalized the notion of falsifiability to that of selection. As an outline of the evolution of science, and this is only an outline, this needs to be enhanced: selection --> variation and selection. Further, as a general “paradigm” of evolution, we should recall that variation and selection is probably approximation An evolutionary paradigm is no longer to be thought of as implying either gradual or uniform growth 3-98 The punctuated equilibrium model of growth [which need not be inconsistent with gradual growth] may be on its way to becoming part of a universal vocabulary of evolution [bifurcation, catastrophe perhaps]. The question of gradualism must be subject to further consideration as regards birth of theories and “paradigms” in individual-cultural context; must be divested of subjective measure: appropriate time scales are required [time to learn a theory, say]. T. Kuhn has provided some thoughts along these lines but a preliminary reading among philosophers and historians of science and scientists shows a tendency to reject Kuhn, accept Popper's outline [not all scientific revolutions are paradigmatic; evaluation of thought in between “revolutions” as puzzles is subjective and inaccurate in that it is more than mere search in a space of instances - there is search for concepts.] The revolutions are the punctuations of equilibrium. Further analogy with bio-cultural evolution may be valuable 2. Falsification-falsifiability supposedly groups knowledge into four categories: [1] false, [2] without content, [3] science, and [4] tautology. Tautology includes syllogism, logic, syntax [essential or supra-conventional syntax such as subject-predicate form]. The question arises: are science and tautology truly different? In syntax the universality of the subject-predicate form has never been universally verified and is therefore open to falsification-selection. The theory of logic is open to falsification-invalidation as happened in the crisis in the foundations of logic and mathematics c. 1900. The problem with such criticism is the degree to which language and logic are ingrained and the fact that the object and instrument [i.e., one of the set of instruments: language, reference to “reality”] of criticism is the same. Nonetheless language [syntax] and logic, i.e., special cases, are subject to falsification by [existential-observational] experiment. To distinguish science from logic based on selection-falsification criteria we need to classify modes of falsification...Science is selected 3-99 by “scientific” experiment; language, logic by existential, experiential, observational experiment; organismic, instinctual, race, traditional knowledge by phylogenetic, cultural experiment 3. Selection theory does not answer the question of what is science. That was not its intention. Approaches to what is science: language [s] of science, types of concept, types of heuristic, modes of variation and selection [hypothesis and deduction-criticism-experiment], characterization of content, levels of paradigmatic assumption [order, mechanism, causality, uniformity, etc.], cultural influences [rationalism vs. anti-rationalism,111paradigmatic models, etc.] 4. Popper criticizes verifiability. On the other hand the logic of falsifiability has been criticized as being “equally” problematic as the logic of verification: if a theory T involves hypotheses T = H1 and H2 and ... and T is falsified, we do not know which of H1, H2, ... is invalid. However, [a] we do know that T is falsified if it is falsified and that logic is pretty simple, and [b] it is in principle possible to discover which elementary hypotheses are valid by constructing enough “theories” and performing appropriate critical experiments. On the other hand, a scientific theory can never be verified by any logic. Popper, Feyerabend, Lakatos, Kuhn have been called irrationalists. However, it has been fashionable to regard science as irrational since Hume.112 Is science truly irrational, truly unverifiable? Is the space of potential experience horrendously infinite; is nature so essentially inscrutable? We have evolved with nature, are of nature, knowledge is nature. But, our evolution is in a phase of nature, not all of it. And, nature must have some essential structure to permit, in its womb, its self-knowledge, and so on. Rationality and irrationality are the temporal constructs of an imagination that we do not fully understand 3-100 The universe has not yet revealed its own signature – rational or irrational – yet In the meanwhile, lacking final intimation from the hearth of creation, we may generate temporal notions of verification113 and verifiability. We must be careful to allow that these notions be in principle verifiable and falsifiable. First: we must have a theory of what science is that is separate from how we test a theory [otherwise, falsifiability-verifiability is neither falsifiable nor verifiable - nor even quite understandable, become screens behind which the drama plays on unperturbed]. But even before we inquire what science is, we must ask what is knowledge [3.3.2]? If we require the certainty concept of knowledge [justified true belief] we are led at once to the notion of knowledge as an essentially pessimistic114pursuit and falsifiability as the criterion of scientific theory. If we adopt the adaptive, evolutionary notion of knowledge then science is a progressive adventure, balanced between undue pessimism and undue optimism; verifiability is a measure: as in an idea that “clicks” giving birth to a theory which has a finite life span before it dies - part of the progression of science and knowledge. In this notion, science-knowledge is not intended as complete, valid forever; nor are we clenching our teeth in fear of the death of foundations Perhaps the psychological background of the selection language is the pessimism of completed-certain knowledge [or in biological evolution the notion of progress]. I need here to separate the mythic-psychological-cultural components from the adaptive components. There are also distinctions to be made between biological and cultural-institutional [including science-knowledge] evolution 3-101 5. Could we agree that Newtonian gravitation-mechanics is an excellent approximation over the solar system [no scientific theory is “known “ to be better than an excellent approximation?? Yes. Except as that leads to a static concept of science. So here is an implicit requirement: science may be dynamic, evolving 6. Is there no limit to increase of knowledge-science? Maybe, but we have not reached it yet. Science, as we know it, and as an adaptive mechanism will reach some limit [probably] at which time equilibrium or decay or new radiation may occur - by use of an evolutionary metaphor 7. What does invalidation-selection and scientific-rational analysis say about phylogenetic vs. ontogenetic learning - an open question? “Invalidation” occurs at different levels and has different mechanisms. Again, selection says nothing on this - it was not meant to do so. Study of form and structure, process, and evolution are best done together. However, selection-invalidation does bring out the analogy of the evolutionary mechanisms 8. In light of the “irrationalism-falsification” hypothesis, why do many, not all scientists believe in “reality” of theory? Is this a combination of scientific knowledge with naïve realism? 9. Falsification is in some sense a theory [a theory of scientific theory]. Should its criterion be applied to itself; i.e., is falsification falsifiable? 3-102 3.5.6.1.4 Relation of evolutionary framework to the question and nature of a priori and synthetic knowledge115, 116Analytic [by reason [analysis] alone] knowledge is, classically, “knowledge” that is true by analysis of language, by tautology: e.g., “a black cat is black.” In this sense, analytic knowledge is a priori: before empirical observation-sense perception. A synthetic judgment: a judgment relating a subject concept with a predicate concept not included within the predicate proper. The validity of such a judgment depends on its “ground.” Kant's central [epistemological] question was: “Are synthetic a priori judgments possible?” Kant's answer was that synthetic a priori judgment is possible [in mathematics and in intuitive principles such as causality, as examples, which cannot be derived from sense data and must be logically a priori to the materials that they relate]. Such synthetic a priori elements are “transcendental” which means that, while they are indubitably in experience viewed as a connected whole, they transcend sense materials in status We can also argue that analytic knowledge [which is necessarily a priori] is transcendental; i.e., real. There is a real content to the statement “The black cat is black.” This is suggested by the fact that the black cat will probably remain black - and a cat - for at least a moment. One will not have to look around every moment to see if it is still black - or still a cat. More accurately, the universe is such that perception of black cat is possible. Even better, the universe, the world, has become such that perception of black cats and propositional expression of such perception is possible... The even simpler phrase “The cat” has similar content. There is its syntactic and semantic content of course, and there is content implied by its syntactic form. In addition, there is content implied by its expression that is over and above the content implied by mere expression of a phrase 3-103 Without this observation, analytic truth seems to be true in a way in which the synthetic a priori cannot be true. Analytic truth is linguistically true which is at a higher level of generality than logical or mathematical truth of the synthetic. That is why the truth of the analytic seems to be inaccessible to the synthetic. However, this is at most apparent. The problem is that “The black cat is black” is a linguistic expression of the proposition “The black cat is black.” The symbol for the proposition and the linguistic expression are identical. The symbolic object and the instrument of analysis are the same [by sight and sound]. However, the proposition is not merely its symbol, nor is it merely its linguistic expression. “The black cat is black” has an intuitive [perhaps natural language] meaning prior to [symbolic] language. We could regard language as purely symbolic. In that case, the phrase “The black cat is black” would be a convention to be empirically verified. In this case, we must ask, “What is the origin of the convention?” In either interpretation - meaning is conventional or intuitive - the phrase “The black cat is black” has an a priori character In general, the separation of verb and noun is not so clear as the concepts seem to be. Likewise the subject-predicate form: analytic knowledge refers to a phase of experience. This phase of experience is the a priori. However, it is not obvious to what it a priori. Likewise, analytic knowledge is transcendent but it is not obvious what it transcends The simple “deduction,” “a black cat is black,” should not mislead us into believing that all analytic knowledge is trivial. Some analytic deductions may be highly complex, provide new 3-104 information by no means explicit or anticipated from the initial information. However, the relationship between the premises and the conclusions are contained in the background universe. That there is factual content, albeit of a very general nature, follows from the linguistic [and logical paradoxes]. This falsifiability of analytic knowledge implies, not that it is scientific, but that it is about the structure of a certain phase of reality that includes knower and known Thus in numerous ways: significance, transcendence, being intuitive knowledge of some phase of reality, the analytic and the synthetic a priori are of similar type. In either case knowledge or reality has been coded into symbolic formulations...and this is open to selection or falsification. For these reasons, the rational foundations of language, logic, mathematics are never complete. However, there is a phase in the development of thought in which analytic and synthetic a priori are not open to analysis and therefore the a priori acquires an absolute, transcendental character Such knowledge, the a priori, must have developed at some pre-rational, perhaps pre-linguistic phase - perhaps even before the dawn of thought. It must be encoded in to the body - perhaps into elementary perception and neural structures. If the knowledge is prior to thought, it is not synthesized through thought - though it may be discovered and expressed through thought and language. If it is pre-linguistic, it is not easily amenable to linguistic 3-105 analysis; if it is pre-rational it will seem necessary to or contained in logical analysis. We should look to evolution of organisms and their universes for the origin and structure of a priori knowledge There is a certain permanence to the structures of the earth, which permit organisms to have organismic knowledge and human organisms to have - in addition intuitive knowledge - evolutionary and experiential knowledge. Rocks and lava, which have properties today, had many of the same properties at the dawn of geology: the potential to be perceived in colors, as massive, as fluid, and so on. These potentials represented actual qualities and the ability to perceive them was built into evolving organism. Organisms, objects and qualities are all real in that they are part of the world...even while the concepts of “organism”, “object” and “quality” are relational. The perceptions are composites of perceiver and perceived, but it would be adaptive for certain permanences and stabilities to be built in to body, perception, and language...”The brown rock over there 'is' over there, 'is' brown.” This is analytic knowledge116 There are levels of organismic knowledge, which have to do with the special circumstances of our biological and social evolution but are not in the general character of the total or even immediate universe. Thus, such knowledge does not have the apparent character of a universal or a universally expressed truth. However, cognitive, cultural knowledge may communicate with this organismic level through feeling, selective experience rather than through direct empirical evidence. The actual situation may be complex with both intra-organismic communication and cultural selection being involved 3-106 This may include origins of the synthetic a priori. Some “values” may be examples. Rational and rationalistic analysis may be an example. Causality may be an example. Causality would “look” very different to a virus, an elephant, a galaxy, a universe Some knowledge grows out of individual and social processes which are remembered; other knowledge of cultural type is of obscure origin but these origins can be deduced - at least the fact of the origin. All such knowledge is synthetic and non a priori: it is or has been based on empirical and factual information. Nevertheless, knowledge with obscure -traditional and other - origins may appear to have an a priori character Knowledge learned by an individual through life experience is ontogenetic; knowledge learned by species, life, and so on is phylogenetic Analytic knowledge depends on certain features, predating even [perhaps] geological evolution: uniformities and stabilities of the immediate universe. However, sufficiently far back in race, species . . .physical evolution - possibly among a universe of local universes - these features crystallized into evolving order. Such information may predate rationality and may or may not be encoded into rationality: rationality is incomplete; may predate and may or may not be encoded into language, intuition: language and intuition are incomplete. However this information is coded into existence and “being” which may, and does, communicates to and is searched out by rationality, language, and intuition. When encoded into rationality, language, intuition, these instruments of understanding 3-107 do not originally reflect the evolutionary origins of stabilities and permanences in structures, fluxes and relations...and do not need to have done so. Hence the apparent a priori natures of rationality, analytic knowledge, and aspects of intuitive truth. However the absolute distinction between a priori and empirical [synthetic a posteriori] truth is not an ultimate distinction, although it did seem ultimate to Kant. Conventionally, synthetic, empirical knowledge is learned by individuals directly: this is ontogenetic117 knowledge: from the individual being. What is learned by the culture as a whole: myth, tradition, what is learned by the species...in organic evolution [instinct, autonomous regulation]: is phylogenetic117 above knowledge Knowledge that seems a priori to the individual may be empirical to species and physical evolution. “Knowledge” that is a priori to species may be empirical to life [DNA coding] or physical evolution [evolution of atoms]. However, the a priori, even the deep a priori, may be recognized, understood and found to have a context called a “limitation” by the pessimists. There is a sense, in which all self-knowledge of creation - which is not distinct from its being - is both a priori [or necessary] and synthetic [or empirical.] 3-108 3.5.6.1.5 Relation of evolution to other aspects of knowledgeI mention some further aspects of knowledge which can be understood better within a framework of evolution or which have implications for an understanding of evolution of knowledge and its relation to other levels of evolution. Details and development are left until later. The aspects are: Accidental knowledge, Social theory of knowledge, Relation between cognition and emotion, Science and religion 3.5.6.1.5.1 [1] Accidental knowledgeI have suggested that no knowledge is truly a priori. In order for knowledge to be a priori, it would have to be true without reference to experiment or observation. There is such knowledge but it is either traditional-mythic or phylogenetic. Such knowledge is empirical in a more general sense than personal experiment. Rather, the experiment is performed by the culture or species...as a whole. Also, such knowledge is true [known to be true] only to the extent “tested.” Of course, based on the previous discussion, we find significant doubt regarding the “certainty” notion of truth - as a unifying theoretical concept and as a practical notion. Within the framework of the more appropriate notions of the a priori - even though stricter than Kant's - and of truth - less strict but perhaps more appropriate than the certainty notion - it seems possible to find actual examples of a priori knowledge: knowledge which is true or applicable by accident There is a sense in which all evolution has the character of an accident. This is the sense in which variations [seem to] not prefer order 3-109 However, there are occasions when some complex evolutionary structure developed in one environment has adaptation in a new environment: limbs for walking and climbing become limbs for manipulating. Of course the transition requires some adaptation but much less than a direct development for manipulation. In the same way, knowledge developed in one setting is applicable to others. Examples are language, logic, and mathematics. These are examples of symbolic knowledge There is a fair amount of accidental knowledge. Mathematical applications provide some famous examples; language and logic also have many unanticipated applications. Two outstanding examples from mathematics are the application of matrices in quantum mechanics and tensor analysis in the general theory of relativity. These two examples are often called applications of pure mathematics. It should be remembered, however, that matrix theory has origin in the theory of linear transformations and tensor analysis has its origin in the analysis in non-Euclidean and Euclidean geometries; e.g., in the theory of surfaces. Linear transformations and non-Euclidean geometry have origins in linear equations and generalizations of the Euclidean framework. While it is true that mathematicians, not scientists concerned with the physical world, developed these new mathematical concepts, it should be remembered that the origin of the concepts is not pure creation but creative abstraction from direct representations-approximations of real structures and phenomena. The frequency of application of mathematics, logic and language implies [1] a value of the independent development of these disciplines, [2] a certain difficulty in rationally deciding how independent the theoreticians and the scientists should be of each other [this is not the same issue as communication; variety is a possible approach], and [3] at some level of abstraction the number of basic118 structures of the universe are fewer than might be expected be expected; 3-110 hence the importance of classification. Much of mathematics is concerned with classification of its objects. Such classification is not trivial and is often based on deep properties. Objects within a class are similar. These classifications can equally be regarded as classifications or potential classifications of natural structures and phenomena. One basic classification is into “linear” and nonlinear” behavior. Linearity is well studied. Nonlinearity is extremely diverse but there are convenient classifications of nonlinear behavior. These are not complete. One approach to qualitative classification of nonlinear phenomena is through Rene Thom's singularity theory. This discussion is a scratch on the surface of classification in mathematics. However, because of the historical connection between symbolic and natural structures, we can have some optimism for a structural-mathematical outline of the processes and objects of evolution The existence of archetypal categories in the universe, science and knowledge is confirmed by the unanticipated applicability of symbolic systems such as language, logic and mathematics and by the frequency with which analogy can be employed. Examples of analogy are provided in knowledge, often through the symbolic systems: linear and nonlinear systems, and are provided in nature, often through evolution: within biology and through evolutionary convergence across levels of evolution; e.g., biological, social and cultural. The existence of archetypes does not imply that all archetypes have been discovered Tentative conclusions: 1. Archetypes of behavior in the universe of nature and knowledge exist and have frequent use; 2. the accidental discovery of a common archetype in nature and symbolic [or other] knowledge is the only true a priori knowledge; 3. as pointed out in 3.5.6.5, such a priori soon enters a process of evolutionary convergence and change and so loses its initial a priori character 3-111 3.5.6.1.5.2 [2] Social theory of knowledge119Cultural relativism asserts that the norms of each culture are independent of the norms of other cultures and that “value judgments” have no rational foundation. The social theory of knowledge, due to Karl Mannheim, extends this relativism to knowledge including science and philosophy Two observations can be made: 1. Culture relativism has often been used to deduce the equality of all cultures [as Ruth Benedict has]. In fact, no such deduction can be made from cultural relativism, which implies: no comparison. For this reason, cultural relativism has also been responsible for enhancing continued injustice by implicit appeal to irrationality of value judgment 2. For the distinction between cultures to not extend to differences between individuals, it must be assumed that culture, in addition to having a pervading influence over individuals, has primacy over individuals It is true that a significant portion of human knowledge [especially meaning] is fictional. In relation to the fictional portion, it may be asked: 1. What is its relation to the social theory of knowledge? 2. Is knowledge form-criteria or function? Further, the existence of fiction and relativism in culture and knowledge does not imply that all knowledge is relative. The resolution of this question may be in three parts: 1. Careful analysis of nature and aspects of knowledge - see [3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.5.6] 2. Careful analysis of individual psychology to assess the individual's capacity to transcend cultural fiction; a difficulty in transcendence lies in the pre-rational identification with meaning,120 cultural influences to maintain such meaning: approval, acting out of differences of meaning on a trivial level and avoiding depth [this is institutionalized]. As an example: we laugh at the competitive advertisement among toothpaste brands, but we all buy toothpaste. 3. Careful analysis of actual meaning implicit in language and behavior and evolutionary convergence of such behavior 3-112 3.5.6.1.5.3 [3] Relation between cognition and emotionBoth cognition - including - perception, and emotion are feeling...or a development of feeling. Cognition: structures and transformations; emotion: qualities, intensities and transformations. Cognition and emotion are not pure; “emotion-affect” generally includes the effect and accompaniment of thought, and cognition is usually accompanied by feeling and emotion. Further, being unitary, neither is intrinsically better, all being necessary in individuation and in integration in society and corresponding in their emphasis to different types Cognition and knowledge, emotion and symbolism, feeling, intuition, instinct, organismic knowledge are all elements of the individual and social order and hence the natural order. These affinities and unities may be understood through an evolutionary framework Cognition and emotion have origins in feeling. Many approaches to definition of the interrelations are possible. One possibility: feeling is a sustained internal stimulus; feeling specializes along the dimensions: intensity, quality, structure; emotion: an integration of intensity and quality; cognition: integration of intensity, quality, structure; locations of emotion and cognition in body-brain are different 3-113 3.5.6.1.5.4 [4] Science and religionReligion in mythic cultures includes primitive science. The function of this religion is multifold: social bonding and perhaps navigation; individual navigation of natural, social, personal and universal realms. In post-mythic scientific society, the central functions of myth do not disappear. Science navigates in natural [physical and life], social and personal realms. Science emphasizes structure and certainty, its institutions imply a continuity of its realm into the universal. Ideal religion emphasizes quality of personal experience: emotional-cognitive: the sacred is an emotional and a thinking experience. A scientist may find his or her religion in science. But the true sacred provides an additional function: the freedom to contemplate the universe and actual and symbolic universal possibility. This as a source of personal freedom and as a source of truth and an insurance against tyranny of institutionalized knowledge The free individual weaves with creativity, criticism, freedom, and wonder, not caring whether science or religion is being done. The attitude of science is one of openness to truth and understanding; the attitude of religion is one of openness, wonder, and being in this truth. True science and ideal religion weave together a full and rich fabric of reality These functions exist, in less differentiated form, in mythic cultures All cultures incorporate, in different degrees of balance, “freedom” and authority Understanding of the origins of myth, religion, science and definition-understanding to an ideal fabric of science and religion can be approached through historical and evolutionary study 3-114 3.5.6.2 Evolution as a Framework for Social Process121 and institutions of societyThe process awareness --> plan --> action has both logical and evolutionary origins. We would like to “derive” the process from both types of foundation and others. We are interested in optimal and in necessary conditions. I will also consider the more extended awareness --> knowledge --> plan --> design --> act --> evaluate and its variations and applications to institutions I am interested in level I [mythic] and level II [post-mythic] processes 3.5.6.3 Evolution as a Framework for Consciousness...and concepts...and personal growth Action; essential nature of action - first, selective and second, as a generator or inhibitor of variation in absence of meaning and knowledge; psychological need I have yet to see a complete discussion of consciousness 3.5.6.4 Evolution as a Framework for Design3.5.6.4.1 Evolution in designsEssential role of action, mistakes in improvement; similar role in knowledge 3.5.6.4.2 Evolution in design methods and capabilitiesProblem solving and creative design; choice and, value...just as knowledge has both ontogenetic and traditional-mythic roots, so has design and value Social process; culture: culture is basis of social development beyond bio-psychological human development: agriculture is culture; the subject matters of “natural” science are not culture, but science is culture; art and religion are culture; and others Evolutionary design Design as evolution or evolutionary; evolution as a case of design… it is recognized that this rings of teleology but it is not here being regarded as a fact but as something to consider and, even if in refutation, learn from it 3-115 3.5.6.5 Evolution as a Framework for the Universal122By “universal” I refer to all universes of actuality, possibility [which the rationalist hates to contemplate], and the unknown; and actual and potential relationships among these. Included are universes of being, universes of thought, all as part of the same natural order. Whereas the materialist dogma hates to contemplate the possible, the unknown, the open spirit welcomes all possibilities and potentialities along with the actual but does not exclude discrimination. It labors to exclude only ultimate excesses of hate and fear [nor the hateful and fearful in themselves], but not the significance of hate and fear In view of a multiplicity of meanings,123 levels of knowledge, the distinction between the actual and the potential, between known and unknown is neither static nor clear The openness of spirit is the openness to the sacred. The essential meaning of the sacred is the incompleteness of all actual meanings. It is a private acceptance, an emotional, cognitive acceptance of the powers of the universe as transcending the powers of men. In view of the openness, and unknown in the future, it is a source of power against the tyrannies of dogma, institution, and humankind. The sacred is a power against insecurity and defeat and against temptation to self-indulgence and oppression. Understanding and living in the true meanings of the sacred will be found - again - to be practical “Assumptions” and “contradictions” in our knowledge [or language, rationality] and culture are not assumptions or contradictions of nature. Nature itself has no assumptions or contradictions. Even mind itself, as a part of nature, has no assumptions or contradictions even as it subjectively formulates assumptions and finds contradictions. Assumptions point to incomplete acquaintance with origins [hence axiomatics]. Contradictions in cultural-mythic and symbolic-rational knowledge point to incompleteness and continuing evolution. Contradictions in our “nature,” among the different types [and disciplines] of knowledge - including formal-contradictions, refer to different aspects of superposed evolution and contrary tendencies among the same. In saying this, reference is made to the contraries among “natural” [and socio-cultural] evolution and evolution of knowledge and their interactions: these levels are seen as part of the natural order. The same type of consideration applies to systems and environment. It is rationality which in understanding and expressing these contraries [lacks, and incompletenesses] “finds” contradictions among its own elements, and in understanding and expressing “origins” needs axioms and assumptions among these elements 3-116 The existence of paradoxes [and other contradictions] in language, logic [rationality], and knowledge is not surprising. Let us assume that language has its origins in survival. A hiss is a signal occasioned by a danger and the response is: scatter. Even in this simple situation there are “epistemological problems”: the initial observation may be in error [a shadow is mistaken for a predator]; even though there is danger, the response may be inappropriate or inadequate [in presence of a compound danger]. But, as language itself becomes an object of analysis, reality is summarized by rules of grammar, logic and so on. The summarization process may be in error [contradiction] or inadequate [incompleteness]. There is an analysis of the biological and cultural foundations124 of language, logic [rationality] and knowledge to be done along the lines implicit in this discussion. This would include: origin of primitive signals: hisses, whistles, aspirations, grunts and visual signals as occasions for a response; diversification of signals: pitch, harmonics, sounds, signs and combinations for diverse occasions: message --> action; proliferation of occasions and messages; complex occasions and origins of language; relations between occasions and knowledge: actual occasions --> knowledge of nature, symbolic occasions --> knowledge of symbolic relations [i.e., syntax and logic], actual and symbolic occasions --> origins of science. Knowledge is part of the natural order In summary: nature itself has no assumptions - it has origins; nature has no contradictions - it has contraries Contradictions are contraries of symbolic systems in transition; axioms are speculations of abstracted reality coded in symbolic systems in transition Perhaps, when a concept is recognized and named, there is an act of creation - a symbolic saltation but the relation-object so abstracted originated in physical-biological-cultural evolution; and the concept evolves: converges125 [under appropriate conditions]. Perhaps a resolution of contradiction, paradox and meaning of axioms [and assumptions: assumptions --> abstract --> axiom?] is to be found in these ideas 3-117 If all facts or all necessary facts were known, speculation and criticism would be unnecessary. Theory would have no role. Without progression from unknown --> known, without change, then science, theory, abstraction, formulation are without implication, meaning, and content Here, in the locating of assumptions, formulating axioms, locating contradictions and imprecisions - all transient; in interacting with environment and variation into new levels and regions of existence and understanding do we find potential, amid our own existence, for universal evolution 3.5.6.5.1 On UniversalityEvolution begins in the universal, in the unity of original being, as far as is known by 1987 Western science126 in physical nature: but this does not imply an origin. Evolution remains in the universal but the differentiated aspects of the atoms of evolution do not necessarily manifest or realize this Atoms of evolution seek out universal elements as transcendence of the differentiated and transient aspects of their nature: in movement, perception, cognition [symbol and language]; in mythic thought and religion; in philosophy, art, science: in emotional, cognitive and feeling states127; and, finally, perhaps in biological and physical being: for, it is reasonable, perhaps, that any approach to the universal would go back down “the” stages of evolution The biological and physical stages of approach will not be without risk. They could occur through “blind” evolution or through technology 3-118 3.5.6.6 Consistency among the Frameworks and Points of ViewMechanisms for Evolution; levels Design; levels Choice, materialism, determinism Eastern viewpoints; other views 3-119 3.5.7 THE OPEN PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY128For early life, the immediate universe of self and environment is very simple. Life, self, environment becomes diverse; capacity for ontogenetic learning increases, species Homo sapiens emerges. Knowledge grows and diversifies; activity proliferates. Philosophy emerges from mythic thought as a self understanding of this diversity. Unity is inherent in such understanding: unity of the realms of: being, knowledge, motivation and action. A core of philosophical knowledge and method is born The open problems of philosophy derive from the ongoing interaction of unity with diversity: of the enterprise and concerns of philosophy with the specialized disciplines and activities. Therefore, to understand the origin and meaning of the open problems - and of the process of philosophy - we need: ▪ A conception or a set of conceptions - of the nature and enterprise of philosophy: its concerns and core insights or knowledge, and its methods - as they stand now and as they have developed historically129. The central concerns of philosophy are metaphysics: the nature of being-process, and epistemology: the nature and theory of knowledge. These central concerns include or branch into the philosophical concerns of the specialized disciplines and activities130 ▪ A broad, encompassing view of the specialized disciplines and activities: awareness; knowledge - its central and peripheral disciplines; design and planning and their levels; motivation and action 3-120 This provides a view of philosophy as the trunk, and perhaps some of the major roots and limbs, of the “tree of knowledge”131 growing out of a “ground of being and mythic thought.”132 It is important to emphasize that in this metaphor, which is akin to Quine's “seamless web of knowledge,” the roots form a fundamental part of the metaphor. In addition, the metaphor needs completions in that some “philosophical limbs” rejoin the trunk, and, historically, roots join after limbs branch out. Further, while the main connection between the ground function - roots, limbs and earth - and the reaching out function - branches, leaves, air and sun is the trunk, other links are forged The metaphor is complex and mixed. Apparently, this goes against literary rules. Nevertheless, the subject is complex, the metaphor is rich, and it would be interesting to fill out the metaphor sketch provided here Here a brief legend:
Table 5 Ground of Being and Mythic Thought 3-121 There are senses in which the important problems of philosophy remain open. First, in the sense that philosophy includes an account of humankind's contemplation of the central mysteries of being and knowledge - our centering in existence133. In this sense, philosophy has religious and motivational value: we see our own existence as great because we are part of the greatness of the cosmic rhythm: universal being pervades our being134. Second, because of ongoing discovery in the specialized disciplines and activities, philosophy and its central concerns remain open to new meaning and interpretation thus, while clarification and unification of metaphysics and epistemology and the special issues remain to discovery and development The open problems, arising out of the interactive and historical elements, fall into the following areas: Continued development and new learning in: A. Core areas and methods in philosophy: in metaphysics, epistemology, motivation, design and action; B. Philosophy and human enterprise as a whole. These open problems are, perhaps, more significant but better understood after those in item A; C. Fundamental problems of humankind. As an extension of item B, philosophy includes consideration of fundamental material, social and existential problems. Philosophy remains open to reality; D. Philosophy and criticism of the special disciplines.135 3-122 3.5.7.1 Problems and Problem Areas in Metaphysics, Epistemology, Design, Motivation and ActionProblem areas: a detailed definition will come later
Table 6 Open Problems of Philosophy: Metaphysics and Epistemology 3-123
Table 7 Open Problems of Philosophy: Motivation and Action
Table 8 Open Problems of Philosophy: Philosophical Method 3-124 3.5.7.2 Problems and Problem Areas for Philosophy and Human Enterprise140 as a WholeBased on the insights from the tradition of philosophy and religion, and on the new learning from cosmology, epistemology, motivation and action which is, in part, based in interactions of philosophy, relativistic and quantum physics, cosmological, biological and social-cultural evolution, we begin to see: The subject matters, and hence the disciplines, of metaphysics, cosmology, epistemology, motivation, design and action as a whole, as an interacting unity 3.5.7.2.1 Problems relating to unity3.5.7.2.1.1 [1] Foundation in physical cosmologyFounding the origin and nature of being in physical cosmology - to the extent possible; need for metaphysical cosmology, perhaps 3.5.7.2.1.2 [2] Synthesis of all modes of knowledgeSynthesis of all classes of knowledge, reason [logic], perception, philosophical method [critical and speculative - as archetypes of the “methods” of knowledge], being and process: this amounts to a foundation in which the natural order includes the orders of knowledge - and value. This would be done to the extent possible; 3.5.7.2.1.3 [3] Motivation, value, psychology and religionIn item 2, motivation is represented by value. This is to be supplemented by psychology and religion; 3.5.7.2.1.4 [4] Design and action141Design and action are incorporated, beginning in social process and proceeding to universal evolution; 3-125 3.5.7.2.1.5 [5] A study of unity and diversityA study of unity and diversity; meanings of unity: forming a set of similar or identical entities or processes; forming an essential whole; having interconnections. Unity can be analyzed through structure: identity or similarity; behavior - as a whole; by showing the interconnections - either of the parts or of the processes, especially when the processes form a [feedback] loop; showing the common evolutionary origins or origins in a homogeneous state 3.5.7.2.1.6 [6] Equivalence of metaphysical and epistemological systemsEquivalence and interrelations of the different metaphysical and epistemological systems [especially in view of evolution of knowledge]; or synthesis-syntheses, possibly eclectic, or the systems; or demonstration that they are different aspects of or different ways of looking at the same reality; to the extent that these objectives are possible 3.5.7.2.1.7 [7] Structure of knowledge142...in terms of the discussion of Areas 2 and 3; also the questions: ▪ Can the branches of knowledge be arranged in linear, hierarchical, circular, or spiral-helical orders: value, logical, epistemological, and historical-evolutionary...? ▪ Do the branches of knowledge form watertight compartments, or are they a “seamless web”; are there multiple criteria of truth; are the sciences and humanities essentially distinct? 3-126 The Foundation of the Unity should be based on logical empirical ground. Since the structure of the universe “is” diachronic, logical empirical approaches need to be based in a resolution of the elements of form and structure into their evolutionary origin: the foundation of unity [with its psychological, epistemological advantages] is to be based not only in structure and its description- mechanism but also in evolution and history [as best understood]. In the historical evolutionary view, analysis starts at some time: the origin of the known universe and goes further back into the “unknown” and beyond into “unknown” or “universal.” The benchmark for the unknown or universal could be the findings of cosmology, physics, biology, or some transcendental or imaginative approach. Below, it is cosmology; the concept is similar in either case. In between the levels of the universal, nature and knowledge, and design form a part of the natural order: the following is shown as a sequence but is, in part, parallel: The universal Known origin; physical cosmology, geology Origin of biology and action in the “middle dimension”143 Perception; ontogenetic learning in “middle dimension” Human origins, cognition, motivation, design Symbolic systems, society, history; syntheses Going beyond “middle dimension”; universality144 3-127 3.5.7.2.2 Problems relating to evolutionary origin3.5.7.2.2.1 [8] The philosophic, open outlookOne of the fundamental tasks of the philosophic, open outlook is to remind us of the finitude and incompleteness of the variety of ways in which we understand the world-universe and act in it 3.5.7.2.2.2 [9] The universal in the particular and the symbolicAnother, and related task is seeing behind or in the particular and the symbolic ways; this includes the notion of unity [items 1-8] and the notions of universality discussed in 3.5.6.5, in this sub-area, and in Area 2, especially 2.6.3-4, 11-14 . . .provision of an attitude and a framework which will act against potential-closing dogmas however successful. Such attitudes and frameworks will support individuals and cultures through their psychologies and social structures in the understanding and acting out of universal elements in and through the particulars of their own existence. What is wanted is a philosophy of the universal. [This includes the questions of actions and attitudes; and is different from the somewhat technical “problem of universals.”] In this is one foundation of freedom 3.5.7.2.2.3 [10] Evolutionary foundations of philosophy...and of its divisions and special disciplines and applications.145 Origins of philosophy in awakening of self-critical attitudes of mythic thought [mythic thought provided the original creative [speculative] ideas]; synthesis of creativity and criticism; breaking off of the well-developed and definitive areas of study into the sciences, resolution of philosophy into a core and special disciplines; growth through continued interaction of: sciences and other particular areas of study, special philosophical disciplines, the philosophical core, and new information, knowledge, ideas, syntheses and criticisms or evaluations 3-128 ▪ Foundation of philosophical knowledge in evolution: philosophical knowledge comes from ontogenetic [including social] as well as phylogenetic [evolutionary] sources; but ontogenetic nature has origin in evolution; this applies to all knowledge and aspects of social process. A value of evolutionary foundation and study is that things commonly thought of as separate [e.g., life and matter, life and levels of knowledge, a priori and empirical knowledge] are shown to interconnections. These things are essentially interacting and therefore can not be fully understood in themselves. Further, evolution builds upon existing structure and so the products of evolution show the signs of this process: sub-optimality, adaptation of structure with one function to another, and so on. The result is that the universe and its subsystems can not be understood as constructed from a perfectly planned blueprint [but could, perhaps, originate from the blueprint of a less than omniscient [all knowing] planner that would use an evolutionary approach to design-plan formation]. Evolutionary study includes evolution of form, structure, and process Note that we can never know all the details of history and evolution. But this is precisely one reason why evolutionary theory is valuable: it provides trend and mechanism in evolution and history and so helps fill in the gaps of knowledge One of the outstanding open problems of philosophy is to work out the evolutionary implications for itself and knowledge, generally, and design, action, and evaluation. This includes some of the essential unsolved problems: consciousness, meaning and purpose 3.5.7.2.2.4 [11] Development of a philosophy of evolution and designProblems inherent in 3.5.6 3.5.7.2.2.5 [12] Foundation for a sequence of philosophiesBeing --> process and becoming --> interaction and evolution? Divestment of superstructure 3-129 3.5.7.3 The Fundamental Problems of Humankind; the Value of Philosophical PerspectivesHere, I consider an extension of philosophy. In addition to the core, problems of philosophy as expressed in Areas 3.2-5, there are certain situational problems of humankind. These include the crucial, acute, pressing ones as well as long-term concerns. The general understanding and questions of resolution of these fit within a philosophical framework. Additionally, the situational problems are intricately related to the existential questions and all real resolutions must include elements of each Philosophy and philosophical attitudes and approaches are valuable, essential in knowing and resolving the fundamental problems because [1] clarity and accuracy of vision are encouraged and enhanced. These include the notion of truth, of understanding and eliminating errors, tacit and unwarranted assumptions and biases; and value of reflection and thought in knowing truth [3.4.2.2]. This leads to careful identification of the essential problems and factors, for philosophy retains its original role as synthesizer and critic of mythic and imaginative thought. [2] Courage and color of vision are encouraged and enhanced: philosophy does not reject the power and vibrancy of pre-mythic being and mythic thought: it adds to them the element of criticism of their excesses. This function leads to creative solutions and new concepts in solution. The critical function can then be applied to the potential solutions of creative thought. [3] Wholeness of vision is encouraged and enhanced: philosophy retains an integrated whole of mythic and creative thought: even as specialized disciplines and activities branch out, they remain connected to and interacting with philosophy: even when the disciplines become isolated in practice. The essence of philosophical meaning requires and includes the interconnections and interactions. The wholeness required by the dynamic, holistic vision of philosophy includes: multiple facets of the human situation and unity with the “context” - environmental, universal; fullness in the levels of reality, dimensions of being, process and needs: integration of reality, value and style [action and emphasis]; vision of problem, solution and approach as one phenomenon: separation of this phenomenon into “problem,” “approach,” and “solution” has elements of disintegration. The value of wholeness is clear; included are perspectives otherwise neglected, interactions and resolution of otherwise difficult fragmentary problems.146 [4] Further, philosophy [when it integrates 1987 learning [3.5.6]] encourages and enhances these ideals, not as absolutes, but as adaptive elements 3-130 Thus, philosophical attitudes encourage and enhance accuracy, imagination, and wholeness of vision in a way that is adaptive to a chosen context. There is also need for special disciplines and sources of information, special approaches. Further, the whole process occurs within a social framework: the realities of this framework must also be included. But, also, philosophy encourages understanding and vision of this system and of essential environmental and universal elements as an interacting unity. Even when philosophy is not formally present, it is often present in the attitudes of some individuals. Practically we may say that organic integration of philosophy and the framework of fundamental problems is an aspect of top --> down design [3.1.3]. This does not mean that philosophy or knowledge are secondary to design 3.5.7.3.1 On Problems and SolutionsLiving in the world we become aware of problems: 147 acute problems: hunger, suffering, inequity, injustice; loss or lack of self-respect and dignity; loss of human vitality in over technologized, over urbanized,148 over cultured civilization; war, nuclear threat; decay of values and loss of meaning, purpose, and heroism; alienation; growing populations and dwindling resources; paralysis of human psychic reserves by fear and the flight from fear, from death itself, to the desperate search for security; long term problems: careful design of society and social institutions, and of individual life patterns and attitudinal possibilities, for resolution of acute problems, evaluation and enhancement of long-term values What is the nature of these problems of which we are immediately aware? Are these the real problems? If so, let us understand and describe them more carefully: what are their “origins,” interactions, unities? If such origins can be found, perhaps these are the problem[s]. What are the other immediate problems? Perhaps the problem types considered are symptoms. Philosophy encourages us to see problems clearly and truly, as unitized as is valid, and in relation to some objective or circumstance: an adaptation. Further, such values are to be integrated, as far as is reasonable, in the structure of the world, and evolution, from which the problems arise 3-131 That is, see the real problems and in their proper aspect. See their interactions, common causes and origins and the most appropriate points in the chain of causation at which to act. This is in itself a philosophical attitude but also necessitates understanding of the world through conventional philosophy - epistemology, metaphysics, and value. Additionally the solution approach is to be integrated and applied to the whole context in its appropriate extension and dimensions and levels of being. Seeing the structure of the problems and their relation to the truth of existence is a creative act that opens realistic approaches to resolution It is not the purpose at this point to provide a complete identification and definition of the fundamental problems and resolution but an initial insight into understanding and definition of the problems and development of proper resolutions. I will take up four considerations suggested by the foregoing discussion: 3.5.7.3.1.1 [1] The human situation must be seen and felt in its full contextWe are of nature; the complete context is humankind-and-environment and universal existence. So the real problems are not of humankind in isolation, but - even if our motives are “selfish” - of humankind and its complete environment. Thus, as an example, hunger is not merely a problem of feeding hungry individuals or showing how every nation [why nation?] can feed its people. These are short-term attitudes. More importantly, hunger is an aspect of development of natural systems. Over extension of natural resources is a real problem, not an imaginary one. It is true that culture and society provide a shelter from the “rule of nature,” but only within constraints. The problem of resources is a question of balance: of population, consumption, style and resources. We can respect this balance, or ultimately suffer certain consequences. Resolution of acute problems is a short-term approach. Restraint and balance provide a long-term basis of material problems 3.5.7.3.1.2 [2] On choice of valuesThe context [context º determinants] of value formation includes human nature, biological and psychological, origins of and interactions within the society, interactions with other societies, environment and universe. Creative and selective 3-132 forces are from these elements. Thus, although rationality, or even human psychology, is an element in value formation, it is but one of a number of elements. Value formation in society and in the individual is not under complete control of rationality-psychology. Moreover, since rationality-psychology is bounded, this situation is appropriate. It is rational to accept the limitations of rationality-psychology Even so, we are faced with value choices. Changing circumstances, incompleteness, and ambiguity of values and value frameworks frequently occasion need for interpretation. Less frequently, due to significantly changed circumstances, shifts in values and or value types [paradigms] become important. These changes are from among the determinants149 and context. Human nature remains relatively constant while society, culture and institutions, environment, concepts of the universe and of the universal change. One approach to choice can be the following: [a] Choices should be made, as is appropriate, or possible, to the situation, in full light of knowledge of the determinants, i.e., of the total context, of value. These include sociological, naturalistic, universal and evolutionary knowledge. We are interested in the extent to which values are based in evolutionary biology. [b] Choices should be made, as far as is appropriate, or possible, in full knowledge of changing circumstances. This implies a kind of evolution of values. The creative function is served by imagination, historical example, and so on. The selective forces include rational and other elements. Generally, the selective value of rationality will be limited by the finiteness of cognitive understanding. [c] Since knowledge and rationality are incomplete and bounded, we recognize that risk is associated with rational choice. The level of risk of actual choices and values should be compatible150 with the level of risk of alternative choices and values. The latter includes as an option conservation of existing values. Note that evaluation of risk is not a completely rational operation but involves elements of value. In addition, a level of compatible risk includes positive benefits, and detrimental effects, among its determinants Social values, their determination and change-evolution [item c above] are and should be based, in part, in evolution of the whole context [item b]. Social values should be examined in the full light of evolutionary knowledge 3-133 What does this mean? It does not imply discarding tradition; but it does imply examination of traditional values as they have become counter-adaptive to changed circumstances. Nor is it implied that biology does or should determine values. Evolution is more than biological development. I have shown significant examples of understanding the nature of culture from its basis in evolution. Such understanding will shed useful light on our value systems and possible constraints on value determination and possible constraints on solution approaches from material and existential points of view. To what extent are we constrained by our evolutionary past and our present in determining appropriate-adaptive value and meaning and to what extent are we free to create meaning and value? An instance: We can recognize that the call of the environmentalists and the conservators of “nature” is much more than an appeal to naturalistic romance, more than provision of a playground for psychic healing of over urbanized humankind, more than a resource hinterland for the cities, more than a buffer against future population growth. Knowledge, design, planning are never perfect. Cultural and social processes are “experimental.” The world: humankind, Earth needs space so that such experiments are possible. A variety of ongoing small and medium scale experiments is essential because of the incompleteness of knowledge and design. Space is necessary for variety. In this way failure - which is necessary for enhancement, even maintenance [because of degradation], of life - is not catastrophic. The space and the variety are necessary, not only for independence of the trials, the experiments, but because they - space and variety - are the context, the ground, of evolution. It may be that we can design and build efficient cultures to support a large civilization, but at risk of inflexibility Variety, diversity, variability, space and low interaction levels are thus evolutionary values. Multi-culture is a value. These values respect the past and enhance the future of evolution. Design and planning [i.e., at cognitive levels] may overcome their own intrinsic limitations by allowing151 a context, allowing space for failure and development. This is freedom, enhances freedom 3-134 3.5.7.3.1.3 [3] Humankind and environment in balance in relation to a full spectrum of needsConsidering humankind and environment in balance, including universal context, in relation to a full spectrum of “needs” will provide a basis for more comprehensive understanding of human, social and environmental [includes life] contexts - a complete or more complete context152 - and problems, and a prospect for balanced and self-sustaining design. Philosophy, with evolutionary knowledge, provides insight into the levels of existence or dimensions of being which each have certain expressions and “needs.” I have identified the dimensions of being153 and expression as natural, social, inner, universal. An alternate labeling is natural, social, existential [inner-universal] Different cultures, based on different circumstances and insights, have evolved or chosen different expressions and balances. In some cases, the results have been grotesque imbalances. The stereotypical Indian imbalance is toward the existential; the Oriental [Confucian] is to the social; the Western to the natural-material. The grotesque aspect arises because humankind, by nature and from structural, societal and evolutionary need, or require a balance. Provision of appropriate balance makes for a self-sustaining structure. In lack of balance, there is a consumptive attitude to one type of need: consumptive spiritualism, consumptive materialism. The consumptive situation arises because material or existential emphasis is used in an impossible attempt to satisfy the other type of need 3-135 3.6 CONCLUSIONThere is significant potential for expansion, inclusion, reorganization, and divestment of superstructure in all philosophy and artifactual processes. This will not be easy because of the cognitive problems and because knowledge and artifact are not completely free: they are bound by history and some evolution into the psycho-social structure of institutions; and, further, the institution and psychology of “rational” knowledge [post-mythic] do retain valid [adaptive - from the point of view of the entire social-environmental structure] elements. However, the potential remains for a powerful new understanding of a unified world of “natural” and “artifactual” processes, in which nature and artifact are basically of the same order of existence. Such a view of humankind, philosophy, knowledge emerging from “nature” will include and be philosophy. The idea is not a deterministic one; it shows possible merging with and among evolution in many senses: levels, constraints, immediate, long time, universal 3.6.1 Emergence of a new naturalistic view of cognition, emotion, philosophy, knowledge and designA new naturalistic154 view of cognition155 and philosophy is emerging as follows. In the context of universal being there is an evolution:156 space-time-matter157 --> cosmic, geologic structure --> chemical structure, life --> humankind --> society --> mythic thought and mind [... --> mythic action --> ...] --> ...culture --> elements of rationality --> philosophy --> rational [... --> science --> ...]158 and mythic knowledge, mind --> rational and mythic design --> rational and mythic action --> universal thought --> ... --> universal being It seems inevitable that elements of rationality would have arisen in mythic cultures as a result of speculation on mythic thought and knowledge as independent entities, or in the context of the thinker and or object of thought, and that the results of such thought would have been integrated into the body of mythic knowledge. However, the process of rational thought did not at once become institutionalized. Indeed, there were strong cultural safeguards against the emergence of a rational activity that would displace mythic knowledge. It is valid to point out that modern “post mythic” culture involves a combination of mythic and rational thought. As pointed out above, this has validity [adaptivity]. Undoubtedly there are counter-adaptive areas of mythic thought in modern 1987 culture. The existence of these and the strength of our attachment to them are evidence of mythic thinking. Even attachment to rationality is or can be a mythic function and therefore destructive. This applies equally to non-attachment, or to attachment-non-attachment to emotionality 3-136 Properly concerned ideal thought 1987 is a blend of mythic and rational-critical thought. I have discussed this in detail [3.4.3, 3.5.6]. It should be pointed out that introduction of rationality does not eliminate error. [In a synchronous model of knowledge this does not matter, but rationality does not completely eliminate the diachronic nature of knowledge-artifact.] Also, the introduction of certainty and definiteness accomplished by the introduction of rationality is detrimental to power [not physical power] As the self-criticism [rationality] of mythic thought becomes formal, an institution, philosophy159 emerges as the body of rational knowledge. Philosophy has roots in, maintains connections with, and includes elements of all items in universal being: space-time-matter --> ... --> universal being. The developing “method” or institution of rationality and the existing phenomenon of mythic-creative thought are incorporated, contact with all elements of being [material, cosmic, natural, life, psyche; emotion, intuition, cognition...] and action are maintained. As development occurs there emerge spheres of coherent activity within philosophy. Some are peripheral in that they are specialized and or definite. Knowledge accepted as definite is called science. Of these some become separately institutionalized disciplines and continue largely independent activity and development. There remains a core of philosophical content and method and activity. Thus the original field of philosophy --> core and periphery and independent disciplines: knowledge In the culture of the West this sphere of activity is more restricted to the faculty of thought: mythic [includes religion, and all aspects of psyche] and rational. The activity is significantly academic. For vibrancy of this domain of Western knowledge, contact is maintained, or should be maintained, between [the necessarily developing] core and periphery of philosophy and independent disciplines of knowledge, especially at the point of conceptual development. The independent disciplines, science included, require the input of philosophic doubt as well as mythic-creative imagination. The integrity of the entire body of knowledge needs occasional “protection” against pervasion by the nature of special disciplines 3-137 These remain the concerns of philosophy. They are also the concerns of the special disciplines. Philosophy also remains concerned with development of its own core, for which it necessarily maintains contact with reality and the independent disciplines. The content of Western knowledge is and reflects a unity Design, action approaching to universal being are occasionally incorporated with philosophy, philosophic attitudes [and the whole of knowledge] in the West. Examples are Socrates and Henri Bergson. However, this is not institutionalized. The Western tendency is away from this. Western philosophy and knowledge are highly academic. In Eastern, and to a degree in existential philosophies, incorporation with all elements of life and evolution is the classic way. This necessarily excludes “excess” institutionalization. Hence in Eastern160 and existential philosophies the boundaries between philosophy, religion [as an aspect of mythic thought], between the core, peripheral and independent disciplines is not so clear. Philosophy in this ideal is a part of, an expression of, and a unity with universal being 3-138 3.6.2 TRANSITION to the Realm of KnowledgePhilosophy has been included as providing some foundation for knowledge and social process. Also in the development there is a sequence [details in 3.6.1]: evolution --> knowledge --> action. In this scheme a foundation as well as principles of organization of knowledge are provided. At this writing the full implications [as I have realized them] are not incorporated in Area 4 3.6.3 FUTURE work for the Realm of PhilosophyI plan to continue development of Area 3, and its application and integration with other areas, especially Area
4-1 4 KNOWLEDGEThe Object of Study is Symbolic Knowledge and its Systematizations The primary object of study here is symbolic ontogenetic knowledge. The object of such knowledge includes non-symbolic and phylogenetic learning. It must also include, as an object, the nature of knowledge. These aspects of knowledge, while not avoided are not especially sought out. The nature of knowledge in general; the topic, experience and phenomenology of non-symbolic knowledge, relations among the modes of knowledge, especially as these are important in themselves are the province of Area 3 and its specialty sub-sections and other studies. Here, because of its special status as the repository of recorded and communicable knowledge, symbolic knowledge and its systematization are considered Knowledge as an Adaptive Element in Nature A number of concepts of the nature of knowledge and its foundation have been considered [Area 3]. The central one for the present purpose is that knowledge [knowing] is an adaptive element in the natural order. This concept can be related to all others. This is not to imply that all other concepts of knowledge can be derived from this one Relations of knowledge vs. its “functions” It is a presumption to name some specific “purpose” of knowledge as the function of knowledge. However, the role of knowledge as an adaptation indicates its role as a dynamic aspect of social-cultural processes. Knowledge is used in design. However, it is not proper to say that the purpose of knowledge is design. Knowledge is an element in the larger socio-cultural design - or evolutionary design in the case of phylogenetic learning. Nor is it valid to assign knowledge a material-practical “end” - in the conventional meaning of what it is to be practical or pragmatic. Knowledge has material and existential relations. Roughly: material, practical, definite knowledge is science; existential knowledge is humanities, which includes social analysis, art and literature, religion, and history. It is clear that this division is an approximation. Philosophy incorporates material and existential aspects. I incline and subscribe to a view in which the existential aspect is most general: the existential includes the material. Therefore philosophy and the humanities cover the whole of knowledge and science within which science is a topic. In this view, the split between the “two cultures” is due to the ignorance and prejudice of thinkers The position of knowledge as an adaptive element in nature implies that there is a development of knowledge. This development, in evolution, is considered in 3.3.2, 3.5.6.1, and 3.6.1. Evolution in general and development of knowledge in particular provide a principle for organization of the disciplines of knowledge 4-2 In §4.1, I briefly consider some adaptive functions of knowledge; in §4.2, I discuss some principles of organization of knowledge; and in §§4.3 and 4.4, I present an outline of knowledge based in these principles 4-3 First, immediately below, I will review and summarize some concepts of knowledge from Area 3. This will serve as convenient summary and a foundation for Area 4 and subsequent work. In §4.1, I will briefly consider some adaptive functions of knowledge. These are drawn from the summary discussion of the nature of knowledge below. In §4.2, I will discuss principles of organization of knowledge. These have basis in the adaptive-evolutionary including design “function.” In §§4.3 and 4.4, I present an outline of symbolic knowledge that has foundation in the adaptive basis. In §4.5, some open problems are mentioned. In §4.6, I consider an encyclopedic compilation A number of concepts of the nature of knowledge and its foundation have been considered in Area 3. These include [1] System theory of knowledge: States and processes of one system [say A] map or model states and processes of another system [say B]: i.e., A has knowledge of B. A and B can be the universe or any of its subsystems. There is no necessary restriction on A or B161 or their relationship. There is no restriction on the type of knowledge. It could be symbolic, organismic, abstract representation, and so on [2] Knowledge as an adaptation This includes the idea that knowledge, and the potential for knowledge - for an organism to learn - arises-arose in evolution and or through learning. Knowledge and the occasion for knowledge arise together. Knowledge is created as well as discovered. These two main considerations lead to a number of more specific ones ...Especially in the sense that there are potential occasions for knowledge which have not yet arisen and therefore appropriate adaptations have not developed [4] Knowledge includes information ...But, also, condensed information - representation and potential representation of patterns. This is built into the structure of the perceptual-cognitive systems of organisms as well as into the structure of symbolic knowledge ...Learned by an individual or by individuals; includes learning, discovery, creativity, and empirical knowledge Phylogenetic knowledge includes the a priori Phylogenetic knowledge is “learned” by species, life, and others during evolution; seated in individuals, but transmitted genetically; interacts with ontogenetic knowledge: includes capacity for learning and perceptual development. For ontogenetic knowledge system A = individual, for phylogenetic knowledge A = species, etc 4-4 A = society or subsection. Expressed through institutions and or individuals. Expression may be ritual, symbolic-linguistic. As expression, such knowledge is mythic. Mythic refers to a type of thinking, not content. Mythic knowledge includes aspects of mythology, religion, tradition, value, and is distinguished by the fact that it is culture bound: it is selected-”invalidated” [falsified] as the culture is selected-dies. In fact, one of the functions of mythic knowledge is the adaptivity of group cohesion ...Rational knowledge is selected by “its own” criteria: validity, truth [including empirical truth], meaning, verifiability-falsifiability, and aesthetics. Criteria for rational knowledge may be rational - or mythic - irrespective of the nature of these criteria. Rational knowledge may still serve a mythic-cultural function [and therefore, “unfortunately” an anti-cultural function].162 Rational knowledge can prove to be counter-adaptive to society-culture. The full truth of this negative judgment is as follows: it is the total cultural system [including rationality] which can be adaptive and counter adaptive One of the consequences of these conceptions is that knower and known, mind and universe, are of the same natural order Knowledge and evolution: Status of Integration After Charles Darwin, it became acceptable, according to reasonable rational, empirical, and cultural and consensual criteria [but not to all factions], to consider life as having evolved. Darwin's The Origin of the Species appeared in 1859. Today in 1987, evolution in biology is well established - although development and criticism continue. Therefore, evolution is well integrated into the body of biological knowledge. Physical evolution is more remote, and remotely understood. Social evolution remains disputed but is becoming better understood. Non-biological evolution is not yet well-integrated into academic-consensual knowledge: This is reflected in the organization of knowledge today 1987. At this writing, the integration of evolution into knowledge of nature will be supplemented through Area 2 4-5 In formulating an evolutionary epistemology, i.e. an evolutionary foundation to knowledge, it is not enough to seek an evolutionary foundation for existing knowledge and conceptions of knowledge, but we must be willing to revise our conceptions of knowledge itself. This is a general principle: in seeking to incorporate new information and ideas into a conceptual framework, we must be willing to modify the framework itself Thus, in the case of knowledge, we should, in relation to concepts such as, “Knowledge is justified true belief,” be willing to alter this definition or to alter concepts of justification, truth, and or belief. In line with the notion of evolution being a mutual trial and error process of systems in an environment, we must be willing to give up aspects of certainty and universality in the context of knowledge and truth. Further, we need to understand that these concepts of certainty and universality are not even desirable as actual elements - although they may stand as motivating factors and ends, especially universality. We also recognize the limitations of empirical justification in that certain intuitive163 aspects of knowledge have basis in evolution itself Alternative conceptions of knowledge as adaptive information or adaptive information generation [such as intuition, instinct, concept...] may be appropriate to an evolutionary framework At this we may object that such concepts of knowledge are not adequate and that certain features of the modern era [1600-2000 AD] have made the certainty and universality conceptions possible and hence necessary. To this I reply [1] what certainty and universality there are have to do with our evolutionary relationship with a certain phase of the universe in “space and time.” [2] The belief in such certainty and universality has to do with creation of appropriate psychosocial conditions [although the belief in the knowledge itself is not founded merely in such conditions]. [3] In the larger picture, and in truly formulating an adequate framework for knowledge, the certainty-universality conception may be counter-adaptive As long as we cling to our old contexts [knowledge as academic knowledge based in psychosocial interaction of public knowledge c. 1600-2000A.D.], we will 4-6 not want to make a transition to new concepts. We may think of such new concepts as valuable metaphors and similes that enhance and add meaning to the old. I see the situation as the reverse. The old concepts are a psychosocial phase of the new. This does not mean that the content of modern knowledge, e.g. modern physics, is wrong. It does mean that our attitudes toward the universality and certainty, the psychology, the value and use of this knowledge may be inappropriate One appropriate new context for knowledge is to see it as part of an unfolding evolution.
Table 9. From Being to Social Design Relation between Evolutionary Epistemology and Evolutionary Design Evolutionary design includes the following: A type of thinking and action or, more appropriately, a design or plan based in and for a type of thinking and action somewhere between satisfying our evolutionary natures [which includes environment: particular and universal] and living within evolutionary and natural164 constraints while developing our evolutionary and occasional future as we wish and have “freedom” to do so: using our true freedom One role of evolutionary epistemology is to understand knowledge in this evolutionary design context and provide knowledge and understanding of the context: understanding evolutionary natures, constraints and providing a style of thinking appropriate to the intended development 4-7 It should not be forgotten that one role of epistemology-philosophy is to guard against the pervasion of endeavor by a single slant. Even though a general concept of evolution as implied here is much more than a single slant, epistemology has the additional and related roles to play: to question and to sharpen the conceptions being forwarded 4-8 4.1 ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE IN EVOLUTION AND DESIGNTurning Points in Development of Knowledge Beginning with replicating molecules [and undoubtedly earlier - it is interesting to see how far back this goes], biological evolution involves adaptation. Environment and life co-evolve: the systems in this mutual co-organization have coded into them the natures of their selves and their environments. [The environment of environment is the system[s] inhabiting it.] This clearly satisfies both system and adaptive concepts of knowledge. The faculty of knowledge clearly goes back at least to the origins of life. This original knowledge does not involve learning165 over the life of the individual. At some point in evolution, learning by the individual becomes possible This point is clearly a divide, for the burden of perceptual attunement to a complex environment is no longer solely genetic. Genetic coding can provide the rough adjustment and the potential for fine-tuning. Fine-tuning occurs during development through interaction with the environment. An example is stereoscopic vision.166 There are undoubtedly examples that are more primitive: non-instinctual or combined instinctual-non-instinctual learning. The divide involves two factors: [1] It allows an enhancement of behavioral or organismic complexity with less extra, additional genetic complexity than would be needed if entire development were genetically controlled, and [2] by such enhancement an evolutionary niche or environment is created in which the new development can rapidly develop in level of performance and complexity, a type of punctuated equilibrium that is different than adaptive radiation. It is interesting to identify other critical divides of this type There are other divides of this type in evolution of learning. A key one is memory, which leads to elementary perception of “time.” With memory [and sensory imaging - which is a primitive memory-reconstruction], perhaps, is the origin of cognition. The world and images of the world, and images of images, play side by side. Knowledge becomes highly independent of environment, flexible, aware of “knowing,” conscious. Images can be manipulated leading to symbols. There must be many stages in this development. Abstract symbolic development is certainly an important stage. Symbolic or linguistic learning [and communication] confers such advantages as to significantly enhance learning and behavioral capability without corresponding increase in genetic or anatomical complexity as would be required without symbolic-linguistic learning and communication. Further, this opens new possibilities that make further, quantum, and enhancement of the “recent” [neo-cortical] development adaptive 4-9 Subsequent evolutionary “breakthroughs” of this type, in learning beyond elementary sensory imaging [knowledge], learning and communication include vocalization, abstraction, elaboration of symbolic systems, language, mythic thought, elementary writing, alphabetization, rationality and empirical analysis [as institutions], self-reflexive rationality, historical and evolutionary analysis Symbolic and Artifactual Knowledge In Area 4 the knowledge that is of concern [artifactual; technology expands the scope even to the phyla-organismic], and that is the object of study, begins with symbolic-linguistic thought and so includes [1] symbolic systems of all types, [2] language, oral traditions insofar as these are known, [3] writing, [4] mythic thought, [5] rationality and philosophy: core and periphery, [6] humanities, [7] sciences. In short, all knowledge that begins with language. We are also concerned with all existing civilized knowledge and thought, whether linguistic or ritual. Other types of knowledge [which I intend to incorporate later] are relevant insofar as they relate to the present object: either formatively or as content. These concepts are included within the notion of adaptation, or expression of an adaptation Symbolic and Artifactual Design Design has a number of meanings. These are discussed elsewhere.167 Here I am interested in the following concept of design: ability of evolved structures - societies and organisms - to modify the environment168 to meet some need or adaptation. Clearly, life, species and organisms do this to or with environment8. Societies and cultures as wholes do this without necessarily being aware of it. Conscious design undoubtedly begins very early, in its primitive form, with memory. In Area 5 I will be primarily concerned with conscious, at least partially, design and or learned [verb] design that is based, at least partially, in symbolic systems [and imaging] and the enhanced manifestation of symbolic systems mentioned in the previous two paragraphs. In short, I will be concerned in design that is at least partially based in the symbolic, linguistic, civilized knowledge of Area 4. Thus, the design of Area 5 is based, at least partially, in the knowledge of Area 4 and in the philosophy of Area 3 I say that this basis is only partial because, except in trivial cases, design necessarily appeals to organismic and intuitive knowledge, and rational design is incomplete and so must involve trial and error not only of prototypes but also of application. These comments apply equally, with appropriate interpretation, to rational knowledge 4-10 Thus, design of artifacts is embedded in a larger process: the social process, which, in turn, is embedded in evolution. This social process involves design [and planning] and evolution. This is the secondary meaning of design of Area 6. It is design, and involves elements of conscious design. This overall process is the social process that forms a major part of the outline of this work. Areas 4-7 are knowledge --> design --> action --> evaluation The two types or levels of design just considered are: [1] Design of artifacts of objective design - so called because, in the case of “simple” artifacts, objectives are relatively clear, and [2] social design in which the “real” objectives can not be perfectly clear.169 Both of these types of design involve actual evolution [interspersed with conceptual evolution] There is hesitation, for scientific and cultural reasons, in calling earlier levels of evolution design. [The issue has been discussed before.] However, the reasons are not compelling. They are “lack of evidence.” Therefore, design may be appropriate in an actual or “latent” sense. Certainly, the essential definition of design [the ability of evolved structures to modify the environment to meet some need or adaptation] is applicable to species, etc. Rudimentary conscious-learnable design probably goes back to the point in evolution where consciousness-learning [memory including flexible or ontogenetic memory170] originate Detailed and careful tracing of co-evolution of design and knowledge, at various levels, will make an interesting story Objective design seems to involve conscious purpose that involves “free creation” within a conceptual scheme. Both conceptual scheme and individual designs evolve. Objective design, then, goes back to origins of consciousness in memory 4-11 We have seen how the origin of learning consists in a genetic program that determines rough development and potential for fine-tuning during development through actual performance We can make an analogy with objective design. The design or plan is the genetic program. The system being planned is designed so that it can be fine tuned in operation after being built. This concept is built into many actual designs. It is interesting, and natural, that this concept has evolved [aided by conscious design or invention] in many technologies. It is a useful design concept to build or evolve this approach into designs and systems; i.e., designed systems However, there are differences between the fine tuning of development of an evolved organic structure and of a consciously designed system. [1] Because of evolutionary depth, the fine-tuned development of organic structures can be based on extremely fine structure, at the same time very intricate and very simple. Designed systems tend to have primitive and coarse structure of tuning mechanisms. There is, however, no reason to believe that designed systems can not be designed or evolved-designed to evolve in this way; [2] in either type of system the fine tuning can be self-regulated; but, in the case of organic evolution, self-regulation includes conscious learning In addition to the direct-practical value of these concepts in design, they may also give insight into tuning of designs with evolution and organic evolution as a source of design principles, concepts, ideas and value. However, while it is valid to understand and use “evolutionary values,” organic or cultural, I believe it is a mistake to think that these are, or should be, the only values 4-12 4.2 ORGANIZATION OF KNOWLEDGEPrinciples of organization of knowledge cannot be independent of the nature of knowledge; and, in turn, effective organization enhances understanding, development and use In 4.2.1, I consider some principles of organization of knowledge. These include: concepts of the nature of knowledge; organization of the “word” - seen as a unity or continuity - which is the “object” of study171; conventional organization; and general principles of classification Since my conception of knowledge is much broader than the conventional one, there is a necessary problem of where to begin, of demarcation. As pointed out [4.1, p 4-9] earlier, I follow a conventional approach [possibly to be modified later] in making restriction to symbolic-linguistic or ritualized knowledge and knowledge that is expressed by civilized culture as a whole. There is also a concern with verification. This distinction is somewhat natural: we focus on that knowledge which is an expression of civilization. This is “communicable”172 knowledge expressed in symbol and ritual Within this partly conventional demarcation of knowledge, we can describe and express other types of knowledge [and conventional knowledge itself] as phenomena. There are problems associated with linguistic expression of knowledge that is emotive, intuitive, phylogenetic, and so on. One resolution of some of these questions is through art. The symbols of art are closer to the phenomena of existence [and human existence] than are the more abstract symbols of language. Not all language is abstract, in this sense; hence poetry is spoken and acted for full effect. A related resolution is contained in the observation that some phylogenetic knowledge is woven into the structure of language and communication as the a priori. These resolutions are discussed in 4.2.2. Similarly the content of ritual and cultural tradition can be analyzed and expressed in anthropological study. However, such study is not a substitute for ritual and cultural communication of such knowledge. This reminds us that understanding, communication of expertise in the symbolic forms needs a cultural context and, therefore, the textual expression is insufficient. However, in these forms, symbolic expression is essential to representation and communication 4-13 In 4.2.3, I mention some standard classification systems In 4.2.4, I present a system that incorporates features from the introduction to 4.2 and from 4.2.2-3 In classification, there is a question of fineness of subdivision. This question is resolved by providing hierarchies or organization: a broad one in 4.3 and detailed ones in 4.4 4-14 4.2.1 PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATIONAs pointed out in the introduction to 4.2, principles of organization of knowledge must be related to its nature. These are discussed in 4.2.1.1. Other principles are considered in 4.2.1.2-4 4.2.1.1 Concepts of the Nature of KnowledgeI will consider two concepts: 4.2.1.1.1 System Theory of KnowledgeThis concept asserts that knowledge is a representation of states and process [or classes of these] of one system by states and processes of another. This is essentially a naturalistic theory, implying that knowledge is not other than nature, but is an aspect of nature - being based in the organization of a system. We can get into arguments about the reality or naturalness of the types of state-process. We can circumvent these arguments by requiring that knowledge be an organization of states and processes that are of the same type[s]173 recognized by knowledge This concept is complementary to: 4.2.1.1.2 Adaptive-Evolutionary Theory of KnowledgeEvolutionary theory suggests a number of levels of knowledge as discussed in the introduction to this Area 4. These include phylogenetic, cultural-mythic, and symbolic-linguistic. We restrict explicit knowledge to that which is symbolically expressed. This knowledge is of the natural world. Since my philosophy is monistic, this includes all of existence. We now recognize that “a priori” [i.e., what has been called a priori] knowledge is also knowledge built up through phylogenetic and cultural evolution. This knowledge is, in part, woven into the structure of symbolic expression, but also, in some other parts, into the organism, ritual, and so on. These remain a priori until we recognize them, study them and express them - symbolically; if we wish to include them in symbolically expressed knowledge. We can recognize and study these forms of knowledge and incorporate them into symbolically expressed knowledge. Evolutionary concepts are essential to full understanding; especially to criteria for knowledge-truth, also to “fiction” which could be “fiction” in the sense of “experimental” or ongoing, or in the sense that we do not understand the adaptive context; 4-15 also to removal of the circularity in using informal, intuitive, or ad hoc formal criteria for deciding what constitutes knowledge. If knowledge recognizes evolution, then, by the principles at the end of the previous paragraph, knowledge must be an element in evolution. This is not contrary to “fiction” ideas. Evolution is rich in “fiction” - mal-adaptation, neutral adaptation, incomplete adaptation, “freedom” provided by new levels of organization. We see symbolic capacity being born of natural systems sufficiently complex and efficient to make symbolic expression largely, but not completely, independent of natural law This discussion suggests a distinction between knowledge of symbolic systems and knowledge of natural systems [both expressed symbolically]. This corresponds roughly to the distinction a priori vs. empirical-experiential-existential. However, the distinction is losing its absolute nature as a priori knowledge is brought in the empirical domain [through paradoxes] and is shown to be empirical in the phylogenetic and cultural senses. We recognize that natural systems and knowledge are part of the same natural [evolutionary] order and therefore knowledge of this is a spectrum and continuum. However, the initial distinction of this paragraph is a rough practical one based on a level of evolution Function is an example of adaptation. This suggests the distinction: material vs. existential or practical-science-technology vs. humanities [art, history, philosophy, social analysis]-religion. This is an approximate division. Any distinction material-existential will be imprecise, and have elements of relativism. Also: we can see the existential as containing the material aspects: humanities as containing the sciences. The sciences are not non-human but are a part of humankind, of existence. Science is the repeatable, definite aspect of existence.174 [Use of the word “humanities” is somewhat alienating in this context.] Science has existential consequences, not just through its practical consequences, but also through its conceptual and instrumental explorations of the elements of existence - of creation 4-16 4-17 4.2.1.2 An Ideal Organization of the Object of KnowledgeThe separation implied by this subsection and the previous subsection is not a complete one; 4.2.1.2 implies a synthesis. Ideal is a purposefully chosen word An interpretation is: An Organization based in the Known Structure of the Universe Here is one organization of nature and corresponding disciplines. The scheme corresponds to a set of evolutionary levels:
Table 10 An Ideal Organization of the Object of Knowledge In this scheme: [1] knowledge is part of the natural order. [2] Philosophy is not a separate discipline; rather it is distributed among the four areas as metaphysics. Philosophy of the special “disciplines” [history...religion], ethics, epistemology 4.2.1.3 Conventional, Practical and Cultural FactorsThese factors also affect concepts of knowledge Conventionally, practically: metaphysics, epistemology, ethics... form philosophy. Practically: symbolic disciplines come first. There is some educational value to this. An outline of the resulting modification of 4.2.1.2: ▪ Symbolic disciplines General, intermediate and natural, special and formal purpose ▪ Natural disciplines Philosophy Humanities; related artifactual disciplines Science; artifactual disciplines drawing from science and humanities Knowledge is seen as somewhat separate from nature 4-18 Structure of Knowledge and Nature; Realism and Idealism175 Our concept of nature and our concept of the structure of knowledge should be related if we believe knowledge and nature to be part of the same order. Further, even if we do not adhere to this epistemic-metaphysical principle, there will be a natural psychological tendency to relate the two. Should we regard this tendency as an epistemic problem or a confirmation of the principle? I do not attempt to answer now; probably, both aspects are present In 4.2.1.2-3, two broad organizations of knowledge [symbolic-linguistic] have been presented. The first, being based on existence [or a concept of existence] as a whole, lends itself to a philosophy of realism. The second, giving a primary character to a mode of awareness [or a concept of such a mode] lends to idealism If we believe that mind, knowledge and nature are of the same order of existence, then realism and idealism can be understood as complementary descriptions of experience. Neither can be complete as long as evolutionary convergence is incomplete However, idealism and realism lead to different attitudes [and derive from such attitudes and psychological states] to ourselves, others, the universe. They lead to different behavior, action. Which shall we choose? If they are complementary descriptions [perhaps necessitated by incompleteness of organismic, perceptual, cognitive, cultural “apparatus”], then it may be unnecessary to choose. Both may be useful To the extent that they are projections, it is retrogressive to reify these attitudes and then “choose” from between them It will be valuable to interpret these comments in terms of different conceptions of the nature of knowledge: system- naturalistic-evolutionary-adaptive, “justified true belief,”... and related concepts of justification, truth and belief In this connection, note the complementary natures of metaphysics and epistemology176 4-19 4.2.1.4 General Principles of Classification1774.2.1.4.1 Logical principlesPractically, compromises must be made and are sometimes theoretically necessary-justifiable 1. Two classes should have no elements in common 2. All elements should be included 4.2.1.4.2 Material principles1. Natural vs. artificial 2. Essential vs. empirical 3. Pragmatic vs. ideal, etc There are senses in which these distinctions are artificial [e.g., 1 and 2 depend upon theory, ideology]; I have endeavored to show this as true; nonetheless there is a practical and conventional effect of these concepts on traditional classifications 4.2.1.4.3 Dependence on domainNature of object vs. class being classified. Relevant criteria are 4.2.1.3 1. Morphological [system structure] 2. Genetic [adaptive] 3. Mode of expression [4.2.1.3] 4. Exactness 4-20 4.2.2 PROBLEMS OF LINGUISTIC and POETIC EXPRESSION and of ART4.2.2.1 Modes of Human Experience with Preliminary Discussion of ArtConsider that there are: 4.2.2.1.1 [1] Levels of existenceSome correspond to known evolution of the universe as is described in science; these occasion the development of science. Behaviorally, the modern twentieth century [1987] world seems satisfied with this development. Such development is by no means internally or externally complete; hence the occasion of metaphysics 4.2.2.1.2 [2] Levels of experienceFeeling, ritual-hierarchic behavior, emotive, cognitive. The content of linguistic expression is to large degree cognition or other experience translated into cognition. This includes the rational-critical and the imaginative-creative. The later is the occasion of poetic expression, linguistic expression of experience that is more than cognitive. Science, therefore, contains poetic expression in addition to poetry. Although the urge to certainty and security tend to negate explicit poetic expression in science; hence, the desolation of some views of science and the views of some scientists. Poetry also includes expression through sound, form, and allusion [allegorical, cultural, and so on]. Thus, poetry is not a purely linguistic-symbolic mode of expression but symbolic language is one of the vehicles of poetry. In this, I am following the twentieth century convention. This is different from the conception of Francis Bacon for whom poetic thought was imaginative thought The general term for symbolic expression is art. Thus, art does not exclude cognition-rationality. Conventionally art refers to expression of experience that includes significant non-cognitive elements. I do not distinguish art from religion. However, I do distinguish art from dogma in religion and the dogma in creeds. Such dogma has a mythic-cultural role [which may be adaptive and or non-adaptive] but is not art [in this concept art ≈ existential expression]. Of course, the object of dogma may have artistic content 4-21 The non-cognitive content of art is expressed symbolically. Symbolic modes include language. Nonlinguistic modes may be “translated” into linguistic, or the original experience may be translated directly into language. Such translation may be incomplete and inadequate. However, generally, translation among any mixed or hybrid modes of experience and expression may be incomplete and inadequate. Translation of cognitive experience into symbolic-linguistic expression may be incomplete-inadequate Such actual or experiential incompleteness and or inadequacy need not be ultimate. Attention may also be paid to criteria of adequacy 4.2.2.1.3 [3] Levels of consciousness and levels of cognition:Rational Intuitive Instinctual 4.2.2.1.4 [4] Symbolic modes of representation:Type of unit out of which experience is coded: Pure symbols178 Sense symbols: color, tonal, tactile... kinesthetic Iconic symbols Complex unitary symbols and symbolic complexes 4.2.2.1.5 [5] Modes of coding, expression, communication:Representational: based on similarity and analog Graphic and dramatic art, pictographic language, geometric mathematics Symbolic: based on convention Symbolic language, logic, algebraic or symbolic mathematics Religious, artistic, meaning symbols Mixed
4-22 Therefore, although language is a basic form of representation, expression and communication, it is not the most effective or truthful mode for a number of dimensions of experience and existence. Perhaps, by focusing on the linguistic mode, well suited as it is to function as a medium of information, civilization has neglected essential aspects of humankind or nature. These excluded aspects belong to “nature” and to humankind. The existential-nonmaterial modes of experience, properly understood, art and religion, and various modes of art are appropriate expression of truth in all its dimensions. These include compound forms such as interaction of sound, tone, language, and sequence on meaning Why does music speak to humans with such depth? Perhaps development of biology [insofar as symbolic-tonal creativity and sensitivity], culture, aspects of music occurred together in a social and environmental context. This development may include elements of religion and the sacred [attachment of existential value to universal elements - adaptive in view of over-materialism]. This complex of cultural elements may induce in men and women, mutual respect for oneself, others, environment, creation. This clearly has adaptive value. In this sense [but not only this sense] art, religion, and culture include knowledge of a mythic-rational in type. This is what is lost by focusing on knowledge as knowledge, science as science, religion as religion, art as art, politics as politics...thus art in modern society, as an independent institution, even though it has value, is a fraction of true expression and experience Art is the universe of symbolic and representational expression as a whole. Cognition is included as is emotion, intuition...and especially their interaction. Thus, while art does not include organismic knowledge [as a mode - art can express organismic knowledge], it is more likely to communicate effectively with the full dimension of individual being than is linguistic expression, and through deep communication with the individual, art conveys the message of nature: “mutual respect.” For, art, individual, society and environment evolve [d] in mutuality. The final survivor will be [is] the mutual situation in which respect occurs by validly containing mutual [adaptive] knowledge: knowledge that appeals to individuals at deep personal levels and enhances respect. This holistic approach to symbolic knowledge, in which the whole mutually knows itself, and in which this knowledge is expressed symbolically, is potent compared to some definition such as “justified true belief” which, though it has value as an element of the whole cultural system, is incomplete, since it isolates knowledge from its role in [total] social process, and necessarily 4-23 becomes circular in its conception of justification - and of truth and belief. By contrast, the cultural system as a whole - the cultural-human-environmental system is not one to which justification necessarily pertains. The system as a whole is a phenomenon. Within this whole, the cultural system has elements that are phenomenal and elements of justification. Within the system of culture, knowledge, as an element in itself, has criteria of justification - these criteria serve to tie knowledge into culture and to isolate and, further, both functions are valid. However, there is a circularity, an approximation, inherent in the common notions of justification: first, in that knowledge provides its own criteria of justification. This is commonly recognized as a “limitation” of knowledge. I do not recognize this as a limitation because it is based on the idea of knowledge as an institution in itself. Second, in that justification is not the only bond between knowledge and culture, nature. As just implied, criteria of justification are tied into the cultural system and, further, knowledge is tied into the whole system. This is understood through an adaptive framework as opposed to an absolutist, merely self-referential framework for knowledge What is art? At this point, a fuller characterization of art will be valuable. This will include drawing together some of the strands of the previous discussions. We recognize that in seeking to characterize art we are dealing with an actuality and a concept. For full understanding, we appreciate that the actuality and the concept are interdependent, interactive in their relation and mutual evolution. The actuality consists of the universe of human activity in general, as a background and, specifically, as it pertains to various notions of art. However, we are not merely concerned with this actuality and certain conventional patterns of thought pertaining to its nature. We are also concerned with what art is - or can or should be: the concept of art. These two aspects, the actual and the conceptual, or the real and the ideal, are neither complete in themselves. Nor are they complete as a static unity. The only “completion” is recognition that actual and conceptual vs. real vs. ideal come together [do not have truly separate existence] as a dynamic, interacting evolving unity.179 The ideal of art, as understood here, is the integration of individual and group knowledge in relation to the universe as it is and as it is possible. This art is not a completed issue but a developing, adaptive one From the “real” world art is an expression of the full dimension of existence. From the “ideal” world art integrates the disparate symbolic and existential faculties 4-24 4.2.2.2 The Elements of ArtArt can be seen as involving three elements. The fourth element is an implication of the first three: 4.2.2.2.1 Art is expression of experience1. It is expression of experience, not just experience 4.2.2.2.2 Art contains existential elements of experience2. It contains significant existential - more than cognitive - elements of experience 4.2.2.2.3 Art is a form of knowledge3. Art should be knowledge, not mere fact. There is an integration of the elements of experience, which are expressed with through “their” patterns and unities instead of through mere reproduction of information. This is inherent, generally, in the nature of knowledge. This implies that elements of universality, integration, adaptation, creation, criticism are included in art. In the realm of meaning art observes, finds essence, and creates 4.2.2.2.4 Art integrates the modes of human being4. An implication of the existence of evolution, in view of items 1, 2, and 3, is that art integrates levels of evolution as formulated in knowledge and as reflected in modes of being, experience and expression This concept does not imply that art is formal, academic, and an institution, of itself, large scale, programmatic, entertainment, necessarily expressed through technical skill and virtuosity...or not any of these items. But a tendency to segment cultural functions in the twentieth century developed world has created, to a significant degree, institutions for the production of such functions, with internal criteria for excellence - isolated from the actual world. This tendency in art has over-emphasized the formal, academic aspects. This has made for an over-emphasis of art created by institutions-academic-economic...emphasis on art for sale - the selling of existential modes. This is to the detriment of the diffusion of artistic expression and communication among the roots of existence and experience. This does not deny the existence of universality, greatness and significance in art. As a human activity, art need not exclude the notion of creation from evolution This discussion has not addressed issues of significance and greatness in art. However, the four elements above provide a framework for these issues Art is not the complete world, but one of its “functions” is integration of the symbolic worlds of awareness, knowledge, design, and action in meaning 4-25 4.2.2.3 Art and Global DesignFrom the discussion above the role of true art in speaking to material, social, individual and existential needs of individual, society, environment, is fundamental. True art is an integrating factor in evolution, knowledge, design, and action 4.2.2.4 Analysis of Language and Logic and Relation to ArtThe fact that aspects of phylogenetic and mythic knowledge are built into the structure of language and logic in an a priori180 way means that analysis of language and logic is valuable181 but also without complete foundation in itself, for the tools of the analysis incorporate a priori elements. Supplement from existential and artistic domains is essential to fuller experience. This too is incomplete: evolution itself remains in progress. [This opens the question of “ultimates” in evolution. Even if we discern no actual ultimates, there could be potential ultimates.] 4-26 4.2.3 AN EXTENDED CLASSIFICATION OF PRINCIPLES OF ORGANIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE WITH EXAMPLESPrinciples of organization based on the nature of knowledge [logical] and based on the nature of the universe being studied [material] have been considered. This distinction is analogous to the distinction mind vs. matter. I believe this distinction to be false. Classical concepts of mind and matter can be disparate, but concepts and understanding evolve. Knowledge is an aspect of the natural order In addition to organization based on natural order, other principles are used. A list-classification of such principles follows: Natural182 Based on a natural order183 Logical Material Comment: the logical and the material interact as in concept-actual and ideal-real interactions Chronological Comments: Related to natural: evolution Suited to special topics: evolution, history Practical, Design Oriented Retrieval: alphabetic, chronological, natural Administrative: includes retrieval, cataloging Special purpose: oriented to some special project, design Comment: At a general level design is natural; differences occur at specialized levels Mixed, Hybrid Mixed: different principles coexist Hybrid: different principles are combined and fused Actual Most actual organizations necessarily employ mixed, hybrid principles Additionally, the diachronic, evolutionary element is significant 4-27 Examples184 of these principles will now be given. I will consider, for now, only the most important: 4.2.3.1 Natural and Chronological Classifications4.2.3.1.1 Plato [428-324BC]Plato's system of instruction for the future guardians of society, as presented in The Republic, is interesting as an instructional concept for the whole human Childhood and youth Gymnastics; music; language, reasoning and argument Here music is roughly equivalent to Francis Bacon's concepts of memory and imaginative ability Young Adult [20-30] Mathematical thought Maturing Adult [30-50] Experience in human affairs, affairs of state Maturity Dialectic - ideas and first principles Included are thoughts on ethics and politics 4.2.3.1.2 Aristotle [384-322BC]Language and logic Use of words, analysis of statements, reasoning, methods of science Devices of argumentation Comment: these are the contents of the Organon Theoretical knowledge [in ascending order: natural sciences, mathematics, and metaphysics] Natural sciences Physical science [philosophical - on the nature of change] Astronomy [empirical-observational: celestial motions] Biological [empirical-observational] Classification, procreation, anatomy for plants and animals Psychology - Aristotle's Treatise on the Soul, A Bridge to Metaphysics 4-28 Mathematics Numbers and figures as objects of thought Metaphysics [also, first philosophy, theology] Practical knowledge Ethics Economics Politics Productive arts Fine arts Useful arts I omit accounts from Catholic-Medieval thinkers Augustine [354-430], Thomas Aquinas [1225-1274], and Roger Bacon [1214-1292], but note their effect on thinkers of the modern period starting with Francis Bacon 4.2.3.1.3 Francis Bacon [1561-1626]Distinguished three modes of thought: memory, imagination and reason. These are the dominant categories of thought in the three main divisions of Bacon's classification: history, poetry, and philosophy. I follow Adler's use of modern nomenclature: History Natural history Histories of nature, arts, sciences Civil history Biographies, chronicles, history of political institutions and affairs Ecclesiastical history Institutions and events of Christianity Literary history Social and cultural history Poetry185 The whole of imaginative literature: all forms of narrative fiction, dramatic and epic [plays and novels] whether in prose or verse 4-29 Philosophy [Bacon's use of this term is broader than modern use] Philosophia prima Special disciplines: classified according to object of study God - Natural theology [as distinct from sacred theology] Comment: Bacon's first philosophy and natural theology are roughly equivalent to Aristotle's metaphysics Nature - Natural philosophy Includes sciences and mathematics Humankind - Human philosophy Individual Includes psychology and ethics In aggregate Sociology, economics, politics Social and behavioral sciences Comment: human philosophy includes Bacon's famous work on the logic of discovery: on induction, in Novum Organum, in distinction from Aristotle's Organon 4.2.3.1.4 French Encyclopaedists: Diderot and d'AlembertDiderot and d'Alembert followed Bacon's outline closely: the major change was to ignore the distinction between human and divine knowledge; they included sacred theology under philosophy 4.2.3.1.5 Immanuel Kant [1724-1804]Kant's major contributions were the distinction of the rational and empirical disciplines; and introduction of epistemology which, since Kant and including Kant, has rejected metaphysics [as did Kant] and replaced it as the reigning regulative discipline The rational, a priori disciplines: mathematics, rational science or philosophy of science, ethics. The empirical: the sciences 4-30 4.2.3.1.6 Samuel Taylor Coleridge [1772-1834] and the Encyclopaedia MetropolitanaColeridge was also deeply impressed by Francis Bacon's scheme, but did not follow it as closely as the French Encycopaedists did. In 1817, Coleridge drew up a table of arrangement for his projected Encyclopaedia Metropolitana approximately as follows: Division I: Pure sciences Formal sciences Universal grammar or philology, logic, mathematics Real sciences - sciences of reality Metaphysics, morals, theology Division II: Mixed and applied sciences Mixed sciences Mechanics, hydraulics, pneumatics, optics, astronomy Applied sciences - five divisions 1. Experimental philosophy Magnetism, electricity, chemistry, light, heat, color, meteorology 2. Fine arts Poetry, painting, sculpture, architecture 3. Useful arts Agriculture, commerce, manufacture 4. Natural history Physiology, crystallography, geology, mineralogy, botany, zoology 5. Applications of natural history Anatomy, surgery, materia medica, pharmacy, medicine Division III History, geography, biography Division IV [followed by an alphabetic index of the whole] Lexical, gazetteer type articles; arranged alphabetically 4-31 Coleridge's classification and ordering were somewhat modified by the publishers of the Encyclopaedia Metropolitana: The first eight volumes were topical or systematic; the remaining twenty were alphabetical. The first volume appeared in 1818. The Metropolitana failed, whereas the Encyclopaedia Britannica, arranged alphabetically, has survived since 1769. However, subsequent editors of alphabetic encyclopaedias, including Britannica, were influenced by Coleridge's main categories 4.2.3.1.7 Andrė Marie Ampere [1775-1836]Ampere, French scientist philosopher, published a classification of human knowledge: mathematics, physics and other natural sciences, medicine, the branches of philosophy, literature and pedagogy, ethnology and the political sciences. The interest here is the modern ring to these branches and their ordering 4.2.3.1.8 Auguste Comte [1798-1857]Comte was a French sociologist, philosopher, and positivist. He recognized three stages of knowledge: [1] mythology or superstition, [2] metaphysics or speculative philosophy, and [3] the modern era of empirically certified, positive knowledge To me Comte's view and positivism in general is a step into a desolate and fantastic arena of certainty. Knowledge is possible but its nature is not positivist. Comte's main divisions of “genuine” knowledge are mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, physiology, and sociology Comte's views can be criticized on many grounds. The great, and in my opinion negative, significance of his work is the omission, on principle, of speculative philosophy [metaphysics], and practical philosophy [ethics, politics]; and the omission, without stated reason, of political and cultural history, poetry, fine arts, the liberal arts of grammar, rhetoric, and logic. The system is too narrow to be the basis of a systematic view of knowledge The cultural significance of Comte's views are their lasting influence among academics and the public, as a sort of worldview. Personal reasons such as power, ignorance, fashion aside these views are a function of culture, the ignorance of success, in which the mass, academic or otherwise, is swayed by the great achievements of science, not seeing or not regarding the vast infinity186 of ignorance beyond the domain of science and of human knowledge. [I am by no means implying that 4-32 Positivism has been the only worldview.] It is only recently that the failure of imagination and the grasping for security that Positivism represents has become known. The forces of this transition have been in the clear inadequacy of determinism in science: shown up by quantum mechanics and relativity187 in physics, the disproofs of gradualism188 and orthogenesis in biology, the incompleteness of behavioral and social sciences - especially in political philosophy; and in the demonstration, first in biology and now, tentatively, in physics of the force of history as a factor in explanation and prediction 4.2.3.1.9 Wilhem Dilthey [1833-1911]The major significance for the modern period is Dilthey's division of knowledge into two broad divisions: natural sciences, non-human and human; and the humanities - which included history and biography, economics, politics, and law, moral philosophy or ethics, religion, poetry, architecture, and music In its original meaning, humanities or arts, signified learning in general and sciences were included. Perhaps as a consequence of the [alleged] positivism of science - or as a reaction to Positivism - the humanities have come to signify whatever subject matter is not included in the mathematical, natural and social sciences. This unfortunate split results in C. P. Snow's Two Cultures. They do not speak each other's language. The positivistic school regards the humanities as metaphysical nonsense, and the humanities regards the sciences and technology as barbarian. These descriptions are caricatures, but the split is unfortunate 4.2.3.1.10 Twentieth-Century EffortsAdler discusses three twentieth-century proposals for classifying library books based on organizations of knowledge: Classification, Theoretical and Practical, E. C. Richardson, 1930 The Organization of Knowledge and the System of Sciences, H. E. Bliss, 1929 The Organization of Knowledge in Libraries, H. E. Bliss, 1933 Adler finds the organizations in these books to be useful but lacking in being derived from explicitly stated philosophical principles. Such principles are unifying: they show the structure of knowledge as a whole and the interrelations of the parts, such 4-33 holistic principles are essential to proper learning, understanding of the world and universe in which we live, of understanding the proper balance for rewarding living for individual and society. In fact, Bliss' book on the organization of knowledge contains certain ordering principles but these are not sufficiently broad to meet the needs of twentieth century knowledge. Such principles and organizations existed in antiquity [Plato, Aristotle], the Middle Ages [Thomas Aquinas, Robert Bacon] and modern times [Bacon, Kant, Coleridge]. These works have insights and distinctions that are still relevant but none of these is wholly appropriate to the twentieth century 4.2.3.1.10.1 Fifteenth Edition of Encyclopaedia BritannicaIn preparing for the fifteenth edition, the Board of Editors [which included Robert Maynard Hutchins as Chair until 1974, and Mortimer J. Adler] considered transforming the Britannica into a topical encyclopaedia organized according to philosophic principles. However, the experience of such encyclopaedias [the nineteenth century Encyclopaedia Metropolitana and the twentieth century Encyclopėdie Français] showed certain problems associated with topical [vs. alphabetic] encyclopaedias: 1. There appeared to be no sizeable market for a general encyclopaedia not arranged for ready reference; i.e., alphabetically 2. In progressive construction, it seems impossible to maintain the original course as the work proceeds volume by volume 3. The problem of philosophical principles of ordering; 4. The conflict between natural, philosophical or logical, and pedagogical principles; 5. Conflict between levels of detail, sophistication, completeness - related to item 4; 6. Conflict between use as a ready reference and use for learning For marketing reasons, it was decided that the fifteenth edition would be arranged alphabetically. It was decided to organize the work into five parts: 4-34 1. Propaedia or outline of knowledge according to philosophic principles - one volume 2. Micropedia - a set of volumes with short informational articles arranged alphabetically 3. Macropedia - a set of volumes with long articles on the subjects in all fields of knowledge; also arranged alphabetically 4. Alphabetic index of topics in detail 5. A set of year books with new-modified articles; year and world information This resolves a number of issues and conflicts - by including multiple principles 4.2.3.1.10.1.1 Propaedia - A Detailed Topical Outline of Knowledge The Propaedia, the innovation of the fifteenth edition, is of special interest. The ten major divisions, or “parts,” follow. All other arrangements are mine One Matter and energy Two The Earth Three Life on Earth Four Human life Five Human society Six Art189 Seven Technology Eight Religion Nine History of mankind Ten The branches of knowledge Adler points out that the organization was not to be thought of as hierarchical [ascending-descending] in any order based on what is fundamental, simple, logical, or pedagogical. Such ordering would run counter to the intellectual heterodoxy of the twentieth century. Instead, the divisions 4-35 were to be regarded as arranged in a circle of learning, with any one or none at the center 4.2.3.1.10.1.2 Discussion of the 15th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica with Logical Modifications However, this idea becomes open to Adler's, and general, criticism of works not arranged according to a philosophic principle. What is the structure of the sequence six to nine? In fact, there is a structure to the organization. If we redefine a new area six = as the current versions of six and seven and eight and nine190 and current area ten = to be artifacts of human society, then we have a modified ordering according to evolution191 and or, roughly, degree of complexity. Within this paradigm, improvements are possible: the entire arrangement of six-ten; inclusion of evolution of physics as related to atoms and elementary particles in one; relocation of the sections on human biology vs. psychology There are also problems with the organization of areas nine and ten: Nine The history of mankind Ten The branches of knowledge Logic Mathematics Science History and the humanities Philosophy Thus one-nine are the study of the world; ten is the study of knowledge. This arrangement is reasonable provided it is recognized that knowledge [and artifact and history] are part of the world 4.2.3.1.10.1.2.1 An arrangement in super-divisions An arrangement in super-divisions is possible, with A and B and C = world A. Nature Britannica divisions one-five and nine B. Artifact [also Nature] Six, seven, eight, symbolic disciplines C. The Branches of Knowledge [also Artifact] General: Philosophy Special: The special disciplines: sciences, history, humanities 4-36 In this arrangement we can study nature in general, as in “A” or in one of the subdivisions of natural phenomena-systems; likewise, artifact. The sequence A --> C is clearly evolutionary192 and the subdivisions are to some extent in evolutionary sequence. The order of the subdivisions can be improved to bring them in line with evolutionary order. However, such an ordering probably can not, perhaps, be made completely evolutionary Adler points out a final deficiency in Propaedia. In an encyclopedic treatment, philosophy considered is necessarily academic: a treatment of doctrines and schools of professional philosophy - but not of the great ideas underlying and uniting all fields, even life. These ideas are provided in The Great Books 4.2.3.1.10.1.3 Great Books of the Western World; Syntopicon The Great Books of the Western World, Robert Maynard Hutchins, Editor-in-Chief, have been criticized by many; for lack of synthesis; lack of relevance to the modern problems: as a solution to the problems of modern humankind; in their lack of commitment to an ideological-philosophical organization which would give [some] meaning to their content in the modern context. In this sense, despite the pluralism argument, Propaedia and Syntopicon fall short of Adler's ideal and general ideals of organization. I myself would like to see A Great Books-Ideas of the World There is organization to The Great Books. The works are divided into four broad areas: Imaginative literature Science and medicine History and social science Philosophy and teleology As a directive principle to The Great Books, The Great Ideas - Syntopicon was conceived. This is a collection of one hundred two ideas of fundamental significance in the history of Western civilization. There are two types of ideas: ideas about the world 4-37 and ideas about ideas. Ideas are special organizing principles in the world, and so ideas about ideas are organizing principles for ideas - i.e., knowledge. The resulting division of knowledge, again reflecting the ostensible ideological neutrality of the Propaedia, are: 1. Theology and religion 2. Metaphysics 3. Mathematics, mechanics, physics 4. Logic 5. Political theory 6. Ethics 7. Economics 8. Psychology 9. Biology 4.2.3.1.11 Comments on Knowledge and DesignCommonly the content of professional knowledge is regarded as “know how” and the content of philosophic, artistic and scientific knowledge is “know what and why and where to.” The two are related but separation is valuable: [1] to professional knowledge, [2] as a source of existential-universal knowledge, [3] knowledge, creation and discovery are in themselves an aspect of design - a higher design. This is not to negate the need for balance and regulation; the question is what type and how much and by whom The system of knowledge and design etc. is part of a comprehensive social process design: know-where to. This is not necessarily higher than item 3 above, but provides foundation for items 2 and 3: [4] a practical measure of the value of functions 2 and 3 above is the existence of unknowns in the world. Existential knowledge and independent knowledge have dual roles of providing emotional centering in and practical orientation to an unknown future. An example of the falseness of the polarization: existential vs. practical 4-38 4.2.3.1.12 Learning from the Historical Sequences of Organizations and Their Philosophies: Evolution of Knowledge and OrganizationIn the history of Western knowledge, with reference to the sequence of outlines given in 4.2.3.1, we notice that change-progression occurs by: Modification and or addition: trial Reflection and criticism: selection We find the organization to be an evolutionary system. We further hypothesize that growth of organizing principles mirrors foundations and at least approximately: Mythic thought = Associative thought [predominately] and cultural selection Philosophy = Mythic thought and rational selection Classical science = Philosophy and empirical selection As selection principles become enhanced, the subject matter becomes restricted. Thus science, philosophy, myth are not opposites. There is an inclusion at any time Myth includes philosophy includes science As creativity becomes enhanced, science grows, but this does not necessarily reduce the content of philosophy [rather the new knowledge may expand it; at the same time other knowledge may be discarded]; rather there may be a change in focus. The relation of philosophy and myth is similar 4-39 4.2.3.2 Classifications Based on Practical, Design, and Special ConsiderationsThe natural conception of organization or of knowledge is based on the idea of knowledge as existing in itself as an element in the natural order. However, the natural order is an evolutionary order and therefore knowledge is an element of this order. On a human scale knowledge does have elements of the absolute: being beyond the control of humans here and now. When we push, or contemplate pushing, beyond the human scale, knowledge is “obliged to come down from the heights of the a priori.”193 There is some danger194 in this approach,195 but this is in the nature of evolution. This does not imply a pragmatic conception of knowledge but results in an outlook similar to it The pragmatist concept196 [also: instrumentalist, experimentalist, operationalist, and behaviorist are aspects of and related to the pragmatist concept] of knowledge relates knowledge-justifies knowledge by its ends. According to Pierce the meaning of a concept is the sum total of its “practical” consequences. This is quite different from the natural conception when consequences are known. When it is recognized that consequences and ends are uncertain, largely unknown, the distinction begins to crumble, as does the meaning of “practical.” We begin to see the independent value of knowledge from a practical point of view The distinction between the essentialist [natural] and the pragmatist conception of knowledge is ultimately nonexistent; and proximately it is soft. Knowledge has a valid existence in relation to other elements of culture, world, and in itself, where we find, again, echoes of the actual and the ideal; and, importantly, in the necessary intertwining of the two Thus, on an immediate level, I respect the overt aspects of pragmatism. For immediate practicality see comments under “practical...” on a higher level of design and planning: educational, pedagogic, logical-natural [4.2.3.4 is concrete], social197 considerations. As we begin to go beyond the immediate concerns to further dimensions of being [existential; i.e., inner and universal] and levels of design, the special distinguishing features of pragmatism begin to disappear: practical [the actual] --> ideal [the possible] --> existential [the unknown] 4-40 4.2.3.2.1 Some Practical Considerations: Retrieval, Administrative, and Special Purposes such as Projects and fields of learningRetrieval: Alphabetic, chronological, natural Comment: The natural classification based on the nature of knowledge is also valuable in retrieval; i.e., is also practical Administrative: Includes retrieval, cataloging, inventory, and records Special Purposes: Related to some special purpose, special project, and particular field of learning, design, Comment: At a general level design is natural; differences are at specialized levels An Example - Design: 4.2.3.2.2 Knowledge of designThe first level of design is problem solving, search, or objective design. Objective design is perhaps simpler than problem solving; however, if we allow implicit statement of objectives then, then objective design and problem solving are equivalent. This is the design typified by engineering design, but equally applicable to all professions: engineering, law, medicine and health, business, education, architecture; and to individual198 and other reasonably well-defined objectives The standard sequence of design and planning procedures that is commonly used in formal, professional settings is: Recognition of needs --> problem definition or functional considerations --> performance or design specifications --> synthesis --> analysis and optimization --> evaluation --> presentation and review Interpretation, variations are discussed in Areas 5.2 and 5.3 4-41 4.2.3.2.3 Knowledge for DesignSee Area 5.5 for “background knowledge for design.” Here we consider design as an element in social process, a second level of design: Awareness Values Knowledge - design oriented Design Action Evaluation Learning and Feedback Details of these aspects are taken up in Area 5.5. Knowledge as considered in this list is oriented to application. Knowledge as implied by the list as a whole includes understanding. When Area 3 is included, knowledge expands to include self-referential knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. These ideas are implicit in Area 4 4-42 4.2.3.3 Actual Classifications4.2.3.3.1 [1] Universities and academiesModern, Middle Ages, ancient Adler199 discusses the inadequacy of the organization of departments in modern universities. He fails to comment on the higher groupings into colleges-faculties, or to provide a balanced account of the forces for and consequences of specialization 4.2.3.3.2 [2] Libraries4.2.3.3.3 [3] EncyclopaediasAdler discusses the organization of knowledge implicit in encyclopaedias and libraries. Some of the forces influencing these organizations have been discussed in 4.2.3.1. The primary forces are “pragmatic.” This is to be expected when the patrons of encyclopaedias, libraries, universities are the diverse elements of a pragmatic society. Scholars and scholarship still exist in numbers as great as ever. These are hidden among the proliferation of information and practical disciplines. Organizations of scholars and scholarship is valuable and can proceed despite the economic orientation of knowledge. Without the economic base, the multitude of large universities and libraries would not exist. Therefore, criticisms should be along the following lines: A. Is the general organization of learning and culture and society conducive to good B. Within the context of the economic, pragmatic orientations of learning, there are recognizable effort devoted to independent learning, analysis and development in knowledge, knowledge in its widest sense, as justified by the uncertainty and large unknowns of life and existence 4-43 4.2.3.3.4 [4] Knowledge basesExample: The contents of Encyclopaedia Britannica exist as a computer knowledge base. Progress is being made on making knowledge bases more powerful and usable. Not enough attention is being paid to unique roles in the forefront of research where the researcher develops a dynamic relationship with the data system Comment: See 4.2.3.4 There is potential to make the interaction between computer and individual more dynamic 4-44 4.2.3.4 Design of a Knowledge BaseThese are design considerations of an encyclopedic knowledge base. A knowledge base is a system of information and knowledge that has potential for application to a wide variety of situations In discussing design of a knowledge base, I anticipate a part of Area 5, and recall 4.2.3.2. I will point out here that the standard process of design-problem solving is a reading, a model, of everyday and esoteric problem solving - mundane or creative. I believe [I have not yet proved this in the framework of theories-models of evolution and design] that such a model corresponds to a natural process. Design-problem solving is coming up with a way to proceed [or an explicit plan to proceed, at least an improvement on explicitness] from some state A to another state B. Creativity is involved in that even A is only vaguely and incompletely understood; B is at best implicitly defined in many situations, and the explicit nature of B unfolds interactively with the process of transition. In design we may have A = vaguely felt need, B = need resolved. In science and philosophy “A = current knowledge and information” form a system with incoherence, B = incoherence eliminated; here the designer is individuals and culture. In poetry, B = visions of the possible obtained and expressed 4.2.3.4.1 NeedThere is a variety of types of need: reference and learning in relation to current [or dated, in special situations] data [almanacs], information and knowledge on nature, world, universe [encyclopaedias], symbolic systems information [lexicographical systems], and knowledge [encyclopaedias] There is a variety of levels of knowledge: information, knowledge [in the specific sense of coherent, summarized, pattern integrated information] understanding, wisdom. It is not consistent with the nature of wisdom200 to incorporate it into the structure of a knowledge base though reference to wisdom will be appropriate in a general or philosophical encyclopaedia The occasion of specific need may be: introduction of a base to a new group of people through their language; opening up of new disciplines; updating old information; new conceptions of knowledge and its organization; new media of knowledge and information: writing, printing, mechanical, electronic, optical, photographic [including holograms]; computer, symbolic modes of storage and generation of information and knowledge 4-45 4.2.3.4.2 Functional Considerations, Problem Definition, Decisions4.2.3.4.2.1 [1] General function and economicsThe decision to consider an encyclopedic database has already been made in the topic of this section [4.2.3.4]. To enhance the value of the discussion, I select an encyclopedic coverage of both information and knowledge; i.e., I am considering a class of readers whose interests include convenient reference, reference in depth and learning. Awareness of the economic environment of a project is essential. The economic environment would include unit cost of the information medium; market value of encyclopedic knowledge bases - this will be affected by prestige. Economics does not mean maximizing profit; simply, funds must be made available-anticipated for costs 4.2.3.4.2.2 [2] General vs. Special PurposeSelect general or general and specific coverage 4.2.3.4.2.3 [3] Levels of treatments▪ Comprehensiveness: providing both information and knowledge gives flexibility. There is completeness on two levels: the higher level can be very comprehensive ▪ Assumed background and sophistication of reader: provision of knowledge and information means that a variety of read levels can be catered. Within treatment of knowledge a variety of levels can be catered by providing local outlines [at the head of each article], introductory discussions, references The utility of a general-purpose encyclopaedia is enhanced by making it comprehensive in the domain of public knowledge and information...and by building in flexibility 4.2.3.4.3 Performance or Design Specifications - Including Format; Synthesis: Decisions4.2.3.4.3.1 [4] Length - EstimateThis decision is based on economics, discussed above. There would be some constraint on minimum length consistent with function and on maximum length based on convenience The desiccation is also based on storage density of the information medium 4-46 4.2.3.4.3.2 [5] Principals of organizationThe choices are: 4.2.3.4.3.2.1 Natural vs. Practical Natural: Logical, material201 - Valuable in conceptual and holistic learning and representation, And or Practical: Alphabetical, chronological - There are other choices but these are the two that are consistent with a general-purpose encyclopedic base. Of these two, alphabetic arrangement is more convenient except when it is desired to construct an historical encyclopaedia; valuable for general purpose reference 4.2.3.4.3.2.2 Single or multiple principles of organization For a general-purpose encyclopedic base, it is desirable to have both conceptual and holistic organization and organization of information for convenient reference and withdrawal of information. It is possible to select more than one principle and it will be excellent to use both natural and practical principles - experience202 seems to dictate that organization according to natural principles alone does not meet the needs of many users whose interest is convenient reference. It appears most convenient to select: Natural Principles: Based on material-logical organization of universe-world-knowledge and Alphabetic Organization: For convenient reference How shall this be done? 4.2.3.4.3.2.2.1 Hybrid-matrix organization is one approach This is not convenient for printed volumes whose natural arrangement is linear. When access is indirect - as for electronic data storage, this issue does not affect the user directly. In that case, the choice is according to the preference of the system designer. For printed material, hybrid organization is cumbersome. Alternatives are: 1. Multiple bases or encyclopaedias Appropriate for libraries and library systems; not for single base 4-47 2. Dual, or multiple, levels of text 3. Multiple index systems Again, for electronic storage, the choice does not affect the user. For printed material, dual levels with an information level arranged alphabetically and a knowledge level organized by logical-material principles have been used, but without success [Encyclopedia Metropolitana]. The alternative seems to be the use of an index - or table of contents - to guide systematic [natural, i.e., logical-material] organization of study 4.2.3.4.4 Analysis and optimizationDecision making principles for variables [choices] available to this point: 4.2.3.4.4.1 General or general and specialized base?Printed text: Except for multiple encyclopaedia systems, convenience restricts choice to general coverage Electronic: Both choices possible. Decision based on costs. General and specialized coverage by: linking specialized bases or filtering from a general base 4.2.3.4.4.2 Dual levels or multiple index systems - table of contents system?Both can be chosen. Convenient dual levels that enhance both reference and learning-understanding-conceptual functions are: 4.2.3.4.4.2.1 Information level Articles should be longest possible consistent with information-function and not so short as to negate knowledge function; alphabetic arrangement is natural at this level; for smaller units of information: a detailed alphabetic subject index Articles shortest, dual information-knowledge function consistent with coherence; arranged systematically [or naturally] or alphabetically but systematic arrangement detracts from reference; prefer alphabetic arrangement in printed text systems if intent is to reach a wide audience; knowledge function 4-48 enhanced by systematic topical index [incorporating information level]-table of contents and by having both topical and alphabetic index incorporate hierarchic-tree organization; knowledge and information function enhanced by local table of contents for individual articles 4.2.3.4.4.3 Systematic [natural vs. logical-material] vs. Alphabetic arrangement of knowledge levelThe advantages of each are clear. Drawbacks are: Systematic [natural vs. logical-material] ▪ Problem of organization; with alphabetic can have multiple tables or contents corresponding to multiple systematic principles of organization ▪ Problems of multiple conceptual frameworks for knowledge: previous point ▪ Problems of reference. Systematic organization is a powerful reference tool but the “system”-concept must be understood ▪ Problems of changing understanding or emphasis during sequential construction ▪ Problems of updating; knowledge seen as dynamic Alphabetic ▪ Problems of overall coherence It turns out that the problems of systematic-natural organization are particularly troublesome - especially in light of dynamic evolving concepts of knowledge. This is true of the editors-authors and of knowledge itself. Some thinkers-philosophers believe there to be “eternal” truths. There may be, and some philosophers believe these to be realized in philosophic-humanistic learning. But I do not believe these to be realized in Western knowledge. Whatever the actual truth, it remains that static-fixed is a special case of dynamic-evolving and that the latter covers innumerably many more possibilities including approach to a final state. The problem of alphabetic organization can be overcome by having a systematic-natural-logical-coherent, material outline-index-table of contents or a number of outlines according to a variety of general and special principles 4-49 4.2.3.4.4.4 The IndexThe information-reference function is served by having a comprehensive index of key words and concepts. This enhances knowledge function. The knowledge function is served by having hierarchic-tree [general-special] and cross-reference features. The latter especially enhances information-reference function. These features make an index larger 4.2.3.4.4.5 The Systematic OutlineKnowledge203 function is served by a general outline, and enhanced by detailed hierarchic-tree structure. The latter also provides special purpose knowledge functions. Different concepts or approaches to knowledge may occasion multiple outlines connected to a single base. Special purpose, goal directed activities may occasion special purpose outlines, provided such are able to employ the contents of a general knowledge base All indexes and outlines and the arrangement of the base itself are indexes relative to some objective, including the [not exclusively] neutral nature of the function of knowledge in light of uncertainty and unknown - which are undoubtedly-probably much larger than the certain and the known. In the case where the reader-user does not access the base directly, the objectives are the system designers' mixed criteria of economy and meeting the users' needs through index-address systems. For printed material the structure of the base is directly relevant to user-reader needs 4.2.3.4.4.6 Encyclopaedia Britannica - 15th Edition as a modelThe Britannica is the primary model for my discussion. Detailed information is available in another area.204 The 15th edition realized a solution to a number of the issues of concern: ▪ Propaedia: One volume outline of knowledge focusing on the Western tradition. The Propaedia claims to have avoided - unsuccessfully, in my opinion - any specific hierarchy of complexity or concept. Still, valuable and comprehensive, especially the 1985 version 4-50 ▪ Macropedia: A twelve volume set of short information-oriented articles; alphabetically arranged ▪ Macropedia: A seventeen volume set; knowledge in depth: longer connected-coherent articles; supported by Macropedia, Propaedia; alphabetic arrangement ▪ Index: Two volumes ▪ Database: Britannica has an electronic database Comments Britannica [15th edition] represents a compromise between reference-knowledge functions. Earlier editions had interspersed long and short articles. Two issues arise: ▪ Question of separation of information vs. integrative articles ▪ Optimal analysis and criteria for relative emphasis on short-information vs. long-knowledge 4.2.3.4.5 Cross reference systemsWith an electronic base, cross-referential and dual organization systems are possible without the problems associated with printed text 4.2.3.4.6 UpdateInformation articles: rapid Knowledge: slower than information; subdivisions faster than divisions Index: the entries will be subject to rapid update; modifications to structure will be slower Outline: rate depends on subject and level of organization 4-51 4.2.3.4.7 VerificationIssues are: ▪ Selection of authors for integration and reliability; coordinating authors ▪ Cross checking among authors and editors for reliability ▪ Checking against other references and bases 4.2.3.4.8 Principles of generationThese issues relate to how information-knowledge is stored in a conceptual sense and how translated for use ▪ Stored as a data base Translation by reader-user who reads meaning from the original meaning of author Application: printed material and electronic data systems ▪ Stored as an information system Translation includes compilation by various index-access systems. Meaning provided by reader-user Application: electronic monitor205-driven electronic database ▪ Stored as a knowledge base A. Expert-AI system generates knowledge from primitive information and knowledge units by appropriate principles of organization Application: software systems; special purpose B. Expert-AI-cognitive system generates knowledge from raw data, primitive information and knowledge units by appropriate principles of pattern-concept detection and organization Application: potential [not actual]: software systems for the future 4-52 4.2.3.4.9 Evaluation and feedback: PresentationThere is an interesting discussion in Adler's book on the deliberations and decisions leading up to the publication of the 15th edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica 4-53 4.2.4 MAJOR DIVISIONS OF SYMBOLIC KNOWLEDGEAs pointed out in the introduction to Area 4.1, the phase of knowledge that is of concern in Area 4 is symbolically expressed and coded knowledge. In other words, we deal with knowledge that is coded, expressed,206 and communicated symbolically. This should include both oral and printed tradition. In the twentieth century world culture, printed - or otherwise “permanently” recorded forms - take precedence. By a slight expansion of the symbol concept, we can include other phases of culture in the present concept of knowledge: ritual. However, the present concept does not include organismic-phylogenetic knowledge. Even so, it should be noted: symbolically expressed knowledge, even when rational, is not independent of the other forms. For example, the nature of rationality is, in part, an element of mythic-traditional thought. All forms of knowledge are a part of the universe and their content-nature can be coded and expressed symbolically, at least approximately. Where this has been done, this knowledge becomes part of the present concept. The value of such knowledge is [1] utility, [2] existential, and [3] in estimating, within the present context-concept. The relative priorities and meanings of the different forms: empirical, rational, mythic, organismic, and existential 4.2.4.1 Concepts from Evolution. Effect of CultureEvolution: Symbolic systems and the expression-coding of knowledge through such systems undoubtedly developed together, each enhancing the success of the other, and in interaction with culture, biology, environment. While knowledge “discovered” mythically, rationally, empirically can be coded symbolically [and such coding is instrumental in enhancing thought-discovery], mythic pre-mythic and pre-symbolic-linguistic knowledge - ritual, organismic, etc. - is built into the structure of symbolic convention: [1] through the evolutionary development of biogenetic symbolic capability, [2] cultural evolution-selection in which mythic-traditional knowledge is maintained through culture- [a-cognitive] personality interaction and [3] interaction of [1] and [2]. Such knowledge is outside the domain selected here, to the extent that the encoding is a priori; but is interacting with this domain. This is the basis of the two major divisions below: knowledge of symbolic convention and knowledge of the world and universe. Note that “convention” implies nothing about the content of the knowledge but only that the manner of its incorporation-being held 4-54 is by agreement - by convention. Of course, this convention can be studied, understood as part of the world and incorporated in symbolically coded “knowledge of the world.” This distinction is, in borderline situations, unclear. Further, for convenience, it will not be essential to maintain the boundary rigidly 4.2.4.1.1 CultureI distinguish two related effects of culture: bias and emphasis. It may be valuable to provide a balance to emphasis, but it is epistemically correct to eliminate bias. An example of bias is the putative split between the humanities and the sciences; an example of emphasis is the relative emphasis on sciences vs. humanities. If we remove epistemic bias, we then remove whatever bias in knowledge there is for imbalance in emphasis It is incorrect to assert that the biased [in my opinion] split - humanities vs. sciences - is a universal feature of Western culture. However this bias is an element of Western culture enhanced by misunderstanding and specialization, or seeing knowledge as a mere accumulation of disciplines, and originate in those aspects of culture [among which understanding-control of material aspects of existence is significant], which form the basis of power in the Western world [since power is one source of psychology of reality]. We can obtain some freedom through understanding from the sciences vs. humanities split as follows: We consider certain aspects of the evolution of thought and emergence of archetypal patterns of thought:
Table 11 Toward Freedom from Cultural Bonding Thus science is not the opposite of philosophic-rational thinking but is in addition to the older mode - and provides a dominant new mode of verification-selection. Rationality remains essential in science as does mythic-imaginative thought, and just as mythic-imaginative thought remains essential in philosophy and in society after the institution of rational thought. However, the new criterion does not completely replace the old. Rational thought [in which thought is reflexive] and mythic-creative thought remain as valid thought patterns, generally, as well as sources of validity, in appropriate situations. For example, in situations where rationality and empirical thought are inadequate, partially or completely, mythic thought remains of value. Tradition, value, the nature of rationality and science contain mythic elements. Philosophy is not possible without imagination, and science is not possible without rationality or imagination. Also philosophy enhances the mythic style; science enhances rationality and the mythic style Therefore, we are led to an inclusive view in which science, philosophy, [and the humanities] are not opposites. Imagine the domain of awareness. Of this domain, certain elements are understood in a mythic sense. Of these, some elements are understood in a philosophic sense. Further restriction leads to the domain of science. Outside the domain of awareness is the domain of the potential or the possible. This, provided it is poetically “acceptable,” is the domain of poetry-humanities. In its narrow sense, philosophy is strictly concerned with manifestly rational and general knowledge. This philosophic core maintains contact with all branches of learning expressed through language. Such learning and the core interact to produce their most effective advance 4-57 There is a broader sense of philosophy that accepts as its subject matter this whole domain of activity - except that it is not directly concerned with technical and empirical details. There is an even broader view of philosophy that sees philosophy as the entire domain207 of interaction between a philosophic core and the domain of the possible. This is not the dominant view of Western philosophy but is the nature of certain Eastern philosophies of India and the Orient and strands of Western philosophy such as existentialism As pointed out above, the different types of thinking interact. Likewise, the contents of the different types are mutually modified. The content of mythic thought is affected by rationality and science. Yet, there are domains within which mythic thought is an essential mode: aspects of life and value which we do not understand, the realms beyond science: the infinite and or the effectively infinite, the infinitely small, the infinitely complex, and so on. As some of these domains directly affect our lives, mythic thought is essential, as well as the bonding that goes with it. Such forms are inextricably interwoven with elements of rational thought and cultural evolution. Universal myths beyond science are valuable for future development of science, for universal possibilities. In these domains the narrow view from science says: “Attend to immediate details, do not speculate.” However, such a view is not science, but is an aspect of cultural mythology. In the domain of mythic knowledge [1] where science and rationality say nothing, mythic knowledge may be more adaptive, actually and potentially, than no knowledge; [2] contradiction is not undesirable for the net cultural system may still be adaptive; and science as it moves into new domains can use a multiplicity of conceptual possibilities to work with; and [3] there is change which may be occasioned by imagination, cultural selection, and rational-scientific invalidation. There are also [invalid] cases of “scientific invalidation” of valid mythic knowledge Thus: all types of knowledge interact and change. No category of knowledge provides is complete and absolute truth [evolutionary-selection theory of science]; each category has a domain of adaptability and each system or atom of knowledge has a certain risk associated with its elimination - due to mythic content. There is an inclusion: Eastern philosophy, existentialism, poetry and humanities, the potential and the possible includes awareness, the broader meaning of Western philosophy includes mythic knowledge includes the core of rational philosophy includes empirical science; and there is a movement outward of each of these domains208 through the appropriate mode of creation and validation or invalidation: 209 4-58 Metaphorically
Table 12 Knowledge - from the Universal to the Acute 4-59 4.2.4.2 Main Divisions of Knowledge4.2.4.2.1 Main Divisions of Knowledge - 1This is closer to the practical scheme of 4.2.1.3, than to the ideal one of 4.2.1.2 4.2.4.2.1.1 Symbolic systemsA priori knowledge210 4.2.4.2.1.1.1 [1] General purpose; descriptive metaphysics 4.2.4.2.1.1.2 [2] Natural systems: for art 4.2.4.2.1.1.3 [3] Special purpose: for science and technology 4.2.4.2.1.2 Symbolically coded knowledgeEmpirical, experiential, rational and imaginative 4.2.4.2.1.2.1 [1] Philosophy; symbolic systems 4.2.4.2.1.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts 4.2.4.2.1.2.3 [3] Sciences; technology Sciences include description and dynamics of systems - physical, living, social. In case of design, we add imperatives 4-60 4.2.4.2.2 The Main Divisions of Knowledge - 2As pointed out in detail [pp. 4-8, 9, 53], consideration here is limited to symbolically expressed and coded knowledge of civilization 4.2.4.2.2.1 Symbolic SystemsLogical and linguistic paradoxes have shown that symbolic systems contain knowledge in their structure. We also know this from direct study and evolution 4.2.4.2.2.1.1 [1] General purpose symbolic systems-languages; language of thought; descriptive metaphysics Generally: “analytic” knowledge211 4.2.4.2.2.1.2 [2] Symbolic systems for arts and natural languages; generally: phylogenetic-mythic knowledge211 4.2.4.2.2.1.3 [3] Special purpose symbolic systems for science and technology; generally: synthetic a priori211 4.2.4.2.2.2 Symbolically Coded Knowledge4.2.4.2.2.2.1 [1] Philosophy; knowledge of symbolic systems 4.2.4.2.2.2.2 [2] Humanities; arts 4.2.4.2.2.2.3 [3] Science; technology Both science and art are applied in technology. Design for technology - as in engineering and other professions - includes special information, specialized knowledge, and design science. Design is considered in Area 5, and is given a much broader interpretation there. In Area 4, developed expertise and technique are considered In a more complete analysis we would be concerned with all knowledge in relation to: structure of knowledge, nature, bearers, and origins in structure and evolution of the world. Such knowledge is reflected in the present scheme as far as it has been symbolically coded and expressed 4-61 4.3 A BRIEF OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGEThe following is based on the discussion of Introduction to 4, of 4.1, 4.2, and the major divisions of 4.3 4.3.1 SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS4.3.1.1 GeneralNature and evolution of sensory-perceptual processing [cognitive, emotive], expressive [action, communication] phases of being. Origin of information and knowledge. Preverbal communication of emotion and cognition: gesture, posture, facial expression; laughter, crying and non-word sounds. Evolution of thought: memory, imagination and reason; communication and thought by signals, signs, symbols; origin of speech and language; [phylogenetic-mythic] language of thought and origins of logic; origins of writing; non-sensual vs. symbolic and post-linguistic communication and thought Generalized symbolic systems and descriptive metaphysics 4.3.1.2 Language and Related SystemsNatural dialects; evolution; written language; grammar; semantics and semiotics212; symbols and information; symbolic information disciplines as the shadow of human personality: arts and humanities and their symbolic disciplines: information in visual, tonal-phonetic, tactile, active-kinesthetic, mixed symbols: meaning through form and structure in space and time 4.3.1.3 Special Purpose Symbolic SystemsSymbolic and information disciplines [especially in science and technology]: logic in relation to truth-knowledge, design and discovery; proof, algorithm and heuristic; mathematics - analytical and geometric; other special purpose symbolic systems: programming languages, flow charts and diagrams, technical graphics 4-62 4.3.2 KNOWLEDGE - SYMBOLICALLY CODED KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLDThis includes the universe, humankind, knowledge, and symbolic systems. There is a correspondence between the subdivisions of symbolic systems [4.3.1] and the subdivisions of symbolically coded knowledge here [4.3.2] 4.3.2.1 PhilosophyPhilosophy, here, is taken as the most general knowledge and according to the most inclusive criteria of human experience.213 Core philosophy [sample]: metaphysics, epistemology and logic, philosophy of mind and symbolic systems - includes language ▪ Philosophy of the actual: Western philosophy:214 value, actions, social philosophy, philosophy of the disciplines. Philosophy of analytic thought ▪ Philosophy of the possible215 and the potential. Includes the actual and infinite: Eastern philosophy213 Philosophy of synthetic thought-experience 4.3.2.2 Humanities and ArtsKnowledge and expression of knowledge and experience in general; by special, mixed, holistic modes; of any aspect or whole of experience in nature, society, self, environment, and universe. Francis Bacon classified knowledge according to the dominant mode of thought: Memory, imagination, rationality [and my addition, empiricism]. It should be remembered that any such classification is according to [1] dominant mode. Other modes will be present in a field placed in one class, and may be significant and [2] interpretation of the fields. In addition, the Baconian scheme assumes that cognition is the only factor in determining knowledge - public or private. An approximate classification is as follows: memory: history; imagination: art and poetry;216 rationality: core philosophy; rationality and imagination: philosophy and ideal religion; rationality, imagination and empiricism: science and technology; imagination and mythic bonding: religion. Below, I list the essential fields of humanities and arts in an arrangement that, approximately, permits each “field” to depend on the previous: 1. History 2. Philosophy 3. Art and poetry 4. Science 5. Technology 6. Religion 4-63 There is an unavoidable artificiality to the distinctions implied by these divisions. This reflects itself in the fact that the sequence 1-6 is one of a number of reasonable sequences The inclusion of science and technology among the humanities reflects [1] the idea that science is not opposite to humanistic knowledge but is a specialized aspect of such knowledge obtained by adding a criterion of strong empiricism. The validity of the humanities is that there are many other types of experience with are vital and yet do not submit, or need to submit, to empirical experience. Such types include phylogenetic, mythic, affective, rational, and intuitive. [2] Technology is included in the humanities as it [especially “true” technology] depends on art and poetry. In addition to science, and [3] the following sections on science [4.3.2.3] and technology [4.3.2.4] reflect the emphasis of the modern [1980s] world 4.3.2.3 The SciencesThese represent knowledge in coherent spheres of knowledge such that definiteness is possible. Such definiteness consists in fact [interpreted within the context of ordinary experience-language], and in symbolic representation of the “elements”217 of experience such that the totality of experience [within the restricted coherent spheres] is reducible to relative simple “formulation,” hence the relative rigor and sophistication The fundamental-basic areas of science are: ▪ Physical: matter, energy cosmos; includes physics, astronomy, geology and chemistry ▪ Life: in the universe218 Human and universal: psychology and cognitive science, sociology, social and behavioral sciences 4-64 4.3.2.4 TechnologyFor design, see Area 5, especially 5.3.7 Technology is know how in the uses and transformations of matter, energy, life,218 above information, society [human and social resources] and culture, knowledge [as resource].219 Nature and development ▪ Elements ▪ Major fields 4.3.2.5 Summary of 4.3.2Philosophy Core Analytic Synthetic Humanities and arts History Philosophy Art and poetry Theory and criticism Literature Dramatic: theatre, cinema, and dance Music Architecture Fine arts: sculpture, drawing, painting, printmaking, photography Functional design and decorative Science Technology Religion Science Physical Life Human and social Universal Technology Nature Elements Fields 4-65 4.4 DETAILED OUTLINES OF KNOWLEDGEIt is useful [regarding structure, learning, reference] to have outlines at a number of levels: Level 0: Area 4.2.4 Level I: Area 4.3 4.4.1 LEVEL IIThe organization here will be different See outline from Propaedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica, and the outline and principles of division 4.4.2 LEVEL IIIAgain, the organization here will be different ▪ Philosophy, logic, mathematics and historical-philosophical study of the branches of knowledge ▪ Physical, earth and life sciences ▪ Human and social sciences ▪ Art, technology,220 religion ▪ History 4-66 Comments on Technology The references quoted do not mention molecular221 or “nano-technology”. This is significant for technology of knowledge-information [and for materials, energy and life]. In this still largely, but not entirely [1987], hypothetical technology, processes of chemical disassembly of the fundamental molecular structure of materials-life will be computer recorded and assembly will be computer driven. This will lead to second generation [non-protein] with application to materials, macro-technology, computers, space, production, living cells, and warfare There are risks associated with these concepts. There is also the potential for ontogenetic learning to affect phylogenetic experience to a significant extent. Therefore, the approach to the universal has the potential to go beneath the existential level of humankind. There are risks and opportunities here 4-67 4.5 OPEN PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE4.5.1 NATURE AND METHODSee 3.3.1-2, 3.4.3, 3.5.6-7, and Introduction to 4, and 4.1-2 4.5.2 STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATIONSee comments in 3.5.7; see 4.2-4 4.5.3 PROBLEMS OF THE DISCIPLINES1. I plan to consider these as-when I consider these disciplines. 2. See relevant sections of Areas 2-7 entitled “Problems of...” or “Open Problems of...” 4-68 4.6 THE ESSENTIALS OF KNOWLEDGE - A BRIEF TREATMENTFuture-Possible 1. The concept here rests upon a rejection of the notion that a comprehensive grasp is no longer possible for one individual. Certainly no individual can store in memory, in usable form, all the available information 2. A comprehensive understanding will be based on: A. A classification of knowledge in a group of systems. Such systems will correspond to the multitude of purposes B. Additional hierarchical levels according to: ▪ Tentativeness of the “knowledge” ▪ Tentativeness of the utility ▪ Importance ▪ Ephemerality C. A pyramid structure to the learning of the individual 4-69 4.7 AN ENCYCLOPEDIC COMPILATIONFuture-Possible 4.7.1 A general plan of approach:Principles of importance; basis in design [A] Logical outline [B] Synoptic studies [C] Plan-Design [D] [See 4.2.3.4] Publisher-Committee Marketing Estimation of topical emphasis [update rate] Invitations-specifications Editing Verifying Coordinating Printing
5-1 5 DESIGNOrigins of human faculties and social institutions in: awareness --> knowledge and value --> design --> action --> evaluation and feedback is through separation, specialization, of function in evolution.222 There are two errors of thought [thought as generalized reflection including appropriate elements of intuition, emotion, action] connected with this separation: the first is that the institutions are essentially independent [a universal dualism], and the second, perhaps a reaction to the first, holds that there is and should be no separation; for example, that all levels of design are completely interactive with some specific problem environment. Neither of these views is completely correct; nor is a happy medium. This can be discussed in connection with:223 The sequence awareness --> knowledge --> design --> action --> evaluation and feedback is not meant to imply that the purpose of knowledge is, or is not, design, and that the purpose of design is or is not action, and so on. However, knowledge and knowing, design and designing...are elements of culture, which form an interacting whole that interacts with its environment. As a whole the sociocultural system, initially at least, is a phenomenon - not an object of awareness, knowledge and design. As the elements of the process separate and become activities in themselves, either as faculties or as institutions, they begin to acquire independence. The origin of motivation and purpose is in holding the elements together as a functioning whole This does not imply that the purpose of knowledge is design - although knowledge is an element in design. In terms of understanding from adaptation, knowledge functions best by having a continuum of objectives from externally regulated purpose to independent standards and objectives. As stated earlier, this derives from a continuum of needs in areas that range from understood to unknown and unpredictable. In facing this dynamic multiplicity of material through existential and universal needs, the institutions of knowledge and design require multiple dynamic levels of interaction - among themselves and with actuality 5-2 5.1 ROLE OF DESIGN AND PLANNINGDesigning and Planning Are Essentially the Same Activity There are differences between the ways in which these words are used, not having to do with the distinction between an activity and the product of an activity [noun vs. verb], but the ranges of use are such that there is value to regarding the concepts of design and planning as the same. At a fundamental level, I will not distinguish between the processes of design and planning. [Sometimes a distinction will be valuable.] The degree of detail with which a design should be done will depend upon many factors such as value of explicitness, total resources available, relative importance of the specific project, balance between cost of designing and cost of implementing Design can be undertaken by any group or individual in relation to any interest. Some interests are such that design is acceptance of the moment. Others are such that design is controlled and rational. These reflect the “Dionysian” and “Apollonian” modes respectively. Actual design by humans is usually, if not necessarily, between the two extremes and may include the question of appropriate balance[s] and combination[s] of such activities Role of Design in a Total Process or Achievement of Objectives The role of design lies in the value of breaking up achievement of an objective into design-planning and implementation - or thought and action. The rational model breaks down, the objective is: thought [as described above] --> action. An evolutionary model:224 thought --> action --> thought --> action... and an interactive model: thought « action. In evolutionary and interactive models, the notion of objective has less significance than in the rational model I have pointed out a number of levels of design.225 I will now review these levels: [1] Objective design, [2] Social process, [3] Evolutionary design, and [4] Design as evolution 5-3 5.1.1 ROLE OF DESIGN IN SOCIETYWe recognize a number of levels of design 5.1.1.1 Objective DesignObjective design is the simplest level: The objective of design is well defined. Let us translate into operational terms. By design, we understand: problem solving or search. Objective design requires that the problem be well defined; i.e., the problem space or environment is well defined, and the objective or condition of solution is well defined. The simplest case is algorithmic search: search-solution can be reduced to a well-defined, finite sequence of steps Real situations may become complex: [1] people-designers may be unaware of potential problems, the process of finding and identifying needs requires focus. This calls for active design, [2] when needs are not fully known-knowable - design for diversity is appropriate, [3] when the problem environment is not clearly understood or defined - learning, research are useful. [4] There is more than one solution criterion and the criteria are not reducible to a single criterion - multi-objective design; [5] objectives are not clearly defined, or implicitly defined and therefore explicit understanding unfolds as the process of resolution continues. This is due to learning the structure of the problem environment, especially in the vicinity of potential solutions - dynamic design, trial and test, evolutionary problem solving apply, [6] needs circumstances change - dynamic design [control], evolutionary design [also: when designs are improved as a result of input from use], [7] problem environment so complex that new design concepts are necessary - creative design The concepts of design just identified are: Learning, research and knowledge Dynamic design, evolutionary problem solving 5-4 Static, objective design which employs knowledge and pre-specification of objectives and employs a rational-systematic design methodology, has been criticized226 as being too technical and too loosely connected with the real problem being solved. Use-dependence of preexisting bodies of knowledge [mystique] has been labeled inappropriate, a technology of design. What is wanted, 5 instead, is a close interactive relationship between problem and solution. Shön has criticized Herbert Simon's science of design,227 with its basis in classical optimization, along these lines. Shön's notion of design as reflection-in-action, as well as systematic bodies of knowledge and systematic methodologies, are both useful and included within the range of design levels considered here and justified as a response to the range of needs arising in actuality. [This does not justify every system-range-application of knowledge - practically or ethically.] All such notions can be specified [but not necessarily calculated - such specifications will include human elements] within the framework of an appropriate optimization formulation This does not mean that knowledge and design are identical - only that they can be understood within a common framework. Design characterizes the type of thinking that is closely tied to application and action and includes the highly interactive reflection-in-action. Design-problem solving-interactive problem solving characterizes the thought of the professional The professional is closely connected with practice. He-she can use knowledge and systematic methodology, but such knowledge-methods have limits and so the professional must also respond creatively-critically-reflectively to the needs of the problem situation. This ability of the professional is not completely tied to each specific problem as it arises. There are coherent, developed, areas of professional practice, just as there are coherent bodies of knowledge. There is a correspondence [though not one-one] between the professions and the disciplines of knowledge: for example, law has basis in ethics but ethics is by no means the only discipline which has use in developing and applying law. Some of the professions and corresponding disciplines are: Law [ethics], ministry [theology228], medicine and health [human biology, psychology, pharmacology [also a profession]], engineering [physical sciences], architecture and planning [art, sociology], education, business [organization theory, economics] The professional acquires the appropriate body of knowledge, other disciplines commonly useful in the profession, principles of practice and codes of conduct appropriate 5-5 to the specific profession and general ethics. However, the design-problem solving skills that tie effort to specific problem environments are essential. Such skills may be summarized as the generation and evaluation of alternative. Generation includes ideas such as practice, retrieval and use of information [replication], modification, creativity, synthesis [variation]; evaluation -decision making [selection] includes practice; analysis [satisfaction of natural law [includes test], use of disciplines], comparison [selection, optimization, includes test] ... such skills are acquired in university and apprenticeship education The discussion of design in this area, 5.1.1.1, has been keyed to situations in which, because of simplicity and or practice, objectives are relatively simple and well understood. However, even in professional design, the situation is usually not so simple and reference has been made to this [p 5-3: “Further concepts of design”] Through these elaborations of the design concept, professional design expands to embrace the full range of activities associated with professional practice. A number of illuminating analogies are involved: first note that the specific design process [see 5.2.3] [model]: recognition of need --> problem definition-functional considerations --> design specifications --> synthesis --> analysis and optimization --> evaluation [presentation], has some analogy to professional practice: consider engineering: awareness --> knowledge [academic, learning] --> technical knowledge [research, development] --> design --> construction, production, operation --> management --> feedback, and this has some analogy to a generalized social process: awareness --> knowledge --> design [professional, public policy, planning, political-public decision making] --> action --> evaluation --> feedback This leads to a generalized concept: social process is design. In this concept, the objectives are discernible but diffuse. Society as a whole is negotiating its internal and external environment In an expanded sense, design includes planning, public policy, and public-political decision making 5-6 5.1.1.2 Social and Global Design. Design for Diversity. Social Process as DesignSocial process is awareness --> learning --> design and planning --> action and control --> evaluation --> feedback...learning: discovery, systematization, and transmission-education Consider decisions at social-global levels. The situation is incompletely known and understood, values only partially known and understood. The decision making process is complex and not completely rational. The circumstances being designed-planned for, the future, are incompletely known. In this situation, variety of approach is adaptive. Variety and diversity is a value. Rationality can be employed, to a degree, in the choice of range of designs and implementations and in the specific designs and implementations However, the total situation is not under rational control [or human control]. Acceptance of this is rational, for humans can understand its limitations. The total process in which humankind navigates its future involves an incompletely known arena and an incompletely controllable system. Trial and error, not only of rational and human process, but also of the total context is inherent. This is analogous to the relations between rational knowledge [rational selection] and mythic knowledge [cultural selection]. Both are present and each contains in its content and processes elements of the other. In this sense, social process is design. Rational and professional design include cognitive treatment of aspects of the total process but retain and interact with elements of the mythic What is learned from this? At this point, a number of generalized observations: [1] in rational design close attention will be paid to the actual and conceptual problem environments. This corresponds to the role of empiricism in science, but is not always feasible. [2] A balance of rational design and other processes are desirable. These include cultural institutions: professions, trades, art, religion and other tradition.229 [3] Diversity is a value: ideas of action, play, rhythm of nature [dance230] are relevant and reflected in human nature and tradition. [4] These concepts are also applicable to complex cultural institutions 5-7 5.1.1.3 Evolutionary DesignThis concept is inherent in and applies to the design of 5.1.1.1 and 5.1.1.2. Design is evolutionary in the following senses: [1] The conceptual process [or testing] involves variation and selection. [2] The design itself is a “variation” and its implementation involves selection. [3] The design process evolves as a result of rational and circumstantial factors - including selection due to cultural institutions, cultural selection [in the senses of elimination, dominance, prominence] The concept of evolutionary design shows professional design [also knowledge] as growing out of social-cultural process and social process as growing out of biological evolution [though not completely determined by biology] From the concept of design as an evolutionary process we learn: [1] Rationality and other human faculties: emotion, intuition ... are “incomplete.” [2] Acceptance of elements of insecurity, fate, tradition... This is not fatalism for it does not imply unquestioning acceptance, or acceptance of all aspects. However, it points to the equal absurdity of the opposite of fatalism: complete rational control. [3] Attempts, trials, risks are not only essential, but inherent in living and in social process. [4] There are dimensions to design other than the rational and empirical. [5] Design is based in biology [also knowledge], and may be a [partial] basis for further evolution and growth: in all dimensions: material-natural, social, inner, universal 5-8 5.1.2 EVOLUTION AS DESIGNIf we accept humankind's origins as in biological and then, merging with the biological, social evolution, with both based in physical evolution; then we accept the origin of design - our ability to design - in evolution. Clearly, nature and [rational, conscious] design are compatible. I have discussed some philosophical and epistemic correlates in Areas 2, 3, 4 [and Preface, General Statement, Personal Design]. The question: is evolution design remaining open in its universal senses. Locally it is. I have begun to discuss some universal consequences in these areas. These questions are of deep interest; my reflections so far are incomplete Here, I am interested in practical consequences of the evolutionary nature and origin of design and possible identification: evolution = design? Some considerations are [others in 5.2-4]: 1. What are the constraints of the pre-psychological levels: environmental, physical, chemical, biological [cellular, tissue, organ...], social...on psychosocial possibilities; what are the implications of value and ethics 2. What possibility need and value is there for integrating the levels? How to? Planning-design of design 3. We can see unity to the functions of life through evolution. Detailed understanding of such unity of origin is valuable in understanding interactive function. For example, action includes emotion, cognition. The original processor of information processes simultaneously with action. This continues well into the human use of thought in situations such as hunting Action = thought « action This is design and there is no need for design as a separate activity until thought-knowledge builds its own city. Then, design is the element that connects thought and action: Action = knowing « design « action This is a basis for analysis of thought [knowing, design] and design, and has been used in related forms 5-9 In Area 5, the focus is on objective design and professional design [5.1.1.1]. There is consideration of social process [5.1.1.2] and evolutionary design [5.1.1.3]. Evolution as design as an issue is considered throughout Areas 1-8 5-10 5.2 PRACTICAL DESIGNRole of Design in Completing a Project This section is preliminary to the more detailed and formal treatment of Area 5.3. It is also an outline of the methodological aspects of an essay-book on practical design In achieving objectives, solving problems, there is a strategy that conserves resources. It is to set aside time, reflect on and perhaps come up with an approach or plan. Design is the process of coming up with a plan: Project = design [planning to achieve objective] and implementation Planning or Design of Design: Allocation of Resources How much time and resources should go to design? This question is itself an aspect of design and depends on the total resources. This is a good example of an interactive problem: it cannot be answered at the start. For difficult and expensive projects, an approach is to begin by looking at the problem as a whole and suppress the details. At this level, there may be a number of possible solutions. The one is chosen which, when design and implementation are considered, requires the smallest commitment of resources compatible with quality. In novel situations, this will involve guesses and estimation. Next, the full problem is broken down into sub-problems and selection of solutions follows the same approach as before 5.2.1 MANAGEMENT. Role of Management in DesignManagement includes the best use of time and resources. Design and implementation are not independent: a good design can consume more resources but its implementation may consume less. The questions of the previous paragraph, how to best use design resources, is an example of management In continuous operation-implementation. A function of management is to set planning horizons and perform design and allocation of design resources within this frame of time. That is: Design = management = management and design Management includes effective use of resources. In addition to the question of allocation, this includes scheduling of projects, organization, and creation of best circumstances for creativity and use of human resources Further management functions include: entrepreneurship; development and use of financial and technical resources; integration, interaction and feedback among the design-planning-management phases Management of time recognizes need for: continuous planning and planning horizons; planning for growth and, more generally, evolution with circumstances; emergency planning 5-11 5.2.2 PRACTICAL MANAGEMENTManagement is the overall decision and control function, design is problem solving; but there is an overlap. But for specialization, they merge. Here, design will be regarded as fundamental and inclusive of management. This is appropriate to individual or small group work. The following outline is sufficiently general that it is an outline at higher-complex levels: Elements of Management and Design Functions
Figure 1 Management as an Element of Design 5-12 5.2.3 PRACTICAL DESIGNI describe design in three levels of detail DESIGN = GENERATE AND SELECT ALTERNATIVES WITH ANTICIPATION Comments: 1. “Generate and select” correspond, approximately, to creative and evaluative processes. However, there will be elements of evaluation [includes a priori, heuristic, obviousness] in the primarily generative phase. This prevents, through simple tests or built-in mechanisms, generation of unnecessarily large numbers of alternatives. There will also be elements of creativity in the primarily evaluative phase, by not being completely specific in the generative phase, and by introducing creativity into evaluation.232 “Generate and select” includes thought-action 2. The process “generate and select” is clearly analogous to evolution = variation and selection. This is true whether we refer to design as the pre-implementation phase, in which case the variation and selection are imaginative, rational, empirical, or to implementation and feedback for further design The analogy with [biological] evolution goes beyond this elementary comparison. The different levels and types of variation include: reproduction [variation = 0], which corresponds to permutation of design concepts and use of elements of other design concepts and preexisting knowledge. Mutation - this corresponds to use of new ideas and concepts. Copying mechanisms correspond to method that also evolves: METHOD --> KNOW HOW --> CREATIVITY --> EVALUATION 5-13 The analogy with biological evolution is useful, but misses a number of crucial features: Rationality, controlled [directed] observation-experiment Feedback Planning, anticipation Rationality and directed experiment are inherent in design. Their result is to significantly reduce the number of variations necessary, and the expense and risk of variation; and therefore increase the rate of adaptation...but with risk of “over adaptation,” because of freedom233. Feedback among the stages of design improves the rationality of design by financing coherence. Feedback generalizes to interaction among stages of design, between design and actuality, and is also inherent in design. These elements are not shown explicitly in Levels 2 and 3 below. I allow that feedback-interaction occurs on an interactive-need basis. Planning and anticipation, also an inherent aspect of design, are included below as “anticipate, recognize need.” DESIGN = ANTICIPATE, GENERATE AND SELECT ALTERNATIVES Anticipation Recognize values and needs Gather information Define function Generate alternatives Specify performance Generate alternatives Select alternatives Test cycle Model and test Improve and select Use cycle Build and use Evaluate and feedback 5-14 Anticipate need[s] - active design Anticipate, become aware of existence of problem, need for “action” [intervention, abstinence from action, reflection...]: active design Generate criteria - identify problem parameters Recognize values, needs, and dimensions: natural [material [physical, chemical...] and biological], social, inner, universal Values: resource, environmental, economic, aesthetic, ethical, safety, cultural, human, life, universal Levels: individual, group, cultural-special, global Gather preliminary information Sources: individuals; libraries, literature [primary, secondary, and reference]; academic; professional societies: office publications, meetings; industrial and business, product fairs; government, patents; networks General-design perspectives: ideas, concepts, general and background information and knowledge Specific-design data: known and standard designs and elements, handbooks and catalogs Define problem [1]: select criteria, objectives Functional considerations: specify need based on above considerations Design for function - objective design Define problem [2] Design specifications: translate function into performance specifications. Make specifications as definite as is reasonable Generate alternatives - synthesis, creative and conceptual design; “shape” Gather detailed information on known elements; use of preexisting designs Random, heuristic Creative Invention, variations Formal [includes algorithmic] Tree of alternatives; combinations Systematic Catalogues and inventories 5-15 Select alternatives Test [analysis] Rational: knowledge of reality - common sense, language, logic, geometry, mathematics, science, etc., to eliminate the impossible and to generate234 the possible Experiments: to test parts of the system - if inexpensive Models: to test the whole system - if inexpensive Improving [optimization] Selecting a good idea from the remaining alternatives 1. Based on primary criteria 2. Compare alternatives: within each design concept, among concepts. Select according to criteria Evaluating Building and testing a preliminary version if needed Make sure all criteria are satisfied; check with other people; permits; persuade Planning complete Use cycle [optional]: completing the evolution Build Use Evaluate Feedback For complex systems, top-down design is an effective approach. [This is not to deny the value and need for bottom-up; but bottom-up is probably top-down according to some hierarchical principle.] This introduces further levels such as market analysis, conceptual design, preliminary design, detailed design, and testing, part of management 5-16 5.2.4 ENHANCING CREATIVITY235In the previous section we saw that design = anticipation and generating alternatives and evaluating and selecting-decision making [according to criteria of viability or excellence [“best”] or success...]. Creativity is commonly associated with the “generating stage” but, actually, enters into all stages. Creativity in seeing the situation as it is and as it could be, is involved in anticipation. Creativity enters evaluation-selection in at least two ways: [1] creative approaches to evaluation, selection and [2] leaving some of the generation phase over to provide flexibility. Similarly, aspects of evaluation can be used in the generation phase. This is a creative approach to creativity. One way in which this can be done is: suppose there are three criteria, A, B, C to be used in evaluation. Let us also suppose that it is very easy to build any two criteria into generation. Then we choose the combination of two criteria that eliminate, perhaps by estimation, some of the other alternatives. Then the remaining criterion is applied to the generated alternatives. There are many wrinkles depending on how difficult the criteria are to apply, how best to apply them, whether to apply them formally and so on. Often a not very well considered, or perhaps a seemingly well-considered criterion will be applied [formally or informally] and possible solutions will be eliminated. This is one consideration to be aware of during generation Creativity is considered further in Area 5.4.2.4.2. Further information can be located on this topic In general, CREATIVITY could be defined as the activity of minimizing the effort involved in finding viable solutions through effective use of the management, anticipation, generation and selection phases of design. There may be value to extending this to include persuasion, action [implementation and control] and evaluation [post implementation] and feedback; that is, to social process as design The discussion above points to the creative potential inherent in allowing interaction of the different phases of process. [There is an intimate connection between thinking-in-action and change.] Aspects of this are evaluation in generation, thinking [designing] and acting and so on. Creative design is interactive design. Actually, this is approximate. We have pointed out before the value to a hierarchy of a number of levels of interaction. The problem is: include appropriate levels 5-17 5.2.5 CONTROLRationality, knowledge are limited. Plans for execution of designs cannot be perfectly implemented and knowledge and analysis upon which such plans are built are inaccurate and incomplete. All decisions have an element of uncertainty. This is the origin of the problem of control Control can be achieved: 1. By tightening rational analysis; 2. Judicious adjustment of criteria of validity to consonance with actuality [understanding; natural criteria, value: evolutionary criteria, value]; 3. By close connection between thought and action: interactive design; 4. Adjustment of action according to conformance with plan; 5. Adjustment of plan and design according to values; 6. Adjustment of expectations A. Acceptance B. Rhythm, flow A range of levels of rationality and of control can be accommodated in the schemes of Areas 5.2.3 and 5.3.4.1 5-18 5.2.6 APPLICATIONSThe difference between practical and formal [Area 5.3] design is in the level of resources available, used for design. Applications of practical design could be to any of the examples of 5.3.7: especially the global and the individual categories 5-19 5.2.7 OUTLINE OF A VOLUME ON PRACTICAL DESIGN1. Nature and origin of design Evolution Thought and action Problem of control Levels of control and interaction Levels of design; origin of value 2. Value of design 3. Method; discussion of the elements 4. Applications As issues of interest As studies of method [as in 5.2.1-5, and 5.3.4] 5-20 5.3 FORMAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN: PLANNING AND DESIGNThe linear spectrum of design levels is defined by the degree to which well-defined objectives exist Objective design is the level at which the human designer has well-defined objectives This merges with the next general level, which includes social process Objective design and social design or process are similar Consideration is therefore given to social design or process Objective design is the level at which the human designer has fairly well defined objectives, a reasonable degree of control in Throughout this outline, a number of levels of design have been identified and repeatedly emphasized. The distinction between the levels is based on the degree to which objectives exist and are clearly identified; control is possible; purpose and intention are possible and are present; thought and action are separate. When the objectives, control, purpose, thought are in individuals, there is a high degree of compatibility among these indexes and they define a linear spectrum rather than a multidimensional classification implementation is possible, purpose and intention motivate the designer, and design is separate from implementation. Of course, the “ideal” case of perfectly defined objectives, full control, absolute commitment and single-minded purpose, and complete separation of thought and action does not, and probably can not exist and any desire for such an ideal is fantasy, the fantasy of perfect rationality. Also, the concept of objective design does not describe a discrete set of activities but, rather, a continuum which merges with design levels at which clear objectives, full control, separation of thought and action do not exist The levels of design have origins in evolution. The primal level is material-biological level: at this level we do not discern, initially, objectives, control, or conscious design. Debate may be had, whether this level should be called design. Depending upon the system identified, however, elements of design may be discerned at levels previously regarded as mechanistic by major factions of both science and religion. Debate is then possible: how early in physical-biological evolution can elements of design be recognized, if not by empathy, then by intellect, and for what system? The next level is of information processing internal to biological organisms. This merges into cognitive-emotive information processing of universal [internal and external] stimuli, and into collective social process as design. At this level, which is mythic at its highest development, overall behavior is non-purposive and nature bonded, but elements of design originate from within organisms. This is an evolutionary level. This merges into social process as design with objectives - though such objectives are partial. And, finally, the fourth level is objective design. Each level coexists with and modifies, perhaps suppresses, previous levels. One of the basic themes of this work is that the nature of life, humankind and human institutions of awareness and insight --> learning: discovery, synthesis, transmission --> design --> action: implementation and control --> evaluation --> feedback can be understood in an integrated and connected way, without need for ad hoc elements of foundation, than possible before Area 5.2 is on the informal practice of objective design. This area 5.3 is on formal practice. Naturally these blend into other levels and have especially strong interaction with social process. Therefore significant elements of social process are 5-21 in Areas 5.3-6. The ideas of 5.2, which are formalized in this section, are also applicable to social process in which objectives are only partly known, since they are only partly inherent in their context. An inclusive term for social process in which objectives, control, purpose, separate thought are only partially inherent and objective design in which objectives, ... are inherent to a significant degree, is planning and design. In all cases in which objectives ... are not completely inherent, are partial. There is partial freedom within evolutionary constraints or limits. Progress-process-change outside of these limits is by trial and selection. The issue is open, to what degree these constraints can be voided by rational activity and to what degree such constraints provide understanding of progress-change and value ... within the constraints. For example, although the range of conscious behavior and choice within the limits may be wide, not all choice within this range will be equally desirable. To what extent may the desirability of choices be consciously based in evolutionary nature, fiction and future possibilities? It is correct to recognize that objective design and social process merge and the design and planning concepts and methods are, and should be, perhaps, similar. To the extent that rational design is not possible in given circumstances, an understanding of freedom, constraints, rationality, and interactions - potential and actual - is valuable. This includes, but is not restricted to exploration in the dimensions: material [physical, biology in the realms of the microworlds, macroworlds, and the world of the complex], social, inner, universal 5-22 5.3.1 PHILOSOPHY OF DESIGNThe purpose of a philosophy of design is to provide: an understanding of the nature of design and its foundation as an independent activity; and an understanding of the relations of design to other elements of human activity: natural, social, inner, universal. This has been done to some extent in the areas cited below.236 An outline of this foundation has been accomplished. Clarification, definiteness - rationality and foundation and amplification remain necessary Further comments and observations Design has origin in action: action / thought --> learning --> change --> understanding change… Comprehensive Anticipatory Design R. Buckminster Fuller has emphasized the need for “comprehensive anticipatory design.” This is impossible and, therefore, unnecessary. It is contrary to the idea of design as an element of change and evolution Models Of Design and Integration The models of design presented “being,” “mythic,” “rational,” “planning” modes - Dionysian, Apollonian and other - and integrating modes such as D A D A or thought-in-action Further Topics in Philosophy of Design Localization and internalization of natural processes and evolution; levels of being and design; knowledge, evolution, design; intention and purpose: alternate futures and choice; integration of choice and mechanism; causality and synchronicity in design; specialization of objectives: basis in cultural or natural process and evolution: what are objectives, values and their origins; what are the fundamental problems of design and their relation to origins of design and global problems; what is our approach to design and what should it be? Foundations of design: showing how the processes [design: need --> function --> specifications ... and social process: awareness --> knowledge and value --> design...] can be derived in some sense: from logic, reflection, cultural comparison, evolution, optimality ... or combination; 5-23 design and action: design as transitions: thought --> action and relation to philosophies of action and being [e.g., existentialism and primitive lives]; levels of knowledge and design: knowing that [information], what [history, science, concept], how [art, technology], why [understanding], wherefore [wisdom, value, purpose, design] subject to clarification, modification, action; a priori and “empirical” aspects of design and relation to a priori and empirical aspects of knowledge237 Need for Philosophy of Design and Planning A number of factors are responsible for the emergence of design and planning: 1. Existence of large organizations has meant that resources are available to invest in the study of organization. Such emergence is in turn due to the power of large-scale technologies in using and creating natural resources 2. Existence of a scientific methodology which could be applied to study of design and planning. This has led to specialized tools for analysis of large and complex systems: operations research and systems engineering 3. Development of overall planning method in government, this has been occasioned by growth in governmental programs, globally, in a context of limited resources and growing interaction between political entities 4. The growth of interaction has led to a need for global planning There is a need to understand the nature of the process and its interactions with other spheres of activity, and to provide a foundation for the elements of the process in the context of the large and complex sphere of activity. We would like to know that our categories of understanding238 in relation to design and planning are correct and complete - at least to a reasonable degree. This is the function of philosophy of design in both technical and existential senses. Philosophy provides a foundation for analysis: where, what, how and how much to control Another insight into the role of philosophy is that the philosophical approach is consistent with the models of design presented here [5.2-3]. These models begin with reflection: what is the need? Philosophy begins with reflection: is there a need to review the knowledge and information [mythic or other] at the basis of human-social organization and life? These questions and their answers are necessary but incomplete. Action follows need and need must be grounded. Here, again, philosophy provides a foundation. In a world where the rational model of decisions and actions is the norm, philosophy gives foundation and balance 5-24 5.3.2 MANAGEMENT OF DESIGN. PLANNINGManagement and Related Concepts Management: Planning, controlling, organizing; integration of design and implementation: resource analysis Further Concepts: Design of the design process, planning, facilities, personnel, generalized methodology; enhancing creativity and productivity; equilibrium, period and emergency planning Management of one level occurs at the same and or another level [see 5.3.4.1-4] Determine type of design-style suitable: [1] Mode of decision making: rational, interactive, Dionysian; [2] level or combination of significance: material-natural, social, inner, universal; [3] model of planning: developmental planning, incrementalism, economic model of choice, ethical model of choice [see below]; for individuals, societies, social agencies, technical systems [these possibly overemphasize the rational model], other [5.2, 5.3.4, 5.3.6-7, 5.4]: environmental, resource, wildlife See especially: Robert Mayer, Policy and Program Planning: A Developmental Perspective, 1985. Mayer advocates the developmental approach, but discusses some others such as incrementalism, economic model of choice, ethical model of choice. He does not include an evolutionary model explicitly, but discusses evaluation, feedback, and spiral vs. linear progress. The model is somewhere between my model of design [need --> ...] and social process [awareness --> ...] The similarity between Mayer's model of developmental planning and my model of social process-change is evidence of the experiential value of the models. This is an answer, in part, to the question of justification. However, this is an empirical justification and provides motivation, and perhaps insight, for philosophical, evolutionary and technical justification Mayer points out the origin of the developmental and related models in government agencies during the seventies and further application to large not-for-profit 5-25 organizations and advocacy groups. However, it is clear that such models, with appropriate additions, deletions, modification, Apollonian and Dionysian adaptations are applicable in a wide variety of situations Appropriately generalized, such models provide foundation for the social process and its elements: awareness --> knowledge and value --> design --> implementation and control --> evaluation --> feedback Robert Mayer's Model of Developmental Planning This model is reproduced below from Mayer's book cited, for comparison with my model of social process.
Range of application Design includes management. As pointed out above, there is application, with appropriate adjustment, to a range of situations varying in type and complexity 5-26 5.3.3 TOP --> DOWN DESIGN: DESIGN AND PLANNING LEVELS. PRIORITIES DESIGNTop --> down design is the name of a common sense procedure of principle, which says: start design at the most comprehensive level and work down through divisions or systems through subsystems, to details. There is obvious value to this. However, there are other approaches that are sometimes essential. Bottom --> up design starts with the details. The value is that it begins in the roots of the problem and respects the reality of these roots. Designs avoid becoming top heavy and there is a self-limiting aspect to bottom --> up design regarding size, complexity, and centralization. However, we can generalize the notion of top --> down: T --> D is based on a priority: in some sense global-overall considerations are most important; then come the main systems, the subsystems, all according to some hierarchy. An alternative to focusing on the hierarchy is to focus on priorities Therefore, an approach to design that is more general than simple T --> D, is priority design. A set of priorities is listed: P1, P2, ... and design proceeds according to priorities P1, P2, ... When Pn is satisfied: go to Pn+1. If during design for Pn, any set of previous priorities becomes not satisfied: go back to the earliest, in real design: [1] priorities could be determined dynamically, [2] the concept of degree of satisfaction can be introduced as more flexible that the scheme: satisfied-not satisfied; acceptable satisfaction levels for stepping Pn --> Pn+1, and necessary levels are going back to a previous hierarchy could be preset and or determined dynamically 5-27 5.3.3.1 A Set of Global Design and Planning Levels239Global Environmental and natural Regulating elements and permissible fluctuations Consumable resources Environmental - land, atmosphere, water; material, energy, and bio- Social240 Public sphere: social organization Political: decision making, execution, control Political, legal Economic Technology and technological systems Industrial operations System and product Subsystem, ... component Service
Cultural Art Religion Learning Discovery, synthesis, transmission Private sphere
Individual [see 5.4.3] Universal 5-28 5.3.4 Outline of MethodologiesOr, outline of design and planning methodologies for a set of global to specific levels There is a certain amount of repetition of the different design areas and methodologies, especially in 5.2-4 The methods are variations of a single concept which is an amplification of design = variation and selection = development and evaluation of alternatives An outline of design method was given in 5.2.3. In this area, I give some variations of the basic method specific to different levels of complexity and type. Neither the method of 5.2.3 nor the variations given here are intended as absolute. There are feedback, interactions, and possible additional elements. Nor are these methodologies intended as substitutes for creativity: rather they are intended as vehicles for creativity The basic method is presented, in outline, in 5.3.6.1 “component design.” Subsequent sub-areas contain additional considerations and discussions, but not a repetition of the basic method. These outlines are at present241 incomplete.242 The areas for which outline of method - and some related considerations - is given are: A. Components243 design B. System design C. Industrial operations D. Business organization and planning E. Technology and technological systems F. Social, national and global design and planning Feedback and Interaction among the Stages of Design In general, any feedback or feed-forward of the design process is possible. Thus, any interaction is possible. Obviously, feed forward will be more in the nature of anticipation of “look” forward. The standard sequence, developed for its natural organization of thought, and its validation and growth in experience, is a first approximation to actual design. A candidate for a second approximation [or a first approximation to an interaction model] is Mayer's model [p 5-25] 5-29 5.3.4.1 Component Design - The Basic Procedure244
Design 5-30 5.3.4.2 System and Subsystem DesignAn example of system design is modern aircraft design [1940-1980]. The basic procedure [5.3.4.1] is implicit in the remaining sections [1.3.4.2 - 6], with appropriate modifications Technical, operational, financial Functional design, panoramic sketch; Preliminary parametric optimization Studies; ergonomics - human engineering System performance and analysis; computer Modeling and testing Subsystems, components Performance, safety; FAA, CAA requirements Flight testing In the aircraft industry, typical times for major projects are up to fifteen years, depending on complexity, the political climate, and availability of resources. For the phases, typical times are: months to years for conceptual design, six to twenty-four months for preliminary design, one to three years for detailed design, one year and up, depending on unforeseen contingencies, for prototype testing 5-31 5.3.4.3 Industrial OperationsIndustrial operations merge into business organization and planning. See 5.4.2.4 for related considerations. The typical industrial operations are: Entrepreneurship Management Design and related activities Construction and fabrication Production Operation and maintenance Auxiliary Design and Related Management Activities Information gathering and synthesis Invention [ties in with research] Long-term market analysis Pure research Oriented research Applied research Development Design System and product Production system and control Design study Development of design methods - research-management function Management of design See 5.2, 5.3.5, and 5.4.2 Allocation of resources over all phases and levels of operation and design 5-32 5.3.4.4 Business Organization, Planning and Management245Planning and management are applied in business and corporations. However, much of the principles of planning and management are applicable to other fields: education, professional and trade systems, policy-economic, social, environmental, resource... public decision making and politics. Similarly, principles from other arenas can be employed in business; e.g. principles of appropriateness of scale, public ownership, democratic management. None of this is to imply the necessity of business or its management. Such questions would be considered as part of public policy Management Functions for Business Board of Directors Executive function Marketing Distribution Production Finance Business ethics Strategic planning; time and planning [see comment, p 5-11] Planning and policy Strategy, operations and innovation The functions can be adapted to non-production businesses as well as non-business operations 5-33 5.3.4.5 Technology and Technological SystemsThe two fundamental aspects are: use of technology-development and design of technological systems [the first includes and interacts with the second]; outline: Technology and scientific policy ...On use and development - an aspect of public-social policy [see 5.3.4.6] Technology: resource transformation and use originally in the sense of material and energy resources; broadened to include life, society and culture, information, knowledge. This brief concept of technology is value free except as far as technology itself is a value or disvalue Use of technology for development of military and economic objectives including power Conservation - in a broad sense includes wisdom in the transformation and use of resources, recognition of values of existential and material balance, and balance of material and existential dimensions. Includes human, life and environmental values Development and design of technological systems Policies and management of development [see 5.3.4.4, 6] Technique and art Research; development Technical design Elements246 Complete systems - current and future, “values” Evolved systems Fields Engineering Comment: Correlate the fields of technology with engineering disciplines; employ redefinition if necessary 5-34 5.3.4.6 Social Systems and Institutions: Global, Environmental and Human Concerns: Toward Complete Specification of PlanningInstitutions grow in this process; and there is an effect from global to national to regional and local levels Planning occurs at two levels: rational and mythic [see discussions Areas 3, 4]. The rational level has been outlined in previous areas within 5.1-2. These include: Economic choice Public choice [political process] Ethical choice Social choice Incremental planning Developmental planning Evolutionary planning: includes all above, integrated At the mythic level knowledge, planning serve bonding functions. The entire culture is selected, actual cultures have both features, and clear-cut distinction is not possible. Mythic includes rational without institutionalizing it; rational serves mythic function - even when it “is” rational. Rational planning merges into the mythic level with evolutionary planning. This merger starts with the social process: Awareness --> knowledge and value --> design and planning --> implementation and control evaluation --> feedback --> awareness This process incorporates concept formation, conceptual review and performance review. The entire cultural process is subject to selection and arises out of prior evolution. As stated previously [5.3.1] and in 5.3.5, it will be valuable to “derive” this process from evolution. Note the simpler version of the process: action --> evaluation --> knowledge --> design --> action, or awareness --> knowledge --> design --> action --> awareness These processes complete the “modeling” of choice 5-35 Areas of Policy Formation and Decision-Making: Social, Global, and Environmental Political - public decision making: levels, modes and alternatives Level Global UN Tran governmental: United World Organization247 National Mode Democratic process and or ...Policy and planning organizations Policy
areas248 - economic, legal, political,
social, urban and regional. Economic Legal, political Social, urban Environmental, resource Land, air, water, space Energy, matter, life, social-cultural, information, knowledge and learning Under the best circumstances needs of society and individuals are met by the same rather than conflicting arrangements. Individuals need stability and freedom. Society requires structure and innovation. The correct amount of order provides structure for society and stability for individuals; the right amount of variability provides freedom for individuals and innovation [due to recombination and as a consequence of innovation] for society, both individual and society require a balance of variability and order and there may be compatible arrangements, as a consequence of co-evolution, satisfying both sufficiently or optimally 5-36 Outline of a Complete Set of Areas and Needs for Design: Planning Matrix I have noted the dimensions of human existence on many occasions and especially in Personal Design. There are Natural [biological and material] Social Inner [psychological - of the psyche] Universal. These levels also define a number of levels of being. Each level of being has - or may have - needs corresponding to the dimensions of existence as indicated below. All needs should be cared for - by planning or in evolution.
Figure 2 A Planning Matrix Showing Needs The concept of this situation can be simplified - reduced - from a four by four to a two by two matrix by equating: Natural = Natural and Social, Existential = Inner and Universal 5-36-1 5.3.4.6.1 Levels of global-social planningUniversal Global National Regional Local Group...includes kin groups Individual 5-37 5.3.5 Sciences of Design and Problem Solving: Formalizing Creativity and Evaluation of Design and PrioritiesExtent to which design can be reduced to science; rationalization within artifactual contexts; science of design as an element of design and social process Design here is design of method, not of knowledge Herbert A. Simon251 has claimed that design can be reduced to a science. Insofar as certain technical questions are concerned and to the degree of accuracy obtaining in relation to such questions, reduction to “science” is possible. Generally, such reduction is neither desirable, nor possible, in my opinion. We would need to communicate with all levels of evolution and to be able to control these - to an accuracy within the inherent stability of the evolved levels - to have a science of design. Further, we would feel the reduction of all levels of our being appropriate. In general, we, humankind, do not feel such reduction appropriate. The origins of such feeling find basis: in the reality of our evolutionary past, and this past has “successfully” negotiated several futures; in evaluations of the power of rational-empirical means, and such evaluations are based in rational and other dimensions of personality and psychology; in the existence of vast territories of unknown in our futures [carefully concealed by human artifactual systems - physical and symbolic]; in the potential need for fundamentally novel responses to such unknown; as expression of our full and varied natures: these bases are not exclusive Simon's work includes a response to such criticism and opposition. His work admits of the bounded nature of rationality and this finds reflection in approximation in mathematical description of criteria-values and objectives. Further his description of such objectives allows for varying levels of aspiration; i.e., for inclusion of the subjective, feeling, emotive aspects of human nature and their influence on motivation. I would argue in two ways in response to this: [1] it is incomplete. It does not include account of all human levels of being, nor all dimensions of reality; nor does it include the demands of real time [such may be, at least potentially, incorporated as in interactive design [p 5-22]]. [2] Approximation of objectives is admission of inadequacy unless it can be shown that such approximation is within the inherent stability of systems being designed. This must be determined rationally or empirically. I have not found the provision of such rational treatment, as an a priori [i.e., independent of the specifics of the design or class of designs concerned], in the literature, and empirical treatment that is evolutionary. Further, the existence of fluctuating levels of aspiration is not tantamount to an analysis of such levels in general, even if certain species [of aspiration] or certain aspects can be reduced - in whole, or in part - to, say, economic categories over individuals and or populations 5-38 However, I do believe that there is a science of design which is a codification and quantification [where possible and appropriate] of the learning in method and knowledge for design. Such a science forms a complement to other factors which are not under the purview, control, or awareness of the designer: these other factors include the limitations which arise because [1] the designer's rational faculty, including enhancement by computational, technical and personnel resources, is an incomplete element of the whole set of faculties of understanding, and [2] as an individual the designer - or design group - cannot be completely responsible for decision and control and action It should also be recognized that society is, in certain senses, artifactual. This enables the rationalization [in a valid sense, as well as invalid senses] and rational understanding of certain elements of process within this artifactual framework. However the framework itself is not completely rational or rationalized [in the same valid sense of constructed through rationality - or partially so constructed]. This discussion repeats the content of some comments on p 5-37 Thus, science of design is an element of design and process but does not provide the whole picture. To those who love adventure, and the unknown - even if they fear it as they love it - this is fortunate. This orientation is an expression of the essentiality of unknown elements of our environmental universe 5-39 One of the sources for the following list of topics is Simon's work. However, I have made significant additions and modifications. The major classifications - Areas A to E below; the whole of areas A, B, and E; basis of design and design values-objectives in evolution; the discussion of sub-optimization in item 7; area D.2 - are new Further Modifications Necessary Before outlining the topics, I will mention some changes that seem desirable: 1. The optimization should be more complete with respect to: Multiple interest Dynamic behavior Interaction among and with regard to Elements of process Need [thought-in-action] Real time Basis of choice Ethics Aesthetics Economics Incremental Developmental Evolutionary 2. Incorporation into social process, social and other evolution through Design as an element of social process Origin and nature of values and objectives Origin of knowledge, design, action, evaluation and feedback as separate elements of human nature and social process: in human252 and social evolution 5-40 5.3.5.1 Area A. Modes of Analysis253Cognition, affect, feeling. Origin of cognition and affect in feeling. Priority of quality. Original of quantity in quality: quantity as a species of quality. A priori, organismic and relational basis. Evolutionary basis. General schemes describing and analyzing systems in which quality is not reducible to even vector quantity, and vector “ordering” is not reducible to scalar ordering. Mathematics and logic of non-quantitative analysis. Symbolic treatment When can variables be quantified? Extension of the symbolic at various levels of specificity to questions of analysis [behavior], value and decision [choice]: deterministic, probabilistic, and ambiguous 3. Expression and modes of expression The content, types and divisions of knowledge 5-41 5.3.5.2 Area B254 Analysis of Systems“System[s] analysis” has many meanings. Here it refers to analysis of complex systems by transformation of their symbolic representation. Transformations are: expressive, linguistic, logical, mathematical, schematic ... Rules or schemes of transformation are representations of behavior or natural law: a priori and empirical. Systems of expression and transformation [Å items 3 and 4] provide knowledge Simply, system analysis is modeling of complex systems - holistically [as in item G] or by reduction to components 5. Component analysis and analysis of the scientific categories Modeling of simple components, or populations behaving as components. Physical [mechanical, thermal, optical, acoustical, electromagnetic, nuclear,...: classical, quantum, relativistic], chemical, biological, human, social, ... behaviors. Analysis as in item 4, above 6. Empirical and statistical analysis Analysis of systems and components by testing and interpretation of data. Input-output analysis 5-42 5.3.5.3 Area C. Evaluation7. Theory of evaluation. Basis in evolution and philosophy of value. Optimization vs. sub-optimization: synchronic vs. diachronic systems Value theory, utility theory; see item I, p 5-39, for modes of choice [basis], combinations [multiple interest255] and interactions. Statistical decision theory and optimal controls: classes of such theory corresponding to item I [p 5-39]. Treatment of affect and other “non”-cognitive aspects of human behavior. Quantification and other ways to symbolize objects and concepts Basis in evolution and origins. [See 3.5.3, 3.5.6, Introduction to 4, 4.1, 5.3.1, and comments under item II, p 5-39.] Much work is possible here. Objectivity256 in values has dual basis in: selection, unknown future-human nature [and nature of environment], philosophy of value [3.5.3] Comments on optimization vs. sub-optimization in a synchronic system - one that is, can be, designed from scratch - design is optimal design. In evolutionary-diachronic systems, in which adaptation occur by building upon existing structure, design is subsystem optimization. For complex systems, this is often true for artifactual design - until power of analysis is sufficient Approximate expression of symbolized-quantified value. Techniques for deducing optimal set[s] and element[s]: a. Algorithms for a variety of situations, b. Algorithms and heuristics for choosing satisfactory alternatives Imperative-modal logic vs. declarative logic. Appropriate classes of logic. Cases of very large and or ambiguously defined problem space 5-43 5.3.5.4 Area D. Problem Solution5.3.5.4.1 Area D.1 Search for and Generation of AlternativesFactorization [planning] and means-end analysis as two basic approaches. Includes large and ambiguous problem spaces. Generation ...For search and information gathering 12. Theory of systems with structure ...And implications for design organization. Complex systems. Hierarchy, weak interactions.257 13. General and evolutionary analysis of creativity Nature and development are not independent. Development = development of genetic possibility in response to environmental and cultural influence; also development = biological and learning. [Also items 8, 5.2.4 and 5.4.2.4.2.] 14. Representation of design problems Similar to item 4: design and solution oriented. Value of representations, types of representation: taxonomy of representations: Expressive, symbolic [see 4.2.2] Linguistic, logical, mathematical Spatial Plans, three-dimensional models Flow-charts, programs for problems involving actions 5-44 5.3.5.4.2 Area D.2 Problem Solving for Complex SystemsFundamental problems arise in describing, experimenting258 with, analyzing, and problem solving for complex systems. Systems may be complex in the following senses: For description, analysis, partitioning into subsystems may be essential. This is a function of the describer relative to the described. Complexity of description needed at one level [e.g., material] is a function of choices at other levels or, sometimes, of imperatives at other levels. This, too, may be a function of perception and value. However, if we consider organic evolution we find partitioning of function. Not all partitioning is merely an artifact of human thinking. Thus partitioning is not mere dissection or reduction but the realization that a unitary description is inadequate: systems have complexity. Even when unitary description is not possible, unified description may be possible through introduction of adequate interactions to model significantly holistic behavior. Another way of saying this is that the significant interactions should be included Partitioning and representation are rarely unique. However alternative partitions or representations may be equivalent. This is, in fact, one test of the consistency of such partition and representation Full partitioning, or full quantification or partitioning may be impossible or undesirable Analysis may be difficult or impossible owing to complexity of analytical models supposedly required for adequate analysis. Empirical study may be difficult or impossible owing to vastness, sensitivity, power of control, analytical complexity and so on; e.g., social systems cannot be isolated, social “experiments” can not be repeated under many circumstances. Yet some [empirical] science is possible: [1] there may be some repetition under similar circumstances and observation can replace control, [2] through incremental and related approaches of planning [developmental, iterative, evolutionary...] In cases where description, representation, partitioning, analysis, and empirical treatment are incomplete, full control must be relinquished The scope of the problem is such that values are not clear. For example, economic values derived in one context may be invalid in other ones. Similar considerations exist with regard to ethical, moral, aesthetic, varietals, action, adventives, inventive and other values and the interchangeability or substitutability of these values Again and for similar reasons, full control must be relinquished. Further, in the case of incomplete valuation [many significant cases] full control is undesirable. In such cases, insofar as control is desirable, planning is: incremental, developmental, feedback, iterative, and evolutionary. These include potential creation of values in art, imagination, and poetry 5-45 Having discussed some of the sources of difficulty and approaches to resolution for complex systems, I now review, tentatively, in outline: Analysis, problem solving for complex systems; iterative-evolutionary problem solving Analysis and problem solving are similar in that goals can be treated as analytic conditions. [See also p 5-14 “Generate alternatives.”] Description and concept formation Partitioning [non-unique] Hierarchization [and subsystem specification] Examples: in social science: factor analysis, indices; in physical Science: discretization, modal analysis Priority partitioning Autonomizaiton [suppression of design of evolved characteristics] Quantification Deterministic, stochastic, and ambiguous understanding and models Non-quantitative behavior Concept formation, analysis and problem solving when control [or understanding or computational capacity] is incomplete Evolutionary treatment: iterative, incremental, developmental with feedback Planning [partitioning] Enhanced by low interaction levels End means Action and feedback Analysis, such as is possible in these circumstances, is a guide rather than an imperative. Therefore, education in distinctions between guiding vision and imperative vision is needed Value free knowledge259 5-46 Comments on Empirical and Rational Elements 1. Inclusion of rational and empirical elements The focus here is not on rational design or in empirical design or in a comparison of rational and empirical design. Rather, the focus is on appropriate inclusion of both rational and empirical elements 2. Interaction of rational and empirical elements. Origin in the real In the total process of understanding and design, rational and empirical elements enter at overall and sub-process levels. Both enter into the translation from “reality” to representation: in this, empirical activity has its rational aspect. Rationality enters as coherence and consistency in symbolic representations and transformation of such representations such as arise out of logic and natural law. Empirical activity conditions this process at three levels: in the specific behavior of specific systems, in the formulation of natural law and in the criticism and formulation of consistency and logical transformation. Even if, in the last case, the empirical element is hidden or wrapped up with linguistic or prelinguistic development. Thus rationality has, is conditioned with, and interacts with empirical elements. We wish to understand: as far as is appropriate, the interaction of rational and empirical elements at various levels, and in various spheres, of activity; and the origin of these systems in the real Rationality enters design through the use of knowledge as an information base and as method: science of design. Here again the empirical element enters: to the extent that science and knowledge have basis in empirical activity: knowledge, too, has basis in empirical, rational [and other cognitive, affective] activity 4. Empirical elements in design Empirical elements enter design directly in the traditional ways: experimentally for those systems that submit easily to experiment and through observation. Incremental, developmental, feedback and evolutionary approaches for complex and or sensitive systems. Such approaches are also applicable to systems for which rational and controlled experimental analysis is possible. In such cases, the question of balance is relevant: “science” vs. evolution. Of course, as an example of previous discussion, science is evolutionary and such evolution includes, or may include, elements of science. To the extent that empirical elements are included there is lack of rational control; to the extent that such elements are evolutionary there is lack of human control. Such “lacks” are not deficits but are appropriate 5. Unity of rational and empirical analysis in both knowledge and design We have seen, in areas 3 and 4, the unity of rational and empirical analysis in knowledge. We see this unity again, in design. This is natural for there is analogy and continuity between knowledge and design at one level: objective design. At another level: social process, evolutionary and incremental-developmental design, knowledge is included 5-47 as an element which, as a whole, is subject to elements of rational and empirical construction and criticism. Perhaps humankind is passing into a post knowledge-information phase in which the whole process: awareness --> knowledge and value --> design and planning --> action --> evaluation --> feedback and its interactions are regarded as fundamental. The lack of such a transition hitherto may be due to the operation of the whole process at a mythic level. In this situation of incomplete [relative to the possible and desirable] understanding, and in transition from mythic culture to such understanding, it is probable [and historical] that we would have: [A] substitutions of elements of process: knowledge-rationality-empiricism-designandplanning-action-evaluation for process and [B] repressive and violent returns to full institutionalization of mythic knowledge 6. Distribution of design and intelligence is consistent with phases and modes of process The empirical, evolutionary elements of design and planning are enhanced by distribution of “effort” as opposed to centralization. Further, such elements are enhanced, as is decentralized activity, by curbs on interaction. Centralization of design is the optimal “solution” corresponding to a single omniscient [all knowing] and omnipotent [all controlling] designer. For design with limited rational power, distribution of effort is valuable: more opportunities for solution, less catastrophic consequences of failure. These considerations are in addition to economies and diseconomies of centralization and decentralization: scale. Complete decentralization is the optimal solution corresponding to absence of rationality and control. Witness, in biological evolution, the emergence of centralized nervous control [over autonomic action] 7. Optimum distribution of effort, of degree of centralization and control The optimum for human society is some sort of mean260 and variety of levels of control. Considerations in this context are [A] general optimum levels of central vs. distributed “effort” [note the biological analog: awareness --> knowledge --> ...], [B] hierarchies of centralization and distribution and gradation of degrees of control [again, a biological analog], [C] necessities of centralization arising out of global levels of interaction - and resolution of related problems, vs. values of centralization arising out of sharing of material and human resources and economies of scale vs. disvalues of centralization arising out of catastrophe of failure, unwieldiness and diseconomies of scale and corruptions and temptations of centralized power resolutions, [D] different degrees of centralization for different activities and resources, and [E] questions of controls for levels of decentralization These considerations apply to knowledge and processes of knowing and may also learn from knowledge 5-48 9. Derivation of incremental, developmental approaches These approaches may be regarded as derived: Step 1: Apply rational planning Step 2: Ethical choice - specification is incomplete Step 3: Go back in the evolutionary development of rationality and value - this implies incremental planning. Planning by trial is inefficient Step 4: Synthesis: rationality, valuation and trial; selection by [1] rationality and value, [2] performance, [3] cultural selection: developmental, evolutionary planning as an element of [cultural] evolution Step 5: Incorporate the model: Steps 1 --> 5, as an element of rational process It is clear that rational and empirical knowledge has a valid domain that is also useful in the context of some of the fundamental and derived values of human life. It is equally clear that this knowledge has a variety of limits. I refer to the epistemic and predictive side of knowledge. This appears from the incompleteness of rational planning. [For purposes of discussion here, rational includes empirical, except where this is clearly not intended.] In the face of unpredicted events, rationality can act only incrementally. It might be argued that the limitations of rationality are not inherent, that we have only to wait - on the physical side - for understanding to become complete. On the human side, it might be argued that the limitations are due to elements of human irrationality and not due to limitation of rationality. It only remains to persuade humans to be rational. However, the only empirical basis for rational and empirical planning is the world of human behavior and of unpredicted physical events. Further, rational and empirical thought have been repeatedly shown to have limitations in the discovery of logical and other paradoxes and in scientific revolutions. While there is rational empirical knowledge, it is not complete One of the key themes of this work, elaborated in a number of 5-48-1 of locations, especially in this preceding discussion, is that there are a number of levels of evolution and design by trial and error which supplement rational thought: indeed all aspects of human psyche which influence human behavior, for there is no reason to suppose that feelings, emotions, symbols, and such provide a foolproof basis for behavior, any more than does cognition and rationality. The humanists and rationalists are both wrong, both deceived by the artifactual structure and reality of human society, into believing that their preferred aspect of human psychology is without limitation as a base for decision. I am not asserting that no humanists or rationalists recognize limits Through trial, psyche [cognition, emotion] and process can merge in the following judgment: There are limitations on the infallibility of human decisions relative to values and limitations to values as guides; there are two approaches to this situation: [1] acceptance, [2] entry into evolution - which includes acceptance Evolutionary planning tacitly accepts mythic elements and provides an overall “system” rationality Therefore, we need not hesitate to accept mythic-symbolic elements in our decisions: provided we do not confuse mythic symbols [the explicit ones - we cannot avoid the implicit ones], with the rational in those situations in which we choose to accept as worthwhile, the goal to which the rational effort is directed, and the validity [including the lack of influence of non-specified factors] of the rational thought and its premises. It is true that we run risk of confusing the mythic and the rational. This works equally to the detriment of both. The larger risk is the exclusion of either the rational or the mythic I am interested in syntheses, explicit and implicit, of the rational and the mythic, by any appropriate-valid method including the evolutionary one of pp. 5-46-48 5-49 5.3.5.5 Area E. Open problems in science of design5.3.5.5.1 Problems outlined in 5.3.5Levels, and integration; evolution Centralization and distribution: political, geographic, and temporal Hierarchic and priority levels Affect and other dimensions of human nature; inclusion Non-human dimensions Design within and without social artifact Limitations of science having origin in artifact Modifications on p 5-39 Problems of areas §§1.3.5.1 - 1.3.5.4 [pp. 5-40-43] Organization and realization 5.3.5.5.2 Transformation of General Problems of Design to ScienceTo what extent is this possible and or desirable. Refer to 5.6.1 for general problems 5-50 5.3.6 A Classification of Application AreasIn area 5.3.4.6, I presented a set of planning areas. This was based on a set of dimensions of being. Each dimension can interact with itself or any other dimension in producing an area of “need” for which design may be possible. Thus, we obtain a matrix of planning and design areas. The vantage points in formulating the dimensions of being were characterized [A] by their generality and [B] by being from the point of view of human experience. Item [B] cannot be entirely eliminated. At least in my present understanding, nor is it desirable to do so. This is not to limit future possibilities. The purpose here is to provide a more detailed description of the dimensions of existence This will lead to a more detailed planning matrix. Explicit formulation of such a matrix is unnecessary at this point. Planning may proceed as follows: as each level is planned, appropriate interactions are included. A T --> D [top --> down] process may be used: Step 1: Planning areas generated in 5.3.4.6; Step 2: planning areas generated by the level of detail to be considered below. An aspect of planning design may be to specify “active” elements of the planning matrix Bases for the dimension of existence, and detailed description have been provided in this and in early works All areas of knowledge may be designed for. [See Area 4.] A classification of such areas is implied by evolution [see 2.6, 3.5, Introduction to 4, 4.1, 4.3-4, and 5.3.3.1]. As pointed out earlier, prior levels imply constraints for subsequent ones. This is one reason for co-consideration of planning levels and areas.261 The other is the strong interaction and need for balance among the dimensions of existence, from individual and social-global viewpoints. As pointed out earlier,262 proper function is a mutual enhancement, not conflict, of individual and group 5-51 5.3.6.1 Planning Levels - ConstraintsFirst in evolution comes a set of four levels that provide constraints but are not otherwise interactive factors in material level design and planning. These levels may, however, be interactive factors at other levels and may become interactive at the material level in the future. These four levels are: Universal Cosmological Galactic Solar and solar system These are the scientific-empirical expressions c. 2000 AD of the universal levels of existence. At such a level of conceptual and cosmic vastness, such description, scientific or other, can only pretend to completion. Other descriptions made by appeal to intuition and imagination may be sources of knowledge through the provision of the possible and the potential, as can also be provided by the rational when it is not slave to empiricism. It should also be pointed out that whereas science is an excellent provider of knowledge, there is a close extrapolation from the empirical; its proof as an element of adaptation is by no means certain; this applies equally to all human faculties These levels co-evolve with the structure and nature of matter, radiation and energy, which are fundamental to, at least, the material and energy aspects of global planning levels The four known [1987] fundamental physical forces of nature and their co-evolution with: the large-scale structure of the universe; the fundamental constituents of matter; elementary particles Atomic nuclei and nuclear reactions; atomic structure. Chemical elements, compounds and reactions; nuclear and chemical energy Matter in bulk; solid, liquid, gas, plasma states; bulk descriptions of matter and radiation: heat and thermodynamics, continuum descriptions and treatments, chemical and nuclear species 5-52 5.3.6.2 Planning Levels - Constraints and interactions for which control is possibleThe next set of levels are increasingly interactive materially and culturally, and expressive of human “nature”: Global Environmental and natural: cosmic, solar and geological influences on global change and balance; equilibrium. Self-regulating elements Permissible fluctuations and transitions; climate and the eco-biosphere Resources: Consumable and renewable Environmental - Land, air, water, space Material, energy, biological and psychological or mental-conscious Social Public sphere: social organization Cultural263 Religion Art Learning Discovery, synthesis and transition: Academic and educational systems Political: decision making, execution and control Political and legal aspects Economic: origin, production, distribution and use of wealth International, national and regional: macroeconomics Production and distribution Goods and services Technology and technological systems Industrial operations System and product Subsystem ...component Human labor and distribution of income Consumer market: pricing and distribution Private sphere Relations among individuals Individual Universal264 5-53 5.3.7 Examples of Design and Planning Activities...Towards a Complete and Structured SetThis list is a supplement to the information and design and planning levels in 5.3.3-4, especially 5.3.4.6, 5.3.6, and scattered throughout areas 3, 4 and 5. Information is repeated to make the list relatively complete, but full completeness is not the objective. The list reflects the structure of area 5.3.3.1, 5.3.4.6 and 5.3.6, but not fully; for those structures are in process of improvement. The objective here is to provide basis for further work in design and planning in which a relatively complete and structured set of methodic procedures, planning and design levels and areas, and problems will be provided. These problems will be supplemented by solutions, proposed solutions, and work toward solutions, [A] as contributions in the significant problems, and [B] as examples 5-54 5.3.7.1 Global Planning and DesignUnited Nations; League of Nations; other supranational coalitions; learning from errors of the past-design of international government: trans-governmental organizations; government of, by and for the peoples of the world: infra-government [sublevels: p 5-36-1]; “United World Government” as an alternative to the United Nations which has its economic and power base in national governments and not in peoples; basis in local reliance: alternative government: government as conversation: bilateral government Must be rooted in understanding and reformation of economic [includes military] and charismatic [includes elements of politics and law] sources of power and sources of inertia. Economic sources require, equally, a resource base and a population locked into and committed into the production of economic values. In “wealthy” nations the consumer-demand both justifies and necessitates economic means as the source of meaning and so, as a source of power. Charismatic sources of power are based in imbalance in emphasis in dimensions of [human] being and are rooted, in part, in economics as meaning and power. Inertia can be traced to imbalances: within, among these dimensions, and among peoples Change must be rooted in reformation of all sectors of society, not merely of government: political and legal, economic, cultural and learning [discovery, synthesis and transmission-education] so as to reflect the constraints of proper balance within and across all dimensions of existence and all peoples. Force of reason and compassion requires search for alternative forms that will respect such balances. Thus we seek: Alternatives in: Politics, justice and law; economics; cultural and learning aspects and institutions Balances265 to be considered are: Within and among: dimensions266 of existence; peoples; Material-natural: populations, needs and resources Social: structure for stability, levels of centralization; societal function; provision of human needs Inner: freedom as a source of creative potential; dignity and equity Universal: as a condition of creative potential in face of the unknown 5-55 1. Problems of needs and expression There are problems of needs and expression, and balance in the basic dimensions as discussed above. [See also personal design, and p 5-36; refer to modern engineering under world order.] See 3.5.7: fundamental problems of humankind; 3.5.6 basis in evolution.267 Nuclear disarmament, war, arms production and flow Global population; agriculture and food Resource protection and policy: environmental, wilderness: “New” attitudes to the environment268 Social design as balance between structural and human needs; Proper design is mutually enhancing Poverty of symbols 5-56 5.3.7.2 Social Planning and Design...General: see 5.3.7.1 Awareness --> knowledge and value --> design --> action --> evaluation and feedback This concept has been known for a long time and is found in Vedanta. For awareness see 5.5; for the remaining elements: appropriate areas of this work; also for knowledge and design: below, for knowledge: 5.4.3 ...Areas 3, 4, 5 Learning: discovery, synthesis and transmission-education; the process is dynamic; design of academic and educational systems Knowledge systems [area 4.2]; knowledge for design [pp. 4-37, 40-41, 4.2.4.4.] Structure of knowledge, philosophy at center: driven by evolution, change; organization [3.5.6, p 4-38, 4.2-4.] Method Philosophy: 3.4.3 Knowledge, science: 3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.5.6, and 4 Design [design of design and planning]: this work, specifically 5, especially 5.1.1, 5.2.3, 5.3.3-4 Fine tuning in design: p 4-11 Management: 5.2.3, 5.3.2 Social planning, public policy Structure of the major social and cultural institutions Art and religion; value Resource planning and development Urban, rural planning; architecture [also as a profession] Social benefit systems Social delivery systems; health care Planning for technological development; appropriate technology Emergency systems: earthquake, flood, and other hazard Emergency medical systems 5-57 Professions [includes professional decision making; careers; quality, manpower] Planning, education, architecture, law, business, theology, engineering, medicine, public administration Problems: redefine according to social, other functions; nature of professions...design? Trades, services [see Professions note] Essential needs and functions; balance between self-reliance and import and export; appropriate scales to meet needs of all dimensions of existence; internal production of economic values as strength; inner and universal values in unlocking from excess dependence on economic value; proper understanding of needs; special problems of small communities in industrialized nations: United States; special problems of small communities: India; independent community and village design269 5-58 5.3.7.3 Engineering and Technology. ProfessionsModern engineering is an example of a profession. For systematization, refer to design, modern engineering, the background to these; discussions of organization of knowledge in Areas 4.2, 5.4.2, p 5-59 Technology, 20th century trends, learning and the professions, engineering Technology [4.3.2.4] is know how in the use and transformation of resources; engineering is the use and development of such know how and of technical systems. The traditional resources are material and energy - including agriculture. Engineering included the physical and chemical aspects of such resources. The science of technology, then, included the engineering sciences and the agricultural sciences [which are separate from agricultural engineering, the application of materials and energy-systems technology to agriculture]. Of course, engineering and agriculture included much more than sciences. Design is an art, an applied art, which uses science and art both as information and as method Trends in twentieth century technology include [1] broadening of scope to include: definitely [in 1987] information, aspects of biology-biotechnology and, less definitely, human psychological, social, cultural, learning resources. I refer here, not to the mere application of material, energy and information resources to biological, psychological, and cultural contexts. I am considering an enhancement to include as resources: material, energy, natural [living and environmental], human, psychological, social, cultural and learning [knowledge] elements. Technology is, then, know how in use and transformation of this resource system. The development and use of such know how can be regarded as the province of the professions [in the original sense of learning = knowledge and profession = pure knowledge and applied knowledge]; [2] emphasis on science, the technological sciences There are consequences of this attitude. Learning can be broken down into knowledge [understanding and its methods] and profession [use and transformation of resources and their methods: design]. There is a distinction between “pure learning” [i.e., knowledge] and applied learning [i.e., profession], but the distinction is not clear. Profession includes, but is not and cannot be restricted to, science. Thus, it is incomplete to regard engineering as the science of materials and energy technology. The knowledge needed for engineering is both science and art. Additionally the method of engineering, design [includes research, R and D], involves both science and art. Finally, there is a broadening of the meaning of engineering, in addition to the materials and energy aspect. Engineering includes, definitely, information, human and psychological interactions with complex systems. There is a trend toward a concept of engineering as development of expertise and design for use and transformation of any system regarded as a resource 5-59 Profession Applied knowledge:270 art, science, other Engineering and related fields: definition Learning [content, method] applied to use and transformation Information: knowledge Method: design [includes research, R and D] Engineering and related fields: list The focus will be the traditional one Traditional engineering fields Military, civil, mechanical, mining and petroleum, electrical and electronic, chemical, aerospace Modern-1987-interdisciplinary fields Bionics; systems engineering - large-complex systems design and operations research; cybernetics, control theory and information and communication science, artificial intelligence and digital-logical computation Traditional Technologies271 - elements and fields Elements of technology; the major techniques: energy conversion and utilization; tools and machines; measurement, observation and control; extraction and conversion of raw materials for industry and other application; industrial production processes; biogenetic technology Fields of technology; the major applications: agriculture and food production; major industries and manufacture, fabrication, process, construction, service, utilities]; construction technology; transportation; information processing and communication systems; military technology; technology of the urban community; medical technology; technology of earth and space exploration 5-60 5.3.7.4 Research SystemsContracts, resource development and research planning Contracts, grants, proposals Resource development Research planning [see also p 5-93] 5-61 5.3.7.5 Educational and Learning SystemsPreparing for a course Approaches to teaching CAI project Course outlines Notes, projects, problems, examinations, other materials Engineering text sequence Undergraduate research Graduate research Instructional materials development Careers Career opportunities Selection Education and career planning Job opportunities and search Professional development Design of learning systems, academic institutions, evaluation, and academic leadership Learning is discovery and research, synthesis, education Academic Institutions Schools Trade schools, etc Universities and colleges Practical considerations Symbolic considerations Design and evaluation Management and academic leadership 5-62 5.3.7.6 Individuals and GroupsSee Areas 5.4.1, 5.4.3, and Personal Design ...Dimensions-expressions of being « needs; ... individual and social health is consistent.
Figure 3 Human Needs - Based on Maslow's Hierarchy...Also see Figure 2 A Planning Matrix Showing Needs From this point on in 5.3.7.6 are some considerations of need and expression Basic needs security and natural expression Practical design: a system of practical functions Clothing, gardening, water treatment Housing and transportation - building and maintenance Personal health: physiological, nutrition, activity; psychic Financial design and planning Trip and expedition planning; hiking and camping Wilderness and emergency survival systems 5-63 Groups Counseling Education Career Political commitment and advocacy; campaigning, diplomacy Yogic Systems for Human Development.273 Human = inner, universal; refer to other systems; modern West emphasizes natural and social Karma Yoga: Work Bhakti Yoga: Love Gyana Yoga: Knowledge Raja Yoga: Psychic 5-64 5.4 Some Application Areas: Detailed ConsiderationsThe purpose of this section is to provide a relatively detailed outline of design and planning considerations for some representative application areas. In addition to personal criteria, these areas are selected as providing a range with respect to two criteria of classification: [1] level in hierarchy of inclusiveness, and [2] soft vs. hard systems, i.e., human vs. technical, green vs. gray, etc. The distinction is not to imply a lack of mutuality and interaction. The areas are: 1. Global. Includes human, social, environmental aspects 2. Engineering. Includes engineering design 3. Personal design. Includes the dimensions: natural, social, psychic, and universal 4. Knowledge. Includes nature, structure and organization, method and content 5-65 5.4.1 GLOBAL, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AND PLANNINGAwareness: dimensions - organization, human, natural [material = physical and chemical, biological] and environmental considerations Fundamental problems connected with the dimensions: immediate and continuous; material and existential ... poverty of resources and of symbols Value: needs of [1] individuals, [2] society and organization, [3] environment. Structural needs [basic] vs. needs and values of freedom and expression: variety, space for experiment, meaning and survival. Mutuality of needs of items [1], [2], [3] General knowledge: philosophy, humanities, and religion Specific knowledge: sciences, technology, and structure of social-cultural institutions and dynamics of social process.274 Considerations: all dimensions of each component [5.3.4.6, 5.3.6] should be included; special focus should be given to process [design, social process] and to mutual provision. I next consider: Provision for society, individuals, and environment ...and emphasize that good-healthy design and planning inherently involve mutual provision for needs and opportunities for expression of value and being 5-66 Structure Institutions - economic, legal, political, cultural - learning, art, religion and social: provision for structure, environment, and individual Political process and public policy; contributions of individuals and groups to decisions; mechanisms for provision and “guarantee” of needs of individual, society-social structure [self-perpetuation is not enough], environment Contribution of the free individual Contribution of the environment Freedom Basic needs: material [survival: air, water, dry land; food, shelter, clothing], security, equity, dignity, freedom of movement and expression Education in the dimensions of being and awareness Balance between populations and environment; self-regulating features of populations and environments; regard for self-regulation of the global environment; considerations of regulation and self-regulation for human population[s]: quantity [numbers] and quality [value: appropriateness of resource development and use: new, renewable and natural technologies; appropriate technology] What is good for environment and humankind should be the same: long-term it will be. Considerations include health of environment, humankind, and margin of error; densities to maintain health of population and environment; mechanisms of such maintenance; what has happened - reintroducing regulations and considerations for such regulation: autonomous is preferable by human and holistic value-ethics; openness and freedom in the environment are probably important to humankind and environment Restraints on resource development and use and use rate are desirable, essential; ultimately growth and misuse are self-limiting [through equilibrium, catastrophe or decline]; it is preferable [unless self-destruction is a value], if such self-limitation is not to be catastrophic, that restraint be based in knowledge and understanding 5-67 5.4.1.1 Fundamental ProblemsThe question of the essential problems has been considered a number of times in this work. In one sense, the whole work considers this issue. The Preface, Areas 1-8 individually, and as a whole address this issue. Each area and a number of sub-areas have portions and sub-areas on open and or fundamental problems Section 5.4.1 has considered some basic aspects of the issue of completeness [with regard to dimensions of existence] and balance in global planning. Further considerations are throughout this work, especially in Area 5. Also, see §3.5, especially §§3.5.6 and 3.5.7. The considerations in these sections include content and method 5-68 5.4.2 ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN. PROFESSIONSDefinition is difficult because it takes place in the context of a complex and evolving set of constituencies trying to understand and create a complex and evolving world. Let us try Understanding without specific objectives; there must necessarily be generalized and personal motives The professions Technology275 [1] Systems for transformation and application of material [physical, chemical, biological] and energy states and resources: “the machine” [2] Systems for transforming and applying any type of state or resource: material, energy, human, psychological, social, political, economic. Emphasis on mechanical approach [i.e., routine], but is this essential? [3] Know how for [1] or [2] Engineering275 as a Profession The activity of developing, designing, maintaining technology and technological systems; overlaps science, research, art, meaning [3] of technology. Focus on creation and transformation, and on meanings [1] and [3] as applied to [1] of technology. However, this broadens as knowledge opens abilities to transform through art, experiment and understanding, and not just maintain and codify. Engineering uses knowledge, research, art, expertise, but is not any of these. A central, perhaps the central activity of engineering is design 5-69 Engineering activities [repeated in 5.4.2.3] include: basic and applied research [pure or academic research is not regarded as engineering although it has application; when there is, if ever, a science of discovery there will be an engineering and a technology of knowledge and this exists to some extent in artificial intelligence]; development, design, construction, reduction, operation, management. Design is design as traditionally understood but merges with and includes research, development, and aspects of management 5-70 5.4.2.1 History of EngineeringThe nature and meaning of engineering evolves with society as need, potential and circumstances change and as technical knowledge grows. The Latin root from which engine [verb] is derived is create. Engineering perhaps existed with the Egyptians, Persians, and Greeks. The Roman engineer was concerned with military and civil works. Medieval European engineers combined military and civil skills and carried construction [e.g., the Gothic arch] to heights unknown to the Romans. Similar developments occurred in India and the Far East Modern - since the 17th Century In the seventeenth century, military engineering grew in France; the growth of modern [twentieth century] engineering dates back to this development The first branch of modern engineering to emerge was civil engineering. This grew out of civil applications of military techniques of construction of seventeenth century France; the term “civil engineer” first came into use in the eighteenth century. Other branches of modern engineering are: mechanical engineering which grew out of the industrial revolution-related development of machines and energy of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; electrical engineering, made possible by mechanical technology and growth of electrical knowledge, and with applications in energy and lighting in the late nineteenth century; chemical engineering which started with the late nineteenth century proliferation of chemical processes in metallurgy, food, textiles, etc.; and mineral and mining [and later petroleum] engineering which has a long and, originally, independent history, dates back to the mining schools of the eighteenth century. These five branches, civil, mechanical, electrical, chemical and mining are the core of modern engineering Twentieth century development includes [1] increasing use of science and quantitative and mathematical analysis in design and development, [2] development of technology and development as a growth factor; i.e., a technology of technological development regarding large scale industrial and academic research organizations dating back to the inventors of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, with application to invention and rapid development of very complex systems. This development is dependent on the rapid feedback between science and technology 5-71 dating back to the practices of the nineteenth century inventors, [3] development of electronics, computer-information processing and communications industry, [4] expansion of scope of concerns due to increasing interaction [in part a function of modern university organization and entrepreneurship] and sophistication of engineering as a discipline: into research [and the hierarchy of research and design functions] as an engineering activity, interface and application in social-environmental concerns bringing the environment and “soft” fields [human, social] within engineering activity [earlier important as interface with buyers and promoters and workers]; incorporation of art in engineering endeavor [a long established tradition in civil and architectural works but often neglected in the name of efficiency and government sponsorship]; a mesh with and inclusion of concern for public policy, [5] a proliferation of disciplines deriving from interest in new environments [ocean, cold regions, space and space exploration], and specialization due to expansion of opportunity [agriculture, aerospace], [6] an engineering of industrial and production systems [industrial engineering] and human interactions [human engineering: ergonomics, systems psychology, safety engineering], [7] bio-engineering disciplines [biomechanical, biomedical], bionics, and biogenetic engineering and nano-technology 5-72 5.4.2.2 TrendsEngineering and other Professions Thus engineering starts as the idea “transformation and application of material and energy resources” [based in arts and physical science] and expands, of necessity, to include much more. While a core, traditional meaning of engineering continues to exist and thrive, there is also a generalized meaning of engineering emerging as a type of creative, transforming activity. This comes, naturally, from the traditional fields and the new ones such as artificial intelligence and understanding of imperatives of finite environments and resources and understanding of necessities and possibilities of evolution at many levels. Relevant words are engineering, creation, genesis, design, evolutionary design, choice, and decision, and are not used to the exclusion of the full dimensions of existence in nature, society, individual persons, and the unknown A Classification of the Professions Regarding professions as applied knowledge, we can regard engineering as creative transformation of resources. Other professions involved in similar activity are education and planning. This point and classification of the professions deserves further attention. I can make the following tentative classifications: Engineering, education, planning and architecture Conservation276 Theology, medicine, law Business 5-73 5.4.2.3 Engineering ActivitiesSome of the activities in the traditional core of engineering are: basic and applied research, development, design, construction, production, operation and maintenance, management. This sequence corresponds to a decrease in the emphasis on science [i.e., science of engineering systems; modern management often relies on a science of management systems] Descriptions can be developed for the different categories - basic and applied research, development, and so on All [universal] activity can be divided: Activity = design [includes affect and motivation] and action And in this sense Design and implementation Research, development, design, and management Construction, production, and operation and maintenance Also, note the close, but not exact, parallel: Knowledge --> applied knowledge --> design and planning --> implementation --> control --> evaluation Basic and applied research --> development --> design --> construction --> operation --> management 5-74 5.4.2.4 Engineering DesignDesign as the Central Activity of Engineering We see from the discussion of 5.4.2.3 that design occupies the center of engineering activities as do design and planning occupy the center of social process. This is also true in the sense of importance; for [1] design is the focal point where all activities come together and are played out in microcosm, [2] design includes research, development, management just as in social process, design and planning include awareness, philosophy, knowledge and values, evaluation; further, design applies to specific end results such as a production or a functional system, and also to the processes or means to obtain the end, i.e., design applied to construction, production, operation and maintenance. In other words, these activities are designed. For example, it is prudent to include considerations of construction, production, operation and maintenance in design for function. Design for function is central to design. Finally, design is a reflexive activity - it applies to itself, [3] design includes the transition between thinking and action The concept and methods of design have been elaborated generally as a central theme of this work, and outlined, specifically, in areas 5.1-3. Therefore, the discussion of concept and method here can be brief as concerns generalities. I will discuss four aspects in the specific context of engineering design: 1. Process, 2. Creativity, 3. Tools, 4. Elements An excellent review article277 on engineering design contains a valuable overview of design, general design tools and methods and a good set of references. Some of the aspects and tools discussed are: the activity of design; decision theory; system design; cybernetics; 5-75 human and engineering communication; ergonomics; industrial design; computer aided design; man-the designer or human problem solving and knowledge and values; creativity; economics and cost; design management 5-76 5.4.2.4.1 The process of design and its contextAs pointed out in 5.4.2.4, p 5-74, the concept and method of design have already been elaborated. In 5.1 and 5.2 we saw how there is a mesh with social [social, biological] need through value and active problem solving. In 5.3, we saw the mesh through a hierarchy of design levels. This hierarchy also includes the process of system --> subsystem analysis and design. This point was elaborated in 5.3.5. Also touched upon in 5.2.5 and elsewhere, is the inclusion of evolutionary constraint and diversity-variety, rationality and empiricism, incremental, developmental and evolutionary [including trial and error] approaches One of the points implicit in these discussions is that all relevant considerations should be built in to the design and not be introduced later. These include: Social; general Safety, aesthetic, value-ethical, economic, legal, political, Environmental Functional Manufacture [includes construction, production] Use cycle [includes operation, maintenance] Development [includes research and management aspects] I have pointed out that all valid considerations are functional at some level of design and planning. Process, at appropriate levels, includes management of design and design of design 5-77 5.4.2.4.2 CreativityCreativity is often thought of as generation of novelty, but has to do with both generation and selection of alternatives; and the interaction of generation and selection; and in effective use of design resources. This has all been discussed in detail earlier, and in 5.1-3. Creativity understood in this sense, is at a number of levels and has a number of dimensions Systems, technologies, methods, knowledge, elements available in society Methods of generating and selecting alternatives; includes algorithms - methods which guarantee solutions but, possibly, in a prohibitively inefficient manner; efficient algorithms, for example some selection criteria, can easily be built into generation so that many, if not the bulk, of nonviable alternatives are simply not generated. Many problems are sufficiently complex that algorithms are not possible. Heuristics are intuitive or semi-intuitive methods that reduce the labor of solution finding by not requiring the search to be foolproof or certain. Two ways in which heuristics can work are [1] by building into generation, selection criteria which are reasonably [relatively] easy to apply but which are powerful enough to eliminate the vast majority of [not even close to] nonviable alternatives at the risk of eliminating some viable alternatives. This risk arises from the uncertain character of the heuristic; [2] by using selection or evaluation criteria which are relatively simple to apply. The risk is that some non-solutions may be admitted. The value of heuristics in analytical or mathematical problem solving is that one, or a few, tentative but probable solutions are generated which can be subject to rigorous criteria. In engineering, heuristic design produces one or a few probable design solutions. These can be tested by experiments and trial runs or prototypes. If these fail, then it is “back to the drawing board.” The overall objective is that design costs can be reduced by use of bold but uncertain heuristics over cautious analysis. In this sense, all design is heuristic design. Certainly 5-78 top --> down and planning procedures, means-end analysis, experimental testing can all be regarded as heuristics, and these amount to entering evolution - “getting one's feet wet.” The discussion of heuristics above is formal. There are also psychological factors such as: Combinatorial thought - which works with both conceptual and physical alternates Associated with suppression of critical, selective and evaluative modes and enhancement of generative, combinatorial, perceptual, lateral or metaphorical modes and change of set Set Conditions for change of set such as - related to - sleep deprivation, aspects of brainwashing, ego-deprivation Memory Insight Lateral thought Perseverance [passion, commitment] Withdrawal Perception Motivation Immersion Incubation Concentration Strategic thought Sequential thought Preparation Personal, Social and Environmental Factors In addition to the “purely” psychological factors are personal, environmental and social factors that are conducive to creativity at the roots of personality and not just as an afterthought Planning, facilities, marketing and persuasion, financial aspects 5-79 Creativity is discussed at length in the sources listed in 5.2.4 and 5.4.2, related material and secondary sources. There is a bulky literature. [The remaining portion of this section could be placed in 5.2.4.] Special and Non-conventional Aspects of Creativity278 Here, I will outline a few considerations, in addition to those discussed above, as well as some new conventional ones. The following discussion is not restricted to engineering. It is not possible to consider creativity in some particular endeavor without considering creativity in general. There is some focus on engineering in the consideration of technical invention Special Versions of the Process This is the problem solving process; the generalized version is the process described in 5.2 and 5.3. There are specialized versions. See also the discussion Heuristics and references cited above Creativity in science is briefly treated in Areas 3, 4, and in 5.4.4. This is also considered in artificial intelligence. Notable discussions of creativity are those of Henri Poincare, Jacque Hadamard, George Polya, Alan Newell and Herbert Simon. Comments on art are included in area 4.2.2 where it is implied that, in some senses, art is an aspect of creative response to limitations on method. These questions are widely discussed in the literature of science, mathematics, art, philosophy and psychology. These topics are left to later development I believe that there are limitations, not only to focus on method, but also to focus on the activity of creativity. In addition to principles [psychology and philosophy] and method [intelligence and artificial intelligence], sociology or social factors are also important. A number of questions and considerations arise [1] What are preconditions for creativity in childhood, development, life-style, social relations, [2] what are the sources of creative energy, [3] what is the role of proximity to creative individuals, especially in growth, development and apprenticeship? 5-80 Technical invention. Some significant inventors: Thomas Alva Edison [1847-1931] Nikola Tesla [1856-1943] Elmer Ambrose Sperry [1860-1930] Lee de Forest [1873-1961] Factors in Technical Invention Thomas Hughes279 has studied some of the features and factors of these inventors that have relation, or possible relation with their inventive results: 1. The ways in which projects were conceived and chosen: Thinking in terms of entire technical systems; keeping away from conservative institutions [universities and large corporations - they all found independent sources of funding]; projects with a potential for breakthrough instead of focus on refinement; broad reading in the science and technical literature to keep up with new information, ideas, possibilities, and knowledge 2. Creative factors: Max Black: “A metaphor is the use of a word in a new sense” - or an idea in a new sense. Aristotle: “Perception of the similar in the dissimilar.” Examples: Newton saw similar causes [inertia and gravitation] in the motion of heavenly bodies and terrestrial projectiles. Edison's invention of the quadruplex telegraph was based on analogy with water system pumps 3. To be independent: A common factor was search for funds - through publicity and demonstration 4. Inventive styles: Focus on systems of problems, technologies - and critical aspects; choice of appropriate problems and relation to background [social and group] factors 5-81 Study of creativity in modern institutions and government280 Government Social, environmental and other planning agencies Corporations Research organizations Academic institutions Independently creative individuals Inventors, scientists, philosophers Writers, statesmen The paradigmatic individuals281 Creativity is the generation and evaluation of alternatives For more detail, see 5.2.4 5-82 5.4.2.4.3 Tools knowledge, and language for designIncludes symbolic skills - language, geometrical-graphic, flow charting: general and special purpose languages; mathematical, computational, computer-aided design and drafting including packages and advanced tools such as finite elements; knowledge of sciences: physical, life, social;282 persuasion and communication. [See also 5.3.5: sciences of design.] 5-83 5.4.2.4.4 Design elementsDesign elements are standard components out of which, based in experience, designs in a given developed field can be built. The selection and standardization of such elements is an evolutionary process and significantly eases the design process. There is also some inhibition but the gain in efficiency can offset the loss due to inhibition. Economics, creativity, inventory often determine that standard elements should be used. However, this is not always he case, depending on the problem, objectives, creativity, and license of the designer. Creativity is involved in using standard elements in addition to creating new ones Discussion of elements at various levels and aspects of design is included in some unpublished articles.283 Other catalogs of elements are in the design texts by Shigley and Mitchell, and Juvinall.284 These discuss tools, standard sizes, sources of information such as engineering societies and manufacturers catalogs A future plan is to provide element data for a spectrum of design levels and areas 5-84 5.4.3 PERSONAL DESIGN. APOLLO AND DIONYSIUSSee Personal Design 5-85 5.4.4 DESIGN FOR KNOWLEDGE AND INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNINGLearning here means discovery, synthesis, and transmission-education Rational design for knowledge can only occur after rationality and empirical activities become institutionalized and is limited to the extent that development is under control of rational faculties. Evolutionary design as discussed in §5.3.5.4.2 may occur if the phrase “under control of rational faculties” is replaced by “influenced by reason and intuition.” Considerable discussion has been devoted to the nature and development of knowledge. To a significant degree, this development is not under human control. We can see knowledge as an aspect of a local evolution [life on Earth] involved in expanding its sphere of being and influence. In this sense, knowledge goes back to the early development of life [organismic knowledge and biological evolution] and to the early development of human society [mythic knowledge-biological, human-psychosocial evolution]. Only recently, through development of a culture of rational and empirical knowledge, has development of knowledge become a conscious function Early in the development of human knowledge there was, undoubtedly, awareness and there were, undoubtedly, elements of rationality and empiricism, but such awareness was not significantly of knowledge itself and rationality and empirical attitudes were not institutionalized Only when there developed significant awareness of knowledge could there be design of knowledge; and only when there became institutions of rationality and empirical attitudes could there be design of knowledge [see §5.3.5.4.2 in this context] In what senses is knowledge designed? Even after rationality and empiricism become institutionalized, we cannot dictate the development of knowledge. Such development depends on three factors: [1] existence of potential for development of understanding: there exist characteristics of the universe and beings within that universe capable of understanding these characteristics. We may state this in a way that is less dependent on subject-predicate-object form: there exists potential for development of understanding relations. [2] Existence of an occasion: prior understanding of proximate characteristics and relations. [3] Development of the opportunity in the particular occasion. These factors are not under full control of humankind, and therefore we do not have fully objectifiable design of knowledge. However, based on the three conditions for development just stated, and on the lack 285 of full control over development, we arrive at the following considerations or approaches to design in and of knowledge: 5-86 1. Understanding Origins and the Potential for Knowledge The potential is in levels of evolution Universal Cosmological Biological Cultural Empirical The object-content of knowledge is to be found in these levels [also reflected in the dimensions of being-humankind [natural, social, psychic, and universal]. Knowledge itself originates in these levels and we may conceive, approximately, the history of conscious-rational knowledge going back down these levels.286 Rational Mythic Organismic Physical Primal We know that, with regard to culture, the rational partly suppresses but does not displace mythic thought. I have discussed these issues in some detail [3.3.2, 3.5.6, and area 4]; we have seen that all cultures have a mix287 of mythic and rational thinking. The levels, extent, and degree of institutionalization vary There is undoubtedly a slower interaction with the biological level: development of new faculties beyond a certain threshold increases new ecological opportunities. There may be interactions at the cosmological, physical level but we do not know whether the slow, large-scale evolution of the universe affects biological evolution: over three to four billion years of life it might. We do know that cosmological, and geophysical and chemical, “set the stage” for biological evolution Understanding the potential for development of knowledge is a guide to search. Understanding the origins of knowledge is a guide to foundation 5-87 2. Provision of Occasions for Development. Institutions of Learning. The Functions of the University I noted in item [2], p 5-85 that occasion depended on prior understanding - in culture and individual. The formal context for such understanding is in codified and traditional knowledge. Knowledge of evolutionary framework of universe-knowledge enhances codification and the potency of occasions. Other cultural factors affecting potency have to do with mood and opportunity. Mood is the ambience that predisposes individuals and cultures to discovery and synthesis. Opportunity is a function of mood and institutionalization of learning As pointed out in classification of knowledge [4.3, 4.4] and design levels [5.3.3.1, 5.3.4, 5.3.6-7], learning includes discovery, synthesis and transmission-education. These functions occur in culture through traditional [mythic] and rational and empirical means and in informal and formal contexts. The informal include kin and other social groups, social communication networks such as media, political interaction. The formal includes research [discovery], academic [synthesis], and educational [transmission] institutions of varying degrees of formality. Research institutions are found, in modern industrial society, in industrial settings, private and public research groups and in institutes. Academic work is performed largely by individuals, a few academic institutions dedicated solely to synthesis, and within institutions of “higher learning.” Education is largely in schools, trade schools, colleges and universities and also through types of apprenticeship and partnership in research, academic and educational settings. The three functions, discovery, synthesis and transmission, form a whole that is vital within the context of modern [twentieth century] society and come together in the university Essential to the function of the university is universality: universality or freedom of research ends288 [within ethical bounds and economic constraints]; universality through synthesis; and universality through educational opportunity and access. In addition to these formal functions the university also provides the environment, through mood, example, educational style and symbol in which the excitement of academic and social 5-88 conscience catches fire Many individuals have written eloquently on education: notably Bertrand Russell, Education and the Good Life; and A. N. Whitehead, The Aims of Education 5-89 3. Models for Development of Occasions and Potential for Knowledge - Creative, Design, Philosophical, Art, and Science Creativity has not been,289 and can not be reduced to a formula; however, there is a non-definite extent to which formalization and discipline is useful. Discussion and mention of factors, however, is not a reduction. Formalization of method as an approach to understanding development is not a reduction either - and such understanding may be useful as a guide; i.e., when not interpreted as a prescription for all occasions I mention the following aspects: Creativity [5.2.4, 5.4.2.4.2]; includes evaluation Design and problem solving [Area 5, especially Introduction; 5.1-3] Philosophical “method” [3.4.3, 4.2.4] Method in knowledge [3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.5.6, Introduction to 4, 4.1-2, especially 4.2.4] Art [4.2.2] Scientific method [2.6.8, 3.4.3, 3.5.6, 4.2.4] 5-90 4 Synthesis of Principles and Method Roughly, we may say that areas 3 and 4 have been focused on content-correctness or principle, and area 5 on method - getting results, or contents; i.e., on process. This separation can not be absolute, for all results are, ultimately, known through some process: even satisfaction is based on past experience and evolution. Evaluation is an aspect of method; also, an objective of method is results. Content and method are complementary, incomplete by themselves Synthesis occurs [1] by appropriate design of method; see p 5-89, recall levels of interaction in design, [2] content and method fuse in an inclusive process: biological evolution includes social process includes mythic knowledge includes rational and empirical knowledge. Aspects of these considerations are outlined in 2.10-11, 3.5.6, 4.2.4, 5.3.5, especially pp. 5-39, 5-42, 5-44-48. Design of knowledge is an example of non-objective design in which possible approaches are rational [or, more generally, cognitive, including intuition and affect] and incremental or rational [includes intuition, affect] and developmental. These are rational mechanisms of entry into evolution [cultural-environmental] appropriate when full rational control is not possible. This is commonly the case; this situation is commonly treated as if rational understanding-control exists Synthesis: Institution of design in knowledge: learning from design, evolution; codifying elements of the development of knowledge regarding “What is knowledge” [3.3.2, 3.5.6, Introduction to 4, 4.1] Evolutionary principles: varieties of content [levels of orientation within ethical bounds [ethics, too, evolves, has foundation, is debatable]; economic constraints] and varieties of method [philosophical, scientific, literary or Dionysian vs. Apollonian] and varieties of modes of expression [linguistic, artistic, action] Recognizing potential for knowledge in evolution Thought [understanding, horizons] Design [thought --> action] Action [physical] 5-91 Some final reflections - and personal observations - from: Ernest Becker: on synthesis Ernst Mayr: on scientific method Ernest Becker: on content vs. method 5-92 Ernest Becker on Synthesis290 “Mankind has always paid homage to its great thinkers; and its greatest have always been the great theoreticians, those who by force of abstract thought have reordered the world of knowledge. This holds true on any level: in the primitive hunting band, the one who is most valued is he who can conceptualize the whole territory of the tribe and imagine what route the wounded animal will take; in the Western world, it is a Plato, an Augustine, or an Aquinas - he who reorders thought into a new synthesis that buoys men up for another little while.” 5-93 Ernst Mayr on Design of Research or Scientific Programs291 Mayr's thoughts are interesting but not deep: Design of Research Asking meaningful questions Having a feasible research program Partitioning a problem into its components [planning] Accepting black boxes and treating them as such Towards Improved Concepts Elimination of invalid theories or concepts Elimination of inconsistencies and contradictions Input from other fields Elimination of semantic confusion Eclectic fusion of competing theories [dialectic] Impediments to Maturation of Theories and Concepts Failure to consider alternatives Erroneous search for laws Heuristic value of erroneous theories 5-94 Ernest Becker on Content vs. Method290 Ernest Becker has pointed out that method is not important and that knowledge itself is important. Knowledge can be taught without teaching how it was obtained. In this way, the student can get an overview of what is important. There is truth in what Becker says. Modern educational institutions, although they make a pass in this direction, are not teaching the essence and central message of the knowledge that is available and could be the basis of a full growth of individual, society and of knowledge itself. Becker's view is based in his concept that a completed knowledge exists, a psychosociology of alienation of “our time,” and this is the core of what should be taught I believe that the central message is changing, is never complete. Method is important in that we are continuously preparing for newness and unknown. I do not believe that knowledge is a consumer commodity. The fundamental problems are continually requiring of reinterpretation. Therefore, although it may not be essential to expose each student to the details of scientific method, it is essential for people to be open to and know the dynamic nature of evolution at relevant levels. In this sense, in a sense of openness, method is essential. Education would, in my ideal view, provide an account of and an orientation to content and method: a synthesis of knowledge and process 5-95 5.4.4.1 What are the fundamental problems of knowledge?Review 5.4.4; see 3.5, especially 3.5.6-7, 4.5, 5.3.5.5, and 5.6.1. Refer to Becker's Beyond Alienation 5-96 5.4.4.2 Design of a Knowledge BaseSee 4.2.3.4, 4.2.4, 4.3, and 4.4; review design method: 5.2.3, 5.3.4, and 5.5 5-97 5.5 AN OUTLINE OF KNOWLEDGE FOR GENERAL DESIGNRelated to active search for problems. Immersion in life, states of mind receptive to such information, creative reception Awareness; openness; states of consciousness; meditation; dreams; daydreams; emotion; intuition; thought; mystic thought; non-critical thinking; metaphysics Values292 Needs of life, human needs and dimensions, health, social needs, environmental needs, theory of value Technology, science and art for technology; health and health arts and sciences; physical, earth, life and human sciences; society - social science; economics, politics, law, education; art, religion Origins. Processes of knowledge; organization of knowledge and knowledge systems Review area 5 Review area 6 Evaluation, feedback and learning Review areas 7 and 8 5-98 5.6 TOWARDS GENERAL AND UNIVERSAL DESIGNA general and universal design is an objective of this work Full levels of living in nature, culture, individuality, and universe Content and evolution integrated Balance of thought and action - Apollo and Dionysius; action as an end Embedding in cognitive, social, natural evolution Ultimates in meaning; universal and cultural goals; beyond inward looking culture Meanings of design 5-99 5.6.1 OPEN PROBLEMS OF DESIGNAs in any endeavor, design has perennial and ongoing problems. These are open - their treatment is never definitive. Lessons require to be learned repeatedly. I will classify the open problems in the categories of: Method Content Background Analysis and improvement of design methods and procedures; optimization Central design and planning vs. distributed; integral: combinations Political, geographic, temporal Elements of design method; their analysis; [see also 5.3.5.5] Social process and evolution as design Elements of social process; their analysis Bringing design and planning to the individuals, groups, communities and other entities that stand to benefit The fundamental problems of humankind; [see 3.5.7, 5.3.3.1, 5.3.4.6, 5.3.7, 5.4.1] Essential areas of design; [see 5.3.3.1, 5.3.4.1-6, 5.3.6-7, 5.4] Problem of action; [see area 6] Knowledge for design; [areas 4 and 5, especially pp. 4-41, and area 5] Foundations of design; [see 3.5.6, 5.3.1, 5.2.4, 5.4.2.4.2, 5.3.5] Foundations in social process, evolution Foundations of social process - in evolution and 5-100 5.6.2 PROBLEMS IN SPECIFIC LEVELS OF DESIGNReview area 5 Knowledge for design [see 5.5] Elements Research methods Design methods Cases 5-101 5.6.3 SIGNIFICANT MODERN AND EMERGING DESIGN PROBLEMSAreas Specific problems Methods 6-1, 6-2 6 ACTION...And Implementations and Controls In the Dionysian mode of being [and earlier in evolution and development], action is whole in itself. The existence of thought is not negated, but thought flows with and into action. In the Apollonian or rational mode, thought and action are separated. Action becomes implementation and control. Thought and action are made whole through design: thought --> design --> action. This goes back to the original separation: action --> reflection and action For some individuals, the Dionysian mode of being is insecure. For others the Apollonian mode is dissatisfying and fragmenting. Carl Jung claimed that humankind contains not one personality orientation but several orientations which reflect different stages of evolution or, alternatively in my estimate, the different requirements of social structure, environmental interaction, and social evolution and change, and so on. In between the Dionysian and Apollonian modes are a continuum of intermediate levels of separation of thought and action. Different levels may be appropriate for different activities. Individuals may be or become whole by finding the right level or balance of levels. This includes sensitivity to context It is consistent with both individual variation and societal need for diversity that there will be different modes of living including balanced ones. The human needs for which are psychological-physiological. Societal needs include both problem solutions and social relations Design, as rational - or rational and empirical - problem solving is incomplete. Action completes design and there is a fuller view of design and action that is mutually inclusive. In rational design, this inclusivity partially separates out into awareness --> design --> action. In awareness, we can include openness, knowledge, values and evaluation and feedback or learning. Then awareness --> design --> action describes social-individual process. The Vedanta recognizes sravana [study, contemplation] --> manana [reflection, meditation] --> application in life [action]. Note that the process study --> reflection --> action includes empirical, rational and, by implication, evolutionary elements However, this separated activity is not complete in itself and is subject to the circumstances of the real: selection. Apollo is psychically whole when he permits emergence of or even abandon to his Dionysian self There are varieties of social context. This need not burden individuals for, although there are types, humans are flexible and adaptable. However there may be contexts of social change which unnecessarily and or excessively burden individuals at large despite flexibility and variability 6-3 6.1 THE NATURE OF ACTIONConsideration can be divided into investigation [6.1.1] and concrete aspects [6.1.2] 6.1.1 Philosophies and psychologies of actionPhilosophy considers two related aspects: understanding the nature of action-this includes the psychological aspect, and action as a philosophy. Understanding is considered in this section. Action as philosophy is considered in item 6.1.3 below General philosophical considerations: Dual nature of thought of action293; determinism, free will, choice; design as intermediate between thought [includes processes, knowledge] and action-the transition; design and dance; Apollo and Dionysius; Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva-Creator, Maintainer, Destroyer; other religious and mythological sources; Bhagavad-Gita; action and belief-survey of religions; action in times of stress, lack of meaning Psychologies: Psychology is an aspect of philosophy. The considerations under philosophies above have their psychological aspect. It is probably an epistemic mistake to separate, in principle, the philosophical and psychological aspects of action. In modern psychology [twentieth century]: Explicit and implicit motivational systems: social-cultural, political, religious, individual, psychological needs [e.g., Maslow's hierarchy and dimensions of being] vs. physiological-action needs; interaction between reflection and action, psycho physiological interpretation; motivation and evolution; origins of the cognitive, affective and other aspects of psychophysiology in evolution 6-4 6.1.2 Philosophies of lifeSee 3.5.5 Aspects to consider are: Existentialism and choice Nietzsche and other existential philosophers such as Kierkegaard, Sartre, Camus, Jaspers Eastern philosophies Religion Psychology and psychiatry 6-5 6.1.3 Action as philosophyKarma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga; pragmatism 6-6 6.2 ACTION AND CONTROL...And implementation of plans Initiation Group action: direction and nature of behavior and attitudes Authority vs. equality; political systems; agencies Social aspects Resource and environmental aspects Observation, measurement, monitoring and comparison with plan Control and corrective action Comment: Observation and control are different from evaluation and feedback. Observation and control address the problem of adherence to plans during implementation. Evaluation and feedback have to do with success and modification of plans after implementation. The activities are conceptually distinct. Their separation in practice is a first approximation to actuality. Such separation has value 6-7 6.3 SYNTHESIS OF BEING, ACTION, MOTIVATION294Synthesis of dimensions of being [natural, social, psychic or inner, universal], 6.1 and 6.1, action and the fundamental existential problems [the existential aspects include the practical] and practical problems-individual, global 6-8 6.4 OPEN PROBLEMSProblems vs. phenomena Problems have “logical” origin in the “dissection” of phenomena. See Introduction to Area 5 on the origin of purpose Synthesis 7-1 7 LEARNING...AND TRANSFORMATIONThis area was originally titled evaluation and feedback Note that evaluation and feedback are a part of learning...and transformation Design and implementation are not complete in themselves because of “limited” rationality and control. Evaluation and feedback recognize this, and complete the process, recognize the strength of reality, bring about entry into evolution Although evaluations in design and of design [and overall process] are similar in nature and analogous in context, perhaps it might be better to have separate names Evaluation in Design One of the phases toward the end of the objective design is to evaluate the functionality, feasibility, of the design, to compare with competing designs before implementation. This is often done by prototype testing. In smaller projects, experiment may be part of the analysis. The objective is to certify the design before implementing. The objective is not to replace analysis but to provide a balance, a sort of optimum between analysis and optimization and evaluation. The function is different from the evaluation after implementing However, there are similarities. In either case, iteration can be involved. In one case iteration of the design, in the second [the evaluation of this area] iteration of an entire projector program. In either case, we wish to optimize design and evaluation [and other aspects]: to balance foresight and hindsight In very large scale contexts prototypes can not be build. Only after the fact or post implementation, evaluation is possible Evaluation in Social Process295 Here evaluation is concerned with the entire process: awareness --> values --> knowledge --> design --> action; and with the question of general direction 7-2 7.1 EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND DESIGNSConcern here is whether needs recognized in design are being met. There are three aspects here: 7.1.1 Was the design or plan implemented?If not, the answer has to do with action and control. Were actions appropriate, what about design of actions [which may or may not have been part of original design]. Was control adequate, can the design be implemented? 7.1.2 Is design or planning effective?Are the needs being met? If not and design [noun] was implemented, is this due to design inputs [data, model, etc.] or design process [see Area 5]. Which input[s] and or phase[s] of the process are the causes of lack of effectiveness? If needs are met, is it because of design? 7.1.3 Is the design efficient?Even if answers to [7.1.1] and [7.1.2] are positive, we ask: could the concept have been simpler, more economical, have contributed more? Even if simpler concepts are not found, could there be better economy, more contribution? The question of efficiency [at least aspects of efficiency] can be built into effectiveness - and often is Evaluation vs. Selection Without evaluation, there is no rational way to select better products, designs, and programs. Selection then becomes purely “competitive”: economic, ethical, and cultural. Of course, when existence is more than marginal or meets criteria of satisficience, competition may be valued as undesirable or actually undesirable in terms of other extrinsic or intrinsic criteria 7-3 7.2 PERSONAL EVALUATION: DIMENSIONS OF BEING OR GROWTHSee “Personal Design,” especially 5.5 and 5.6 7-4 7.3 ENGINEERING EVALUATION: OTHER PROFESSIONAL SYSTEMS1. Methods 2. Organizations 7-5 7.4 EVALUATION OF GLOBAL SYSTEMS1. Global, national, regional, local 2. Environmental, social, individual 7-6 7.5 LEARNING AND FEEDBACKFeedback is use of evaluative information from any of items 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.2 to minimize competitive selection of economic, ethical, cultural...types. Feedback loops evaluation back into awareness, knowledge and design so that design can be improved. This includes: Implementation or design of implementation; control Design modifications Inputs: needs, data, and model[s] Functional considerations Synthesis-concept Modification Selection from alternates Creation of new systems Process: analysis, optimization, and evaluation of design The deficiency may not be in the design; rather, it may be in the elements that precede design: see 7.6 7-7 7.6 EVALUATION OF AWARENESSAwareness Value Philosophy Knowledge
Needs
8-1 8 DESTINATIONS: THE FUTURE OF EVOLUTION AND DESIGNThe original version is outdated and has long been replaced by the new version below which, should rewrite this essay, will need revision 8-2 8-6 8-7 8-8 NEW VERSION OF DESTINATIONSThe Following Includes An Outline for Topics in Management of Social Action, Research and Consulting Services 8.1 INTRODUCTIONThe contents of this chapter are: Central ideas and implementation Review and evaluation Means and approaches to development Support Planning Priorities 8.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT8.2.1 ObjectivesCentral objectives: developing: That understanding which leads to quality of action and existence Quality - of action and existence Aspects of understanding Progressive and explicit There are progressive epistemologies Conserving Primordial tradition There are traditions in which understanding and existence are in such harmony as to coalesce Understanding and quality as intrinsic values Issues of balance 8.2.2 General outline of considerations and priorities for planningOutline: tree form Considerations Intrinsic aspects: having to do with the content and nature of the project External aspects: organizing study and research, forming a research group or institute, publicizing and selling; funding Priorities Priorities for planning General approach...specific operations...criticism Problems and opportunities for sequencing Sources Areas to be planned 8.2.3 Detailed outline of considerationsOrganization of the outline Main divisions [intrinsic - content; external - support] It is neither useful nor practical to make the list of topics detailed or uniformly explicit. The following §§8.1.3.1, 8.1.3.2, and 8.1.3.3 are therefore, selective 8.2.3.1 Intrinsic dimensionsValues and objectives: Quality: Dimensions of quality - inner, socio-cultural and environmental Applications: types: “epistemology” of knowledge - action. Prepackaged services Applications: areas: by dimension of existence - natural, social-cultural, inner-universal Dimensions of culture: Learning Technology, systems of technology Institutions, economic and others By geo-political division Understanding: Openness, attitudes, learning Knowledge: General. Capability for individual learning Human: division: by content - general. By nature; representation By function and by content Continued - special aspects: nature and natural science; society, culture; and social analysis Source and means of development of content Evaluation Aspects to be reviewed; criteria of evaluation; through interaction and learning: self, communication Sources of new material Aspects - sources of new material: communication, experience, literature, personal material; review, creation, synthesis Creation and synthesis Synthesis and selection Selection criteria: criteria of significance Reason, communication, and persuasion...the processes of group knowledge, learning and interaction Reason: Imaginative-inductive. Modes of communication and representation: language. Critical and deductive pattern encoding: logic, mathematics, and applied mathematics Interactive communication and learning [dialectic] Functions and modes...Aspects - medium and occasion; dimensions of meaning; communication of meaning Persuasion and presentation - or rhetoric - and rhetorical design; considerations: Audience and medium Types of arguments Types of discourse Types of proof: Motivation, value and ethics Emotive aspects - nature of emotion and motivation; practical aspects Appeal to reason. Fallacies Scope and organization of arguments - or selection and arrangement Classical arrangement Style or expression: Enhancing functions and classical elements 8.2.3.2 External dimensions: Publicity and Publication Administration, Financial, Facilities, Auxiliary and Other Support297Types: Environmental [physical, social] Technical Through affiliation - research, consulting Through enterprise Financial support Forms of support - grants, consultants Types of source - information resources, classification Example: computational fluid dynamics Development and generation of support: Short term Long term: Publicity: for work: aspects; publicity and publication; publication and publishing; self-publishing [order of publication], production Generation and management of support Technical support - dimensions: research, organization, physical; entrepreneurial management: initiative; standard management functions 8.2.3.3 Leadership, Administration and Management for an Effective Research Environment8.2.3.3.1 Effective research environment on individual, institutional and large scalesOutline Effectiveness and understanding effectiveness. Measures of effectiveness Effective management: overall vision and initiative action [for starting an organization and adapting to opportunity and change] and routine administration. Factors of good research administration Additional considerations for applied research 8.2.3.3.2 ConsiderationsLong-term vision for initiative activities and research opportunities Routine Long term and large scale Large scale Long-term operation of effective research institutions Administration Factors in a creative and productive environment Social: developing and maintaining contact Social: general support Financial management Administration of finance: general business; research institutes and universities; procuring funds for research and educational institutions: factors in attracting funds; loans and investors; campaigning and fundraising; applying for funds marked for, or, transferable to research; pre-application: proposal planning, content; application; post application 8.2.4 Supplementary TopicsEssay: Growth and Status of Systematic Knowledge Essay: Reason, Communication and Persuasion: Individual and Group Knowledge Information: References on institutional investments, portfolio management, venture capital 8.3 MANAGEMENTAn elaboration of some aspects of 8.1.3, Part B for research, study and synthesis, management of research groups and institutes Flow depiction of enterprise General management Functional strategies with emphasis on research management 8.4 FURTHER SPECIALIZED INFORMATION ON FUNDING INSTITUTIONSApplications for funds 8.4.1 A listing of some grant and contract sourcesInternational, federal, national - various categories - state, and local 8.4.2 Plan for research and related fundingResponse to a request for proposal Sample outline 8.5 IDEAS TOWARD A RESEARCH GROUP OR INSTITUTEInitial statements of purpose for communication 8.5.1 The idea of a research groupKnowing and living: knowledge in its relation to action and the quality of existence. On the significance of knowledge and understanding and potential for development and use The idea of a research group: a small, well-formed group of individuals can make revolutionary contributions The dimensions of interest: development of understanding; development of guidelines for group and a full range of issues; special interests How to form and constitute a research group. Selection of individuals 8.5.2 Background work towards forming a groupStatement of purpose and mode Manuscripts Technical experience Work 8.5.3 Outline of budget - an example8.5.4 Further sources of information and special problems8.5.5 Further possibilities for a group or institute8.6 PERSUASION AND PRESENTATIONEssay on “Modern Rhetoric: Philosophy and Design” 8.6.1 Introduction: old and new rhetoric8.6.2 Practical rhetoric: the art of persuasion and communication8.6.3 Rhetorical designPersonal relations with the audience Basis of agreement Public relations Types of argument and aids to invention Scope and organization of an argument, or, selection and arrangement Style and expression: nature, use and effect Comprehensiveness Relations among the factors 8.6.4 Rhetoric and philosophy1. An evolutionary path: population[society[colony[organism [or composite: cell] 2. Classically, with evolution as “dynamic progression”. But, in QM and QF with discrete stable ordered states, and variations due to a “chaotic” environment, would this not be closer to “blind” variation...or even classically with variations due to “chaotic” sources? However, remember the complexity of states and processes, that system = environment and structure, and remember the non-finality of description, classical or quantum 3. This implies, possibly, preference in short-range variations, but not necessarily preference in long-range change except if there is a structure and a trend to the distribution of the states 4. In addition, of life: variation is Dionysian, selection is Apollonian 5. This includes “use” and application of this unity. The “value” is both “practical” [efficiency] and existential [being, experiencing, sacred] 6. Finiteness and boundedness of knowledge and organismic rationality are regarded, within an evolutionary part of its essential and necessary nature 7. World as universe of idea and action 9. Disunity [and “illusion” of time] comes from mistaking givens for real [Gödel] 10. This is in the nature of rational human being; there is nothing intrinsically wrong with fragmentations and plurality kept in balance with holism and unity 11. Essay, “Life, Unity, Meaning”, p. l 12. Reality could be considered an extended process 13. The infinite past would be the remote past 14. A. N. Whitehead has given an explanatory [variation and selection] basis of history as evolution in Adventures of Ideas. See especially pp. 1-9, FP edition 15. Study of evolution must be historical, in part 16. See the bibliography for references on the philosophy of history 18. Western academic culture separates pre-religion, mythology, nature worship, and folklore from Religion 19. Refer to “Religious Doctrines and Dogmas”, Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition 20. See General Statement, 1.1-3, and 2.2 for variations of this idea and related themes. See 2.2.5 for levels 21. R. Rucker, Infinity and the Mind for related metaphysical speculation 22. Categories: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, race; various intermediate and finer types omitted. A taxon is a member of a category 23. Ernest Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution and Inheritance 24. Randomness refers to our knowledge of something - a process, an event, or class of such 25. Remember that these features as more or less exclusive to biology are ideas of Mayr, as is the whole of this Section 2.6.8.1 26. G. G. Simpson, “Biology contains physics, is central” applies more to social philosophy 27. E. H. Carr, What is History, 1961 28. I am at odds with the bio-centric subterfuges of sociobiology, which appear to make and deny various claims. This, of course, must be the position of any reduction 29. I think this is a principle that says any action that is based in inheritance must somehow enhance continuation of the actor 30. I distinguish between theory and concept formation because Mayr does. I do not think his understanding here is good. I see both as species of one concept 31. These ideas would, if true, argue against common descent in the large, and non-treelike merging at any stage would argue against common descent in the small; but none of these ideas argues against evolution 33. “Evolutionary biology”, 1974. Discussed in Gould, Ever Since Darwin, 1977 34. Non-photosynthetic. For other differences see Gould, just cited, p. 117 35. A linear arrangement is appropriate for a sequential process 1[2[3[4[[1] or 1[2[3[4[2 but a nonlinear one is better if there is a high degree of interaction: 1[2, 1[3, 1[4, 2[3, 2[4, and 3[4 36. Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought, 1982 37. Encyclopedia of Philosophy 38. John Alcock, Animal Behavior, 1979. Douglas J. Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology, 1979. R. E. Rickleffs, Ecology, 1978 39. Eldredge, N. and S. J. Gould, 1972, “Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phylogenetic Gradualism”, in T.J.M. Schopf, Ed., Models in Paleobiology, pp. 82-115 40. An example where the use of inclusive terminology and concepts is better than the use of polarized concepts 42. Possibly, extinction of other races of Homo sapiens occurred about 40,000 years ago. See Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter [1987] 43. A similar comparison with idealism is possible 45. This is an original interpretation. Although science, officially, in some versions, disavows any search for ultimates, many still search and hope 46. Related question: Nature of death instinct [J. Lacan...] 47. Is this impersonal science real? 48. This is from Whitehead. I need to identify sources 49. Standard biological and physical evolutionary theory, 1986 50. It is probable that all truths are relative [incomplete], whether symbolic[ symbolic, symbolic[ natural, natural[ symbolic, natural[ natural. Note: [1] all are aspects of natural[ natural, and [2] being [noun, verb] is not true, not false and if absolute truth is to be found, it is in being [verb] in being [noun]...etc 51. Howard Gardner, The Mind's New Science, A history of the cognitive revolution, 1985 52. J. Passmore, “Philosophy,” Encyclopaedia of Philosophy 53. See also 2.6.8 and 3.4.3.3 54. A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, 1929, Corrected Edition, David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne Eds, 1978 55. Nor is need apparent; but see also 3.5.3, 5.3.2, and 5.3.5.3.7 58. This and the following five quotations are from Whitehead, Process and Reality, Op. cit 59. Knowledge: Discovery, creation, validation, production... transmission, and education 60. Area 1 is a general statement of the origins, nature and objectives of Evolution and Design 62. Note the close relation with the concept of language; see 3.2.3.6 63. Although modern science indicates a non-final micro-cosmology, this non-finality is by no means a final fact; nor does non-finality of cosmology place essential restrictions on descriptive metaphysics and ecological epistemology 64. Spirits, gods and God, irrespective of their ontological status, are not primary in this sense 65. Again, balance with Eastern, and other ideas including religion will be provided later 66. I am not distinguishing - or uniting - mind and matter 67. See summary in introduction to Area 4; also see 3.4.3.3, 3.5.6.1, and 3.6.1 68. Reason: logic, formal logic are the symbolic or linguistic expression of reason 69. The “indirect” - mode is: data, epistemic process [ information, logical process [ knowledge. It is not obvious that the separation is possible, hence inclusion of logic in epistemology. Note that the epistemic process is not at all purely Baconian, i.e., there is no inexorable logic that proceeds from fact to theory. In the direct mode, there is no separation this does not mean there is no processing or logic 70. We can think of heuristics as a type of fallible logic which is simpler and therefore more powerfully suggestive than formal logic 72. Perhaps relative is a better word 73. This could be defined rationally, behaviorally 74. Which satisfies the criterion of a quantum leap in quality for significant numbers of people and purposes. Note a potential relation between the situation implied by this model and growth according to “punctuated equilibrium” models of general evolution. “Advance” followed by equilibrium is a characteristic of growth. Not all rapid advance or “revolutions” in knowledge” are due to novelty “paradigm shifts”; there are ways besides conceptual novelty...novelty in which “niches” are opened up - new tools - instruments, technologies, mathematics - new discoveries, syntheses, new insight into implications, cross fertilization between fields, and so on 75. There is also a value to the play and dance of primal being, psychologically as well as adaptively. See references to “Personal Design” in this work 76. Can these be provided a basis: organismic, or direct, or evolutionary or other process? 77. A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, Op. cit 78. This discussion does not recognize a universal or absolute arbiter; careless use of this idea can lead to fallacy. Ultimately, each perception-set is “validated” by percept-concept sets. Even this is limited. What is final when everything may be transient, solid when all is fluid, true when knowledge and being form an interwoven web? I regard this question as something to be reflected on and reformulated before answering it or deriving conclusions from it 79. We can distinguish knowledge, truth: [1] more thought goes into knowledge; or [2] knowledge is systematization of truths, or [3] knowledge is the systematization function and truth is the consonance function. In any case, the distinction is not perfect; and we are dealing with shades of “meaning” and potential meaning 80. Vocabulary, grammar: e.g., the subject-predicate object form that is not ontologically neutral 81. Logic is the linguistic expression of reason, just as language is the expression of proposition. Remember, propositions are whole - organismic 82. Terms are to be interpreted on their broadest organismic levels 83. Fill out from religion, science, art, east-west philosophies, and design 84. Value: economy, integrity: anti-alienation, truth, living 85. Analytic, rational thought which proceed from conscious thought, necessarily employ division. However, such thought can proceed to higher levels of integration by concept formation: relations[ synthesis by concept. There are cross disciplines: biophysics, mathematical logic. Instead of forming tertiary connections we proceed by hierarchy and or process...[ These are the methods of philosophic generalization. In this analytic process analysis is “informed” by feeling, emotion, intuition which are among the faculties of reason and perception. We, therefore, have unity by analysis and synthesis 86. Includes general problems. See 3.5 for more detail on the special problems 87. It is not implied that all process explicitly includes all elements. Some spheres re best described by omitting certain elements. However, I have formulated the system as a comprehensive one 88. The value here is the insight and the motive provided 89. There is an inclusion of and relevance to scientific method 90. A theory cannot be validated by any number of experimental agreements, can be invalidated by a minimal number, perhaps; theories not invalidated remain as active theories 92. Is this an adventure or what? On the edge! 93. For method in science, see 3.5.6.1 96. Personal Design, unpublished ms 97. Learning: discovery, synthesis and transmission of knowledge, understanding and wisdom [education] 98. Punctuated equilibrium can be regarded as a general model of evolutionary change in which changes remain normal - incremental, chromosomal splitting...- on a biological level. However, due to opening up of opportunity such as niche evolution due to critical points or extinction... on a geological or paleontological level change is rapid and thus equilibrium appears to be punctuated 99. Some “socio-biologists” appear to believe that all social behavior is of this type 100. My preliminary reading is that cultural evolution is a general description of a process that is embedded in other levels and these other levels provide the mechanisms of variation and selection. However, writing later, I am not sure why I thought that way. Although the earlier statement includes truth, cultural evolution is an independent element of change 101. This does not imply that there are no new and or unforeseen ones 102. I do not interpret mind in its Cartesian sense as dual to body but, rather, as an expression of organism 103. Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter 104. And institutionalized due to or enhanced by written records 105. This concept goes beyond invalidation. Success includes synthesizing, resolving, and crystallizing areas of knowledge 106. A note to all climbers of mythic mountains - climbing up includes climbing down...into a traditional and phylogenetic past 108. A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, and Modes of Thought 110. In nature, the identity of manifold itself is part of the hypothesis 111. A. N. Whitehead, Science and the Modern World 113. A careful analysis of the question “What is knowledge?” is an essential prerequisite to notions of science and criteria. Although criticism is good and even negative forms of it are useful at times, a lot of futile pessimism and histrionic attacks result from careless assumptions as to the nature and purposes of knowledge 114. Based in hidden psychological and sociological assumptions about science and knowledge. This can grow into a full-scale criticism of [Western?] civilization 115. Since conceiving and first writing this, I have encountered these ideas in Max Delbrück's Mind from Matter, and Konrad Lorenz's Behind the Mirror 116. Note added in 1992 and supplemented in 1998. The form of the statement here was somewhat limited and unclear. The main points are as follows. [1] Analytic knowledge is possible in this universe. [2] There may be universes in which [our form of] analytic knowledge is not valid; and that in this sense analytic knowledge is synthetic knowledge. [3] The present universe is such a universe. This is so in a number of ways. Firstly, language, which is part of the metaphysical background to the expression of analysis, cannot be regarded as having completed its potential evolution even in a progressive sense. A second argument relates to the nature of the distinction between analytic and synthetic knowledge. The original distinction was as follows. Analytic truth of a proposition follows from a syntactical analysis of the internal relations of its constituent parts. Synthetic truth follows from a comparison of the semantic contents of the proposition with external world to which those contents refer. The synthetic a priori was supposed to refer to fundamental truths so basic that reference to the world was not necessary for their validation. Alternatively, it may be said that the reference was prior to the becoming of an individual, a society, a civilization... A better distinction from the evolutionary and modern anthropological points of view is between knowledge that is phylogenetically bound into the organism through evolution and knowledge that is ontogenetically learnt through development. Many sub-distinctions are possible based on such considerations as the distinction between linguistic vs. iconic representation, and blurring of distinctions as in the phylogenetic basis of ontogenetic potential. However, the main distinction between phylogenetic - or ultimate - and ontogenetic - or proximate - process is fundamental. Moreover, as suggested by the previous sentence this distinction can be generalized: ultimate, absolute and necessary vs. proximate, temporal and contingent. Thus, in the 20th century - especially in the last 25 years - it has become common to regard the distinction between the analytic, the synthetic a priori and the truly empirical as incomplete. Further, the distinction is seen to be less central than at the time of Kant. What of the newer distinctions: ultimate vs. proximate...? As our learning advances, our reading is that such distinctions begin to blur and assume lesser importance. At the same time, the implicit and explicit actual and metaphysical frameworks broaden in spatial, temporal and conceptual scope. This latter process reintroduces into our knowledge a distinction between the two processes: metaphor or reading of established patterns or logic - the ultimate... and experiment or discovering new patterns - the proximate...we remain in this process 117. From Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter 118. Known institutions, cultures could, and do, operate at different levels of independence 119. Is there a relation to ideas of Imre Lakatos? 120. See E. Becker, Birth and Death of Meaning 121. Essay “Life, Unity, Meaning.” 122. Also, see 2.6.1, 1, 3, and 13 123. 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.5.6.1, etc 124. See Konrad Lorenz, Behind the Mirror, and Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter 125. Would this be with or to the object of the concept? 126. Not as distinguished from an Oriental or an Eastern science, but as distinct from a universal science 127. Emotion, here, is diversification and expression of feeling along the dimensions of quality and intensity...cognition is diversification and expression of feeling along the dimensions of structure and quality 128. See also T. N. Tice and T. P. Slavens, Research Guide to Philosophy, 1983, ALA, especially pp. 305-312 129. Refer to Encyclopedia Britannica 15th Edition article “History of Western Philosophy.” 130. See 3.1-3; 3.4.3, and 3.5.1-6 131. Here, reference is being made to the cognitive function of philosophy 132. Criticism, in this admittedly mixed metaphor, is at the surface of the “ground of being and mythic thought.” 133. As Bertrand Russell said in The Problems of Philosophy: “Philosophy is not studied for the sake of answers but for the questions...” [3.4.2.2] 134. It is strange that writers such as Jacques Monod and Steven Weinberg, steeped in modern science, see humankind as tragic, lonely, alien. Coming from the same view - but by no means limited to it - I love my being in the universe. A topic that deserves attention is the question of the basis of such epi-scientific views. Are they scientific rather than merely epi-scientific? Writers such as Weinberg and Monod appear to believe that their views, if not actually scientific, are grounded in science. The issue of the scientific grounding of these views is not completely separable from the related questions “What is science?” and “What is the nature of human endeavor?” The views of the scientific establishment are surely important here. However, since that establishment is a specialist constituency the final determination is not and cannot be left to it even if such determinations are occasionally delegated to specialist establishments by default. I believe my view to be grounded although I cannot claim to be unwavering in the way in which I hold it. To go further into the nature of my view would be to go into self-psychoanalysis or psychological analysis. This may be useful and is something that I may take up later in its appropriate setting. If that setting is this work and its continuation then I will be careful to place it in its best relation to the rest of the work and its purposes. I will remember that the purposes themselves are grounded, by my intention, in that they naturally flow from my life and my world 135. Again, see 3.1-3, 3.4.3, and 3.5.1-6. Considerations for items 1 - 3 are taken up in 3.5.7.1-3 136. Refer to P. Munz [1985], Konrad Lorenz [1973], and Delbrück [1986] op. cit 137. This includes academic, psychoanalytic, and “alternative” psychologies 138. Howard Gardner, The Mind's New Science: A History Of The Cognitive Revolution, 1985 139. The “hypothetico-deductive method” is not a complete prescription of scientific method or process...see 3.4.3, 3.5.6 140. These problems are considered in a global and a universal context 141. For design, see: Area 5, and §3.5.7.3...For action see Area 6 142. See next “Foundation of the Unity”. See Area 4 and §4.2 in particular. Finally, see M. Adler, A Guidebook to Learning, 1986, for background knowledge for design 143. Between atomic and global scales: Max Delbrück, op. cit 144. See “On Universality,” 3.5.6.5 145. Refer to The Nature Of Philosophy, 3.2; The Divisions, 3.3; Methods, 3.4; and Special Problems, 3.5 146. There is a need to consider the problem of fragmentation. This is related to what I have called this the problem of “specialism.” Specialism is the negative side of specialization that includes a cult of specialization. I distinguish specialization, which can provide benefits such as “division of labor,” “expertise,” and “opportunity” from specialism which is an excess 147. Refer to manuscripts Modern Engineering, Personal Design, Design and Evolution, Background Knowledge for Design, to Dreams and Ideal Religion for further comments, problems and lines of solution. Also seek out references recent and historical problems and recent and historical social designers: the ancient prophets and philosophers of East and West - Gandhi, Schumacher, Schweitzer, and Heilbroner. Do not seek mere address of special problems, expressions of vast political constituencies, or expressions of conventional wisdom 148. These are the problems of urban centers and over-cultured, anti-naturalistic forms and meanings 149. These are listed in the previous paragraph 150. A range of risk is compatible with value. This issue is related to the one of conservatism vs. adventure 151. In addition to their restrictive aspect, design and planning should have a permissive aspect 152. Note the balance between context and need 154. Before I begin to accuse myself of “naturalism”, let me inquire what I mean and might mean by that term 155. Additionally, a new view of emotion, knowledge, and design is emerging 156. The origins of each item are from before its immediate predecessor. This sequence is not in completed form. I am not making an assumption of complete causation 157. I am not trying to imply that space-time-matter is the ground or origin of being. Rather, for me, it is an example 159. Western philosophy...The circumstances of Greece ~600 BC which permitted development of philosophy - as distinct from theology - are of interest 160. Applied to East and West this distinction is a stereotype; nonetheless, the distinction-concept is valid 161. For adaptivity, B will include A - or similar condition - and therefore A knows itself sufficiently well for adaptation. S 162. It is necessary to include this possibility until the contrary can be demonstrated 163. This statement is not intended to exclude other, non-intuitive elements. Intuitive knowledge may have origin in phylogenetic evolution, while mythic knowledge may have basis in cultural evolution 164. Includes all dimensions...social, psychological, biological, physical, environmental, and so on - persistent and occasional 165. It is interesting to speculate the origin of individual learning: cells, eukaryotes, metazoa, creatures with nervous systems, encephalization, i.e., centralization of the nervous system 166. Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter? An Essay on Evolutionary Epistemology, 1986, [op. cit.], Blackwell, pp. 121-132 167. Preface, General Statement - Area 1, Area 2, 3.5.6, 5 168. Natural, social and self...anatomically, genetically, psychologically 169. To whom or what? Why not? What is an appropriate and or evolutionary meaning of clarity - truth - knowledge? Is this relevant? 170. This includes dynamic, short and long-term memory 171. This includes knowledge itself, and the universe, and the world of experience 172. Herein lies a certain degree of artificiality: organismic knowledge is communicated genetically 173. What does the plural do to “naturalism”? 174. This is not to deny the value of intuition; but the only valuable knowledge is knowledge that can be “wrong” in principle. This point deserves reflection. Intuition can be “wrong.” 175. Realism, idealism: Since 4.2.1.2 was “ideal” and 4.2.1.3 referred to ideal and practical elements, respectively, this is superficially paradoxical 176. See the contents outline of Archie J. Bahm, Introduction to Philosophy 177. These are included for completeness; I have incorporated many of these in 4.2.1.1-3. Also, see Encyclopedia Britannica article “Classification Theory.” 178. There is hardly any such thing as a pure symbol. For some purposes, certain symbols could adequately be treated as pure 179. This type of relation exists between any actuality and concept and, more generally, between any two [or more] mutually adapting systems except when dissolution or final adaptation has occurred 180. To direct experience or analysis 181. A priori is not necessarily “correct” or adaptive - in all instances 182. Encyclopedia Britannica article “Classification Theory.” 183. Which includes both understanding and reality 184. M. Adler, A Guidebook to Learning [1986], Macmillan, is a useful reference. I have used Adler's book for information and ideas; I have made additions 185. The French encyclopaedists Denis Diderot and Jean d'Alembert extend poetry to include all fine arts 187. Although relativity is deterministic, it shows the incomplete nature of conceptions thought to be universal 190. Area 9 could go into Area 5, ... another alternative is - Areas 1 through 5 remain unchanged and the following renumbering could be done: 6 and 7 and 8 and 10 [ 7 and 9 [ 6. There would [in this latter case] be seven Areas. Areas 1 through 5 would be unchanged; Areas 6 and 7 would be labeled “History” and “Artifact” respectively 191. Divisions: matter and energy...the Earth or life...human society...human artifact are not perfectly clear according to evolutionary or structural principles 192. This does not mean that one evolutionary level is complete before the next begins 193. A similar statement occurs on page 2, Albert Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity, 1922, Oxford 194. However, such danger is not essential 195. Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy [1945], p 828 196. C. S. Pierce, W. James, Giovanni Papini, F.C.S. Schiller, John Dewey, C. I. Lewis, and P.W. Bridgman 197. Ernest Becker, Beyond Alienation 1967 198. I am not suggesting that all individual objectives are well defined 200. Wisdom or grace does not have to do with accumulated knowledge 201. See Areas 3 and 4 [4.2.3]; also E. Becker, Beyond Alienation 202. Encyclopedia Metropolitana [19th century], with a natural or logical and alphabetic organization was not successful...due in part to financial and organizational problems. The Encyclopedie Française [18th century] with a systematic-natural was highly successful in its time. Encyclopaedia Britannica [1768-present] with an alphabetic organization is, so far, the only continuously successful encyclopedia of the modern era. The 15th edition of the Britannica, 1974 with a major and definitive revision of 1985, has a mixed alphabetic organization 203. Generally, knowledge function also serves information-reference function. The converse is not true 205. Computer programmed for reference through index and access systems 206. We may say that empirical knowledge is coded, expressed; a priori and empirical are en coded into the structure of symbolic systems. The distinction is not one hundred percent clear 208. By no means strict and exclusive. Throughout this work, there are shifts in meaning to allow for possibility and ambiguity and reflecting development 209. See discussion of “Mythic Elements,” Area 5 210. The separation of knowledge into a priori-empirical is, probably, an approximation. Additionally, symbolic systems do contain empirical knowledge when they are constructed-modified empirically. However, such construction-modification will contain elements of the a priori as will symbolically coded and expressed knowledge 211. Since both empirical and pre-linguistic and mythic and phylogenetic knowledge can be built in, such knowledge is not completely a priori 212. Semiotics = theory of signs = pragmatics, semantics and syntactics. See D. D. Runes, Dictionary of Philosophy, 1984 213. See Area 3; also T. Tice and T. P. Slavens, Research Guide to Philosophy, 1983, and St. Elmo Nauman, Jr., Dictionary of Asian Philosophers, 1978 214. The academic tradition is limited to philosophic doctrines, systems and schools. The understanding here is the broader one of a general approach to life. Further the correspondence West-East [ Actual-Potential refers to a dominant stereotype 215. In the West the possible and potential are represented in poetry-imaginative literature, and existentialism, religion, and the like 216. Poetry is used in its general conception of as literature or even “imaginative” expression...and this includes art 217. These elements are hypothesized-discovered-created as part of the scientific symbolic explanation-prediction system 218. There should be no problem in considering terrestrial life, life, mind, and universal being...if one is explicit about the extent to which such phenomena are known...empirically or imaginatively 219. Matter, energy, life, information, society, culture and knowledge correspond with technologies such as materials, energy, genetic medicine and mental, urban, economic, legal, education, art....These are techniques of 220. See “Modern Engineering” for information on technology. Also, see Encyclopaedia Britannica 221. K. Eric Drexler, Engines of Creation, 1986 222. As discussed in this work. Elaboration of the nature [concept-actuality] of design follows in areas 5.1-3 223. Some relations discussed pp. 4.4, 6, 8-11, and Area 4 224. Clearly these are not independent concepts, nor are they alternatives; but the evolutionary model includes the rational and the interactive includes the first two 225. General Statement, Area 1 226. Donald Shön, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, 1982 227. Herbert A. Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial, 1969. Note that Simon's discussion of problem solving in this and other work [e.g., Models of Thought, 1979] displays precisely the sort of interaction between solution process and problem environment that is in question 228. In Medieval terminology theology, law, are medicine are the professions 229. It is not necessary to accept dogma, etc. In physical knowledge, science is usually more accurate [except aspects of the metaphysical]. However, in psychological understanding religion is often superior to science 230. This refers to cycles of growth and creation, life and equilibrium, and decay and destruction 232. This points to the incomplete separation of evolution into variation and selection, and the advantage of having such separation incomplete. I have discussed this from another point of view in the General Statement 233. This is related to an issue of freedom since rational adaptation can lead to stagnation despite cautions 234. This goes in the section on synthesis. This is an example of combining aspects of selection in variation 235. Refer to works of Herbert Simon, including Models of Thought, AI, and mathematical, literary, artistic, scientific, psychological literature on creativity 236. See Preface, General Statement, Areas 1, 2, especially 3.5.6, Introduction to 4 and 4.1 237. The meanings and intents of key words in this paragraph, such as action, design, knowledge, intention, purpose and values, can be referred to in this work 238. All dimensions of the global-universal context of human life and interactions should be included 239. This listing is incomplete. See also 5.3.6 240. Global[ national[ regional[ local[ group[ individual 242. The list emphasizes technical design and could provide further divisions for item 5.3.4.6 243. That is, design of engineering components. This could be process-operations [chemical engineering] or the basic units of any system 244. Also See 5.2.3 for details: these accounts are generic 245. For further comment on planning and management, see appropriate sections in 5.2 and 5.3; also refer to Melvin J. Stanford, Management Policy, 1983 246. Art, technology, religion and modern engineering. In addition, see 5.4.2 regarding engineering 247. The concept - trans-national government - will not be a federation of governments of nations, and therefore not subservient to national governments and nationalism 248. For areas, references and journals see readings and references for evolution and design: Robert U. Goehlert and Fenton S. Martin, Public Policy Analysis and Management: A Bibliography, 1985, ACI-CLIO Information Services 249. This includes time and material balances 250. Structure and time [time: continuity, perpetuation, reproduction,] 251. Herbert A. Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial, 1969 252. This includes biological evolution. I am not implying that biological evolution completely determines the structure of society or social process - or of design. This would be equivalent to denying existence of freedom [needed regarding the unknown] 253. This is not in Simon. Refer to modern engineering, background to design, background to modern engineering, and science of symbolic systems 254. Areas A and B correspond, approximately to the divisions of knowledge: symbolic systems [4.3.1] and empirical knowledge [4.3.2] 255. Arrow's Theorem and related aspects of multiple decision-makers. This concerns determination of group preference 256. Non-objectivity has basis in dynamic behavior, incomplete selection 257. Consider an outline of a text on applied mathematics - conceived as a science of symbolic systems 258. This may be prohibitively expensive, dangerous, or impossible due to complexity, sensitivity, and so on 259. I am not asserting that knowledge is ultimately value free. I am not entering this debate. However, I am suggesting, as I have done before, that there is value to knowledge that serves its own imperatives 260. Alternatively, the optimum is a distribution of controls throughout society. This concept is more inclusive than the slogan “Thinking globally acting locally.” 261. Levels are the dimensions of existence; areas are elements from the “Planning Matrix” whose rows and columns are labeled by the levels 263. The sequence cultural, political, economic correspond, roughly, to individual, social, and material aspects of social process 264. Individual and universal: see Personal Design. Global[ national[ regional[ local[ group[ individual 265. Justice and equity imply balance among peoples 266. These imply attention to politics, economics, and culture 267. Basis in evolution is discussed in Preface, General Statement, and Introduction to 4, 4.1, 5.3.1, and 5.3.5 268. This idea is implied by balance among the dimensions. It is not new and is practiced in primitive cultures. It is also the imperative of a number of traditional morals and religion 269. Work of Michael Kinsley and others - Rocky Mountain Institute, Arun Gandhi: 5 Shradanjali, Vithalnagar, North Avenue, Santa Cruz West, Bombay 400054 270. This includes learning and its content - knowledge - and its “method” or discovery, synthesis, transmission, and education] 271. Refer to art, technology, and religion for further details. Also, see comments on p 5-58 for newer technologies 272. These are important concerns in modern society 273. See Huston Smith, The Religions of Man 274. Sequential [awareness[ knowledge[] vs. interactive [awareness and knowledge and...][ concepts; “diagonalization” perhaps; relation or analogy to mutual provision 275. See article by Lord Ritchie-Calder, Propaedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica, and “Technology.” 276. These professions are creative, if so treated. They involve creativity and have creative aspects. However, their primary function is conservation and preservation 277. C.A. Murfin, “Design,” pp. 356-373, in K. W. Mildren, Ed., Use of Engineering Literature, 1976. There is a more recent edition 278. I plan further information gathering and study on these topics 279. Thomas P. Hughes, “How Did the Heroic Inventors Do It,” Invention and Technology, fall 1985 280. Evolution and Design, Bibliography Part III, Special Bibliography on Research Organization and Leadership, with Annotations, Anil Mitra, 1988 281. Karl Jaspers, The Great Philosophers, has called paradigmatic, those individuals who have shown humankind how to live. His primary choices are Socrates, Buddha, Confucius, and Jesus 282. Traditionally, 1950-1980s, engineers are not strong in life and social sciences 283. See the manuscripts Design, Modern Engineering 284. Joseph Edward Shigley and Larry D. Mitchell, Mechanical Engineering Design, 4th edition, 1983; Robert C. Juvinall, Fundamentals of Machine Component Design, 1983. The text by Juvinall has additional information, considerations, and an example of a mechanical system 285. Such a lack may be regarded as a limitation, or we may recognize the reason for the lack and use this understanding [1] existentially in the sense of acceptance, and [2] “positively” to understand the nature and function of knowledge and use of this understanding in selecting areas and variety to emphasize and in developing methods and approach 286. Piaget had similar ideas about formation of concepts in individual growth. These are now known to have some approximate validity 287. E.g., in modern society the foundation of rational knowledge is partly rational, partly mythic and, undoubtedly, partly organismic 288. As pointed out earlier, a range of orientations towards immediate and universal ends is desirable. Oriented research occurs within professional schools in universities and in other institutions and organizations 289. The “methods” below channel creativity through codified experience. Such codification and the related experience may have limitations that are hard to overcome because of tradition, training and value. Overcoming usually requires immersion 290. Ernest Becker, Beyond Alienation, 1967, p 279; see also comments by Bertrand Russell, area 3.4.2.2 291. Ernst Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought, 1983 292. See 3.5.3, 5.3.5.3 and 5.3.5.4 293. Refer to manuscripts “Personal Design”, and “Life, Unity, Meaning”. See other references concerning determinism and choice 294. See Objective 3, §§1.2.1-3 295. For the process of learning and evaluation in planning, refer to Area 5. Also see Robert Mayer, Policy and Program Planning: A Developmental Perspective 296. I have used The River as a metaphor before but this is its first appearance as a title or phase of life. It is related to the feeling evoked by the idea of The Ocean - I prefer the image and feeling evoked by the river - and refers to the phase of life of being rather than doing...which is therefore not of not-doing which is also a form of doing. In being the focus is neither on doing or on not-doing but on being, on the present, and not on ends, progress, results and intense future focus 297. For these functions and for enterprise, entrepreneurship and self-support see “Bibliography Part III: Special Bibliography on Research Organization and Leadership.” |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||