Basarab Nicolescu is an honorary theoretical physicist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Énergies, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris.
This is the second time I've read this. The tags I put on this book reflect some of its main themes, but it means to be expansive enough to comment on any discipline. What is impressive is its ambition but it is clearly written from someone who sees the overarching complexity in everything even if he lacks the vocabulary and specific expertise to comment adequately on each of those topics and how they can be transformed through a transcendisciplinary approach. In terms of Michael Commons;s model of complexity hierarchy, Nicolescu means to create a new paradigm for study, or at least one that will be able to give birth to new paradigms.
Its interesting from a standpoint but too general to be really useful.
Pour éviter tout malentendu Demain il sera trop tard Grandeur et décadence du scientisme Physique quantique et niveaux de Réalité Un bâton a toujours deux bouts L'émergence de la pluralité complexe Une nouvelle vision du monde : la transdisciplinarité 25 Transdisciplinarité et unité ouverte du monde 30 Mort et résurrection de la Nature Homo sui transcendentalis Techno-Nature et cyberespace Féminisation sociale et dimension poétique de l'existence Du culte de la personnalité Science et culture : au delà des deux cultures 60 Le transculturel et le miroir de l'Autre La transdisciplinarité - déviance et dérives Rigueur, ouverture et tolérance Attitude transreligieuse et présence du sacré Evolution transdisciplinaire de l'éducation Vers un nouvel humanisme : le transhumanisme
Annexe Charte de la Transdisciplinarité (Charter of Transdisciplinarity)
This book is a fascinating blend of mysticism, quantum physics, and epistemology. Many of Nicolescu's definitions and descriptions of transdisciplinarity are very useful, especially for scholars working against disciplinarity. I didn't care much for some of the idealism, mostly because I found it unuseful methodologically. Even so, there were many unexpected turns of thought can potentially lead to new ways of viewing the world -- and new models for academia.