Eric L. Weislogel On the Relationship of Metaphysics to Transdisciplinarity 79 On the Relationship of Metaphysics to Transdisciplinarity Eric L. Weislogel, Saint Joseph’s University, Philadelphia, PA, USA, Email: [email protected] doi: 10.22545/2013/00040 his essay shows the parallels between meta- to. For who could possibly be \educated in every physics and transdisciplinarity, both in terms area"? It is no longer possible{if indeed it ever really Tof their aims and methods and in terms of were{to be a Renaissance person, engaged in the their place or role in academic institutions. It widest possible array of scientific, philosophical, and attempts to define metaphysics, addresses criticisms cultural pursuits. In our age of analysis and spe- of metaphysics, and indicates the necessary relation- cialization, one who posed as such could be seen as ship of metaphysics to transdisciplinary endeavors. no more than a dabbler. Perhaps only an Aristotle, who wrote on physics, logic, rhetoric, ethics, zoology, Keywords: metaphysics, philosophy, method, meteorology, poetics, politics, and so on, could make transdisciplinarity, hermeneutics, deconstruction. such a claim, but it seems far too late in the scientific and cultural evolution of humanity for us to expect another Aristotle to arrive on the scene. 1 Introduction But just exactly what did Aristotle mean by this insight that Terrence Irwin translates as being \ed- In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle recognizes that ucated in every area"? Did Aristotle mean by this \each person judges rightly what he knows, and is a that one would need to have developed \expertise" good judge about that; hence the good judge in a in every area, that (in today's terms) one would have given area is the person educated in that area." No to major in every subject, earn PhD's in every field, more succinct statement can be given as the basis in order to be the “unqualifiedly good judge"? And for our traditional disciplinary way of thinking, re- what does that latter phrase really signify? The searching, and educating. This insight is no more word translated by “unqualifiedly” means \as such," than common sense. But Aristotle follows this rea- a good judge as such, without regard to any partic- sonable thought by claiming that \the unqualifiedly ular field or fields of expertise. It would not intend good judge is the person educated in every area,"[1]. one who is qualified (certified) as a competent judge If the requirement for being an “unqualifiedly good in some specific field rather than another, but one judge" is that one be \educated in every area," then who is competent to judge per se. the most reasonable conclusion to be drawn from this is that there are no unqualifiedly good judges. Let me note that if there were no such persons, the If this is so, then disciplinary thinking{its meth- prospects for transdisciplinarity are dim. But could ods and procedures, its practices, authorizations, there be such persons? The key to answering this and certifications–are all we are reasonably entitled question lies in our interpretation of the requirement Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science Vol. 4, pp. 79-93, (December, 2013) ISSN: 1949-0569 online Eric L. Weislogel On the Relationship of Metaphysics to Transdisciplinarity 80 to be \educated in every area." The Greek words do edge. This fragmentation of knowledge not reference \areas" (or fields or disciplines). They leads to the fragmentation of the university, say that one must be educated \about all" The all which has a significant impact on its mis- is not qualified, not referred to as the all insofar as sion to educate the next generation. The it is considered as this rather than that. Is there a fragmented university leads{consciously or way of approaching the all, of grasping the all in this unconsciously{to training students (and unqualified sense, of coming to the all as such? In faculty, too) to compartmentalize their other words, how can we know the all as the whole thinking, their reality, and hence their lives. as such in addition to knowing the parts? Our situation demands we respond to the \transdisciplinary imperative," an approach to research and teaching that would serve 2 What is Transdisciplinarity? to mitigate the consequences of this frag- mentation [3]. Basarab Nicolescu has provided us with a brief and useful history of the application of the term \trans- What I call the \transdisciplinary imperative" disciplinarity," [2]. He traces its earliest appearances stems from our concrete reality, our present situ- in the work of Jean Piaget, Erich Jantsch, and Andr´e ation in which the traditional policing of knowledge Lichnerowicz. In a critical synthesis of their various and education hamstring us in our struggle to solve understanding of transdisciplinarity, Nicolescu sum- pressing real-world problems. We have found that marizes the intent of transdisciplinarity by keeping a generalized fragmentation in ourselves, our com- close to the meanings of the Latin prefix, trans-: munities, our institutional practices, and our world across, between, and beyond. The transdisciplinary at large{a fragmentation resulting in a significant way of understanding rests on the traditional and way from philosophical commitments{is no longer newly developing disciplines or regions of research acceptable, that the gains we have made via our and knowledge generation. It cannot mean simply to analytic prowess have come at a cost of debilitat- overcome or leave behind the power and productivity ing fragmentation that needs to be addressed with of disciplinary practices. Further, transdisciplinarity alternative concepts and practices. Our sense of recognizes the fecund interplay between disciplines, the root of the problems points to the fact that we which often-times leads to the conception and devel- will need \more" than our disciplinary practices and opment of new disciplines with new research projects. the institutions that support them if we are to have But transdisciplinarity envisions more. What is hope for a better future. We must not only continue this \more"? What does \beyond" mean in terms our discipline-based research and not only look for of transdisciplinarity? Before attempting to answer fruitful cross-disciplinary initiatives; we must also this question, let us first note the motive for this look beyond disciplinary ways of encountering and desire for something \more." In an earlier essay, I appropriating reality, which may include moving be- wrote: yond the institutional embodiments of disciplinary practices in order to cope with complex problems. The economic, moral, political, environ- But Nicolescu is right, in distinguishing his views mental, technical, intellectual, scientific, from those of, for instance, Michael Gibbons and and even spiritual challenges we face de- Helga Nowotny, to say that transdisciplinarity and mand approaches that are suitably rich in the \beyond" that it seeks are not solely about solv- resources for tackling them. We need to ing the problems that confront us{as important as learn how to take the full measure of our those efforts are [4]. There is more to the \more" knowledge, to find out what it is we really than that; the transdisciplinary imperative goes be- know, now that we know so many disci- yond that, important as that is. plinarily distinct things. We need to find It is in this that I would like to tie transdisci- a way of recapturing a vision of the \for- plinarity to metaphysics. I will not argue (in this est" and not just the \trees." The negative essay, anyway) that those working in a transdisci- consequences for failing to do so are obvi- plinary mode need be committed to any particular ous. Our disciplinary practices inevitably metaphysical position or system. Rather I want to give rise to the fragmentation of knowl- argue against any attempt to avoid metaphysics or Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science Vol. 4, pp. 79-93, (December, 2013) ISSN: 1949-0569 online Eric L. Weislogel On the Relationship of Metaphysics to Transdisciplinarity 81 downplay its ultimate importance for getting to the things, the unmoved mover and uncaused causer, etc. more, for getting at the all. In short, I want to tie This book has come down to us through the ages the transdisciplinary imperative to a metaphysical bearing the title, Metaphysics. Aristotle did not, imperative (an imperative to metaphysics). Meta- himself, name this book this way, nor does the book physics pursues the \more" that transdisciplinarity contain the term \metaphysics." Were Aristotle to demands, and it is in this that they are allied. describe what he was doing in that work, he would say that he was pursuing either “first philosophy" or \theology." It was “first” philosophy not in the 3 What is Metaphysics? sense that one needs to know about this particular subject matter prior to exploring, say, physics or What is metaphysics? The answer depends on who biology (i.e., natural philosophy), but only that it is doing the defining. The term metaphysics has had was an exploration of the first things (arch´e) that many meanings over the course of the history of West- were operative whether anyone recognized them or ern philosophy, and any two philosophers can run not. As John Stuart Mill (no metaphysician himself) into all sorts of insoluble problems if they happen would put it much later, to start with two different notions of what meta- physics is. Blackwell's A Companion to Metaphysics, The truths which are ultimately accepted edited by the eminent philosophers Jaegwon Kim as the first principles of a science, are re- and Ernest Sosa, begins its entry on \metaphysics: ally the last results of metaphysical anal- definitions and divisions" (which you'd think would ysis, practised on the elementary notions be pivotal) as follows: \There is no clear and gener- with which the science is conversant; and ally accepted definition of metaphysics, no agreement their relation to the science is not that of on its tasks, scope or divisions" [5].