Functional paradigm

A scientifique approach within a functional paradigm needs qualitative system dynamics as a holotropic instrument. See the eleven diagrams here below.
Here you see eleven diagrams in which Artes Sophiae shows her way of thinking about system dynamics within a functional paradigm, system dynamically validated and designed.
Under these 11 diagrams this particular functional paradigm will be explained in more detail

A functional paradigm

The more we study the major problems of our world, the more we come to realize that they cannot be understood in isolation. They are systemic problems, which mean that they are interconnected and interdependent as in a framework with basic dynamics.

Ultimately these problems must be seen as just different facets of one single crisis, which is largely a crisis of a way of thinking leading to outdate concepts, based on an inadequate mechanistic and materialistic perception of reality, a mechanical system composed of elementary building blocks, the view of an organism as a machine.

Possible solutions require a radical shift in our thinking: a holo-tropic paradigm to integrate all the different disciplines to solve the interrelated ecological problems. From the systemic point of view, the only viable solutions are those that are sustainable, a key concept in ecological holo-tropic thinking.

The great challenge how to create sustainable communities between all creatures on earth as one big organic interconnected and interdependent community. This requires a dramatic change of thinking, a new revolutionary paradigm that integrates analytical and synthetically approaches, with deep insights into the nature of matter and its relation to the human mind.

It is not only an intellectual crisis, but also a cultural, social and moral crisis and requires a radical revision of an outdate paradigm to see the cosmos as a whole.

A holo-tropic paradigm sees the world as an integrated whole rather than a dissociated collection of particles. An awareness that recognizes the fundamental interdependence of all phenomena and the fact that all creatures on earth are imbedded in the cyclical processes of nature as a whole of interconnected living systems. Not as a collection of isolated objects, but as a network of phenomena; from the perspective of the relationships to one another those are fundamentally interconnected and interdependent subjects.

A new system dynamic paradigm integrates Cosmo centric and Geo centric optics, meta-physic and ethic views, rational and volitional abilities, perceptions and actions, norms and values, analysis and synthesis, quantity and quality, atomistic and holistic, facts and phenomena, dead and living nature, nature and culture, linear and nonlinear thinking in science and mathematics, the I and the Self. In one word, in a functional paradigm they cannot be separated, they are all inherent in the one and only world, everything and everybody are an integral part of the web of life. There is a continuous reciprocal interaction between all inclined levels of existence: mineral, vegetal, animal, human; ascending and descending from physics to meta-physics and vice versa.

Reversible interactions between the whole and the parts

Functional paradigm

Het functionele paradigma.
Met het ´functionele paradigma´ stellen we een begrip aan de orde die C.A.van Peursen heeft geintroduceerd in zijn boek `Cultuur in stroomversnelling´. In dat boek omschrijft en analyseert hij drie mogelijke `denkramen´. Met een denkraam doelen we op een wijze van denken, een bepaalde kijk op de werkelijkheid.
De drie denkramen illustreren, ondanks hun historische ontwikkeling, drie mogelijke optieken waarmee de mens de werkelijkheid kan onderzoeken. Achtereenvolgens worden ze door van Peursen benoemd als het mythische pradigma, het ontologische paradigma en het functionele paradigma.
De kern verhouding die elk paradigma karakteriseert, is de relatie tussen subject en object. Deze subject object verhouding heeft zich in de loop van de tijd ontwikkeld. Achtereenvolgens geaccentueerd als het wie (mythisch paradigma), het wat (ontologisch paradigma) en het hoe (functioneel paradigma).
Elk paradigma stelt alle vragen naar het wie, wat, hoe, waar, wanneer, waarom. Evenwel verschilt het accent per paradigma wezenlijk. Op deze simpele wijze kan ieders karakteristiek omgezet worden in drie elkaar aanvullende benaderingen van de werkelijkheid.
Zie voor een verdere uitleg ´Lerend onderzoeken en onderzoekend leren´ te vinden onder publicaties.
Kortheidshalve kunnen we deze drie denkramen als volgt karakteriseren.
Het mythische paradigma onderzoekt in alles van wezen (het subject) tot wezen (het wie) het analoge verband.
Het ontologische paradigma onderzoekt in alles van ding (het object) tot ding (het wat) het causale verband.
Het functionele paradigma onderzoekt hoe het subject zich tot het object heeft te verhouden opdat een synthetische, integratieve benadering van beide voorgaande denkramen zowel beeldend als begrijpend tot stand kan komen, met behoud van ieders karakteristiek en optiek.
Om begrip en beeld, analyse en synthese op een systeemtheoretische wijze coherent en consistent te kunnen denken, dient systeemdynamiek ontwikkeld te worden teneinde dit functionele paradigma als denkraam ook te kunnen outilleren.
Zulks is het doel van Artes Sophiae en in het bijzonder van haar onderzoekskamer Artes techne. Elke dag een stap voorwaarts; moge een bescheiden aanvang verwelkomd worden, opdat het een vervolg mag krijgen met en door hen die dit willen en kunnen uitbouwen.


The functional paradigm.

With the ‘functional paradigm’ we address a notion that C.A. van Peursen has introduced in his book “The strategy of culture: a view of the changes taking place in our ways of thinking and living today”. In that book he describes and analyses three possible ‘frames to think’. With a frame to think we mean a way of thinking, a certain view on the reality.

The three frames to think illustrate, despite their historical development, three possible optics with which man is able to investigate the reality. They are named by Van Peursen successively as the mythical paradigm, the ontological paradigm and the functional paradigm.

The core relationship that characterizes each paradigm is the relationship between subject and object. This subject object proportion has developed in the course of time. Successively accentuated as the who (mythical paradigm), the what (ontological paradigm) and the how (functional paradigm).

Each paradigm asks all questions about who, what, how, where, when, why. However, the accent differs substantially per paradigm. In this simple way, everyone’s characteristic can be converted into three complementary approaches to the reality.

For a further explanation, see ‘learning by researching and researching by learning‘ under publications.

For the sake of brevity, we can characterize these three frames to think as follows.

The mythical paradigm investigates in everything from being (the subject) to being (the who) the analogous connection.

The ontological paradigm investigates in everything from thing {the object) to thing (the what) the causal connection.

The functional paradigm investigates how the subject has to relate to the object so that a synthetic, integrative approach to both previous ‘frames to think’ can be realized both visually and understandable, while retaining everyone’s characteristic and optic.

In order to be able to think notion and image, analysis and synthesis coherently and consistently on a system-theoretical way, system dynamics must be developed in order to be able to elaborate this functional paradigm as a framework to think.

This is the goal of Artes Sophiae and in particular her research room Artes techne. Every day a step forward; may a modest start be welcomed, so that it may be followed up