Basarab Nicolescu

The concept of levels of Reality, formulated in 1982, is the key concept of transdisciplinarity1. The introduction of the levels of Reality induces a multidimensional and multi-referential structure of Reality, signifying the coexistence between complex plurality and open unity. Every level is characterized by its incompleteness; the laws governing this level are just a part of the totality of laws governing all levels. And even the totality of laws does not exhaust the entire Reality; we have also to consider the interaction between Subject and Object. The zone between two different levels and beyond all levels is a zone of non-resistance to our experiences, representations, descriptions, images, and mathematical formulations. The Gödelian structure of levels of Reality implies the impossibility of a selfenclosed complete theory. Knowledge is forever open. The unity of levels of Reality of the Object and its complementary zone of non-resistance defines the transdisciplinary Object. The unity of levels of Reality of the Subject and this complementary zone of non-resistance defines the transdisciplinary Subject. The zone of non-resistance plays the role of a third between the Subject and the Object, an interaction term which allows the unification of the transdisciplinary Subject and the transdisciplinary Object. This interaction term is called the Hidden Third. The ternary partition (Subject, Object, Hidden Third) is, of course, radically different from the binary partition (Subject vs. Object) of classical realism.

The transdisciplinary approach, with its unique way of combining ontology, logic and epistemology, could inject much fertility into semiotics, social science, the second-order cybernetics and system science. I explain why the metaphysics of transdisciplinarity, radical distinctive from social constructivism, is the most beneficial for the development of second-order cybernetics. I will also compare the continuous interconnectedness of transdisciplinary Reality with Peirce’s synechism. The Hidden Third, in its relationship with the levels of Reality, is fundamental for the understanding of unus mundus described by synechism. Transdisciplinary realism gives a solid foundation to the theory of synechism and could open new avenues of research in social science, the second-order cybernetics and system science.

Nous rappelons tout d'abord les trois étapes majeures dans l'oeuvre de Stéphane.upasco (1900-1988): l'introduction du principe de dualisme antagoniste, l'examen des otions d'actualisation et de potentialisation et la formulation de la logique du tiers inclus. :nsuite, nous étudions les relations entre le tiers inclus et la contradiction et entre logique et ntologie et nous évoquons le rapport entre Gonseth et Lupasco. Enfin, nous introduisons la otion de niveaux de Réalité qui donne une explication simple et claire de l'inclusion du tiers.

In the introduction we explain why the relation between the Object and the Subject is a crucial problem of philosophy. The key point in understanding the Object-Subject relation is the vision on Reality that humans shared in different periods of the historical time. We next describe some historical aspects concerning the transdisciplinary concept of “level of Reality”, namely in relation with the work of John of the Ladder (c. 525-606), Nicolai Hartmann (1882-1950) and especially Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976). We finally analyze a unified theory of levels of Reality - the transdisciplinary approach, with its three axioms: levels of Reality, logic of included middle and complexity. We describe an important consequence of the transdisciplinary approach: the existence of a zone of non-resistance, which plays the role of a third between the Subject and the Object. This Hidden Third is an interaction term which allows the unification of the transdisciplinary Subject and the transdisciplinary Object while preserving their difference.

Theoretical physicist Nicolescu (CNRS and U. of Paris, France) employs a view of the universe found in quantum physics to build his argument as to how basic spiritual questions may be answered and the problems of humanity, such as greed and the dichotomy between rich and poor, can be overcome. His method is called transdisciplinarity because it requires a way of thinking that rises above and beyond the methods of individual disciplines, seeing multiple levels of meaning rather than simple dichotomies. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR.

When two people try to communicate there is inevitably a confrontation: a representation against a representation, subconscious against subconscious. As this confrontation is subconscious, it often degenerates into conflict. A new model of civilization is necessary, the keystone is dialogue between human beings, nations, cultures and religions for the survival of humanity. In forming a new model of civilization a methodology of transdisciplinarity can be helpful. In 1985 I proposed the inclusion in the word “trans-disciplinarity,” introduced by Jean Piaget in 1972, the meaning “beyond disciplines,” and I developed this idea over the years. Interdisciplinarity has a different goal than multidisciplinarity. The latter concerns a transfer of methods from one discipline to another, whereas the former overflows disciplines, but its goal still remains within the framework of disciplinary research. Interdisciplinarity has even the capacity of generating new disciplines.