A Transdisciplinary Approach on the Advanced Sustainable Knowledge Integration

Abstract

The paper presents a new, transdisciplinary approach on the DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom)

Entropic and Negentropic Transitional Model: A SemioPhysical Context

“…The result of this inquiry is the DIMLAK model, as a holistic way of knowledge integration, with different heterarchic-hierarchic stages of knowledge integration represented as a transdisciplinary chain, as follows: Data (D, statistics approach)  Information (I), as syntactic way to relate descriptions, definitions, or perspectives  http: //dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.09.97 eISSN: 2357-1330 Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015). (Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015) Two very complex symbols, Bethel and Ai, are detected and associated, in the Biblical context, with two very specific ethical (as moral, axiological, deontological, aesthetic issues) communicational sources for people living on the earth with information and knowledge transmitted in every possible direction, having a different impact on the listeners Bernstein, 2009;Henry, 1996;Rae, 2009). Wisdom is speaking from Bethel, through the voice of the Priest of God, and madness is speaking from Ai, through the voice of the priest of Evil.…”

“…In the context of transitional processes the transdisciplinary knowledge search window is introduced as a new methodology working with the top-down and bottom-up levels of knowledge and integrating complementarily the advanced knowledge through the DIMLAK model Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015;Gibbons et. al., 1994;Kuramoto, 1975) (fig.…”

“…There are two kinds of messages in a communicational process, Io, named standard information, with its level of advanced knowledge No, and Ix, as information in a given context x (space-wise, timewise, action-wise), with the correspondent level of advanced knowledge Nx (Šlaus, 2003;Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015). In every communicational process there can be identified two different situations; the first one being a negentropic way to achieve the complete advanced knowledge (Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015;Ho, 1994), when the sequential information Ix tends to become coincident with standard information Io, so Ix→Io, or Ix-Io→0, with the correspondent knowledge levels, No and Nx, quite identical, or No-Nx→0, when the synergistic communication is realized.…”

“…In every communicational process there can be identified two different situations; the first one being a negentropic way to achieve the complete advanced knowledge (Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015;Ho, 1994), when the sequential information Ix tends to become coincident with standard information Io, so Ix→Io, or Ix-Io→0, with the correspondent knowledge levels, No and Nx, quite identical, or No-Nx→0, when the synergistic communication is realized. The second situation, with Ix-Io→∞ (infinite), is identified with lack of knowledge, or evil knowledge, with the correspondent levels, No and Nx very different one from another, where No-Nx→∞, the communicational process working as an entropic degenerative process (Ho, 1994;Georgescu Roegen, 1971;Bernstein, 2009).…”

“…A semiophysical system (Pop & Maties, 2011;Thom, 1990;Locke, 1975) has three pillars of the knowledge building: a) phenophysics (phenomenological physics, or common sense physics with structural functionalities) (Petitot, 1990;Arecchi, 2007); b) semiotics (with the logical-creative significance of a message in a given context) (Eco, 1997;Sebeok, 2001;Morris, 2003); and c) ethics (with the perspective of power through authority in leadership, learning, and relations, as moral, axiologic, deontologic, and even aesthetic aspects) Henry, 1996;Rae, 2009). The seven fundamental questions considered as seven habits necessary to be put everywhere and at all times, to the "here and now; and/or; then and there", in order to achieve the integrated knowledge about the future trend of the knowledge-based society Pop, Talpoş & Prisac, 2015) are: (a) "where", through spatial participative sequence, space-wise-SPS, configured by the shape, dimensions, and proximity in which specific agents are to be found in a specific distribution and relationship; (b) "when", through temporal connective sequence, time-wise-TCS, marked by synchronic events in kairotic significance, and finally five questions (c) "who, with whom, what, how, and why", as a synergistic contextual message (SCM), through interactions which can be described in time and space through the actional-interactive sequence, act-wise-AIS (Pop & Maties, 2011;. The synergistic significance (synergy, 1+1>2, and significance, 1-1≠0), works as a transdisciplinary whole-transcending barriers, demolishing walls, and building bridges through the gaps, in order to optimize the synergistic communicational process, assuring the connection between the Sender as the transmitter and the Receiver as a recipient of the information while facilitating the transmission of significant information from an ethic and semiotic point of view as well.…”