By Way of Conclusion
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4387514 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rene Thom, Robert E Chumbley, Robert Chumbley |
| Year | 1983 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 78 |
| Publication date | 1983-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | SubStance (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0049-2426 • E-ISSN: 1527-2095 |
| Publisher | Project MUSE (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3684258 |
| OpenAlex | W2333994249 |
| Language | EN |
The concepts put in play in our problematics (determinism, chance, randomness, order, disorder, complexity, information . . . , etc.) all have this characteristic in common: they acquire a precise signification only in the framework of an explicit (mathematical) formalism. By not attaching these concepts to the formal framework which renders them precise, one is condemned to hold discourses not necessarily senseless, certainly, but of a fluidity, an ambiguity such that nearly always they spill over into verbalism. It is true that epistemology and I side with Edgar Morin here cannot isolate itself inside scientificity. If one wants to make of scientific knowledge something other than the heritage of an elite moreover split into specializations ignorant of or envying each other it is necessary to bring about a sharing among the largest number possible of readers of good will, by an appropriate popularization, of the significance of essential concepts in Science. But, to do that, it is indispensable to begin with the framework of strict scientificity, resigning oneself to using carefully and honestly chosen abuses of language to give a more flexible vision of the scientific concepts, which will permit the essential traits to be grasped by the largest audience possible. This is not an easy task, I admit, particularly if these concepts exist already in an intuitive form as terms in everyday language. It seems imperative, in any case, that the epistemologist know the formal meaning of the concept. What has been objected to in my work seems to indicate that many of those who contradict me do not satisfy this requirement. I am happy, for my part, to have learned what determinism is in the theory of dynamical systems and not in the prose of Edgar Morin -, just as I did not wait to read Ilya Prigogine to know what a bifurcation is... How many essayists write ad nauseam on entropy and the second principle, who do not know what a completely integrable differential form is, or an integrating factor
Ambiguity · Determinism · Elite · Epistemology · Formalism (music) · Linguistics · Meaning (existential) · Order (exchange) · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Chaos, Complexity, and Education · Computer Science · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Science and Climate Studies
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |