INTEGRATIVE / INDUCTIVE
One of the aims of this website is to develop integrative websites.
Although integration is --as an intuitive methodology-- of all times, used by scientists, artists and all kinds of creative thinkers, it was used pre-consciously by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) and Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1949), and could be used in the paper and print era, the arrival of Internet definitely opened an easy and effective way to bring contrasting visions together and to integrate them. Internet is not only a communication tool, but thanks to the internet experience a new form of consciousness emerges in even more people, who realize the paramount importance of integration, and start using this attitude in their lives, not only intellectually, but progressively also in their private and professional life.
Inductive of Integrative Logics is a set of rules than can be used to enable and enhance the process of integration, which necessitates one or more creative steps of induction. Apparently incongruous hypotheses or descriptions of a system are considered rather complementary than mutually exclusive. But the combination of these supposedly complementary contributions proves often difficult, because their wording probably is too excessive/concrete for their essential core. A new hypothesis or description has to be formulated. This is a creative, nowadays still intuitive thought process. If the previously incongruous contributions can be replaced by one new formulation, and each previous contribution can be deducted from it, this new formulation is considered as really integrative, and more plausible than each contribution on itself.
Inductive logics doesn't yet describe this process as an operational paradigm, but enhances the probability that such a process will intuitively occur.
This is a new kind of logics, different from the traditional Logic. Where the latter is deductive (from premisses to conclusions), integrative logic is inductive, because it is a tool to develop, directly and indirectly, new hypotheses. In the past each kind of induction (also in experimental, exact science) was intuitive. In fact, the only thing exact science added to human knowledge from Renaissance on, was a controlling tool: hypothese were examined by comparing their predictions with real experiments or measurements, and hence refuted or confirmed. But there was no useful intellectual tool to develop a hypothesis: this creative process remained up to now within the domain of the subconscious, although many philosophers and scientists up to now searched during centuries for an inductive logic.
Rules of Inductive Logics
Along with defining rules for pratical website integration, it is likely that this experience leads to the discovery (or the explicit formulation ) of the intuitively felt "laws" of creative, integrative thinking. These rules or laws try to describe the intellectual process of integration, and its intellectual attitudes linked to it.
Some Basic Principles
1. Each contribution, how ever divergent or even paradoxal, has its value, and should inspire to a more elaborate integration of the topic. Although there are some reasons for exceptionally discarding some contributions (see below), the reason "that the other didn't understand the least of it" is statistically so improbable, that it better never should be used.
2. Divergent or conflicting contributions should inspire to a reformulation, either of the former hypothesis or of the new contribution, or --most likely-- of both.
3. The first, still partially unconscious, step in the formulation of a new hypothesis (or in the reformulation of an existent) is the elaboration of a more extended scheme: bringing things together and ordering them along an intuitively perceived aspect.
4. If a list of loose elements contains more than 3 or 4 items, a schematizing structure (frame) is likely to emerge, and should consciously be searched for. Longer lists should be avoided. This new elaborated scheme probably will show some gaps, inspiring our creativity.
Causes of apparent unintegrability
5. Most incongruencies between contributions are provoked by improper formulation: concepts often are over-generalized and proposals often are over-concretized.
6. Over-generalization occurs by a lack of contrasting experience. As no "exception" for the observation is available, the factor which is sensible for a possible variation is not observable, and in this vacuum an over-generalization of the hypotyhesis easily occurs. Should Newton --like Einstein-- have observed very little or very fast moving objects, he should never have proposed his simple mechanical equations. Differentiation of observation, and contrasting experience, is perhaps the most valuable factor in creativity.
7. Likewise, over-concretization occurs by lack of inspiration, or lack of contrasting experience. The person honestly thinks his needs or intentions can only be realized by this precise activity.
8. An integration is not always within the same level: not all contributions apply to the same levels of abstraction. But rather than to discard them, they should inspire for adding new levels to the scheme.
Arguments for successful integration
9. If an integration takes all presented elements into account, more concrete statements could be deduced form the integrative hypothesis by reduction, i.e. eliminating some elements that are not applicable in a certain situation. In fact, the possibility to infer all "partial" hypotheses from the integration is the best available argument for its plausibility.
10. Although within a communicating group "democratic" rules can't be used to confirm or to refute the plausibity of a potential integration (on the contrary: new and creative ideas always start as a feature of a minority), the feeling or rather the intuitionof the group members, especially of the author of the contribution, is a good unconscious indication for the plausibility of the integrative hypothesis. As long as a hypothesis is not sustained by unconscious agreement, probably some aspects are neglected. This explains why each integration probably will be transcended one day, as, by new experience or contrasting inspiration, more intuitions become conscious. The technique of integration doesn't consider the temporary presence of more than one proposed integration as an unacceptable fact.
Side-effects of good Integration
11. It is a psychological/intellectual rule, stating that every kind of thinking-in-depth not just reveals aspects of the problem one tries to tackle, but also one or several underlying levels of human and intellectual functioning, including psychological resistance, problem solving methods, methods of creative thinking, etc.
12. One of the tasks of Integrative Logics is to establish a list of all possible logical structures or frames (I presume that they are not so numerous) to be used in articles. Authors (and integrating software) could then work along these structures.
13. There is the logical phenomenon of lateral inspiration: by elaborating one aspect of the topic, e.g. practical conclusions about waye to influence a process, one becomes aware of the different aspects that are active within the studied process.
Some Logical Frames
A tentative list of the fundamental logical structures or frames which can logically organize an integrative site. The frames probably can be discovered by observing how people unconsciously and spontaneously organize their texts. When a certain number of frames is recognized, one can try to integrate them. Most probably there are only one or a few fundamental frames, whereof many concrete frames are reduced.
In these logical frames some topics are sometimes so obvious, they can be skipped.
- The Descriptive Frame
After a definition and simple description of the studied topic one wants to change of influence. Then a list is presented of factors which influence the studied phenomenon. Finally a list is presented of actions that can be undertaken to influence those factors.
Introduction - The Strategic Frame (the Evaluation)
Logical place of the notion
Historical development of the notion
Possible misunderstandings / Synonyms
The process / The phenomenon
Different forms / Stages
Applications / Consequences
Reminder of the purpose of the action * Each Evaluation yields inspiring elements to elaborate the related Integrative Description(s).
Observed problems/divergencies and their prospective(s)
List of factors that provoke/explain those divergencies
Possible actions/measures, factor by factor
Possibly preliminary actions to be taken to enable thje former actions
Possible risks by taking measures, and countering actions
Time table of things to do, personal instruction list
Time and Agenda of the next evaluation
* An Evaluation can be incomplete, and end, at every level, with some questions to reflect on before the next meeting/report