Thursday, October 15, 2009

Session 9: October 7th, 2009

Course 903 is an excellent melting pot for ideas. The questions that crop up during class discussions ferment and produce aromas that draws the Integrated Science Education Initiative forward. These questions are crucial and if these can be definitely answered, I think we can all sit down to a banquet of results.

I invite responses from everyone who can think of possibilities and alternatives for the problems posed here.

Integration is risky. Descartes' contribution to Western Science produced in time a disciplinary regime. The Episteme-Techne-Phronesis model we are discussing now can produce instead a thematic regime. But can it avoid disciplinary sedimentation itself?

Can a thematic regime avoid being trapped in the problem of the sponsor's hegemony in deciding which theme merits study?

How do we determine what is a theme? Empirically anything can be a theme. So how do we distinguish between a thing and a theme?

Once determined, what will be the mode of addressing the theme?

Would studying an integrated theme require one person to study all the different disciplinary specializations?

Can we actually bring matters of the material world to the dimension of phronesis? For example in astrophysics, we are studying the star and it is the sole concern. How then to bring that area of study to the human sciences?

No comments:

Post a Comment