Synthesis in Broad Sense. The Harmonizator

This entry was posted by on Tuesday, 26 January, 2010 at

The traditional development category conceived as unity and struggle of contraries, centered on the conflict between A and its opposite (anti-A) proved to be non-fundamental, being unable to surpass the level of a primitive and precarious organization.  It is no wonder that Hegelian dialectics, binary,  without any passages, based on the elimination of the weaker side, has systematically failed in forging of some abstract, non-authentic totalities. Following Hegel, N. Bohr has definitely collapsed into an antinomic complementarity ( his slogan being: contraries and not contradictories are really complementary), finally leading him to serious methodological- conceptual derailments, for example the explicit negation of a genuine, distinct quantum reality.

Some Romanian thinkers, especially Lucian BLAGA, Stefan LUPASCU and Constantin NOICA- all being Bohr’s contemporaries- have perceived more accurately the minuses of Hegelian dialectics / synthesis, looking for alternative elaborations , more constructive, compatible with the edification and functioning of some genuine, alive totalities highly specific for our contemporary knowledge. Following this Romanian tradition I have elaborated the category of synthesis in broad sense ( synthesis with harmonizator ) briefly presented for the first time at the International Congress of Logic and Methodology of Science held in 1991 ( Uppsala, Sweden).

X

Harmonizator ( H ) represents the active milieu of the alive wholes  of any nature, being constituted from totality of  all  neutral states ( real and / or potential possible ) in relation with the contraries A and anti-A:

H = (non – A) – (anti – A)

At limit, if ( non – A ) = ( anti – A ) the harmonizator becomes zero, leading to the classical Hegelian situation (Fig. 4 a).

By contrast to the Hegelian synthesis the new synthesis ( with harmonizator ) answers to some key requirements of non-Cartesian knowledge, assuming among others:

  • Authentic complementarity between A and its contradictory ( non-A ), acting as an efficient generator of authentic, alive totalities by promoting a new, integrative logic: both / and;
  • Surpassing binarity: the fundamental, interconnected  character of contemporary world imposes taking into account the interconnectivity of all phenomena and not just the two of them;
  • Overtaking the limits of anti – negation and correlatively the development based on exclusion through promoting the non –negation and correlatively again the subsuming development ;
  • The opening of real toward possible – as a premise of living being authenticity, this time the harmonized whole and not at all some ” distinguished ” part –  controls the situation,  making possible the evolution of opposition in complementarity; also,  the Heideggerian principle of tuned reality becomes active only in harmonized wholes, to follow on  the original essence ( idea, design ) commonly found in the potential – possible.

Conclusions:


  • The Hegelian synthesis centered on opposition, should not be undervalued because it represents a particular case of synthesis with harmonizator engaging especially the crisis situations;
  • All authentic, alive totalities are based on synthesis with harmonizator being contradictory, harmonized wholes;
  • Synthesis with harmonizator capitalizes in the most direct manner the lesson provided by biological being, regarding the prevalence of cooperative strategies in relation to the conflictual ones, strongly suggesting  the re-invention of politics, education, medicine, nutrition…on a new complementary base, according to the new methodological principle “ harmonize and develop ”, the decisive factor being this time the active medium;
  • Harmonization represents an essential requirement and not an extravagance inspired by some Eastern wisdom, it being correctly perceived as much as by politicians ( Abraham LINCOLN: ” the best way to destroy an enemy is to make him your friend ” ),  as well as by researchers from different areas:

Lynn MARGULIS, Dorion SAGAN: ” Health is not so much a matter of destroying microorganisms as it is of restoring appropriate microbial community ” ( 1997 ).

Roald HOFFMAN ( Nobel prize for Chemistry ): ”…there is no real single thesis and antithesis but rather a multiple perspective, if not cubist at least multidimensional.  Why opposition? ” (1995).

X

Even though he has unique merits in abolition of Cartesian opposition subject / object in microphysics, it has to be noted that Niels BOHR did not decisively disengaged from the typical values of modern thinking system, for instance he did not understand the contradictory essence of authentic complementarity:

“ I hope that this concept of  ( antinomic , F.F. ) complementarity  is susceptible to elude the actual difficulties generated by necessity to make a distinction between subject and object.” ( N. Bohr, 1928 ).

Obviously, the distinction was not the main concern but rigid separation and especially the opposition involving “ nothing in common ” between the two contraries.  Unfortunately this “ nothing in common ” continues to this day to be predominant in approaching the rapport between ergonic / non-ergonic, matter / spirit, real / possible, action / information, etc. …

Distinctively different from “ Bohr complementarity idea ”, the synthesis with harmonizator has a generalized applicative value, it suggesting correct dialectic solutions ( Fig. 3 ) even there where some contemporary ( remarkable ) physicists inertially promote methodological rupture ( separation and opposition ) –  as is  the case of probability waves methodological status ( to be clear I want to underline that the quantum nonlocality has a non-ergonic essence / nature ).

Fig.3   A new ( non – Bohr ) Complementarity model between  A / non-A:    Action / Information


Leave a Reply