Dr. Florin Florea Felecan together with his two sons – Florin Jr. – International Master – chess and Emilian ( www.felecan.com )
|Agatha B. McWilliams
Submitted on 2013/12/25 at 10:28 am
Very quickly this web page will be famous amid all blogging users, due to it’s good articles or reviews
Thanks, Agatha! Happy New Year from Evanston! Florin
Welcome to this corner of my methodological …paradise entitled New Holism. Several major materials presented here are original contributions which you are not going to find them somewhere else; it is my pleasure to recognize that in their elaboration I have significantly benefited from direct and / or indirect suggestions of some methodological mentors – well-known personalities of contemporary science and philosophy, such as:
Ilya R. PRIGOGINE – Nobel Prize for Chemistry;
David BOHM – the author of some non-traditional physical concepts of great integrative relevance ( holomovement, Wholeness and the Implicate Order );
Hans D. ZEH – the main promoter of the decoherence theory which elegantly and efficiently reveals the genuine genesis ( quantum ) mechanism of the macroscopic systems;
Martin HEIDEGGER, Ervin LASZLO, and Constantin NOICA – first hand philosophers decisively involved in the complex, subtle methodological transition from real ( thing ) to potential / possible ( living being / organism ) , from separation to distinction and in the affirmation / promotion of the fundamental character of the possibility and inseparability categories.
My name is Florin Florea FELECAN and I have earned a Master’s degree ( specifically 5 – years Diploma ) at the Chemistry Faculty of State University – Bucharest being a member of a distinct/ unique series called “ academician series “, due to the high professional quality of my colleagues: Elena ANGELESCU, Marian TUDOR, Dumitru OANCEA and others, followed by a post-universitary specialization in Biochemistry ( mineral metabolism ); I have also earned a Master’s degree ( 6 years Diploma ) at the Philosophy Faculty with a specialization in methodology of scientific knowledge. I have obtained my PhD at the same University with an inter-disciplinary disertation ( physics, chemistry, philosophy ) entitled “Entropy and Negentropy of the Systems “ considered by Professor Prigogine as “ interesting and promising ”.
After the Romanian Revolution ( 1989 ) I was promoted Dean of Faculty of Sciences – University Transilvania, Brasov – Romania being co-opted as a member in the Committee of Romanian Academy of Sciences. In 1997 I immigrated , together with my family, to United States, presently being an American citizen residing in Evanston, Illinois. I am a member of American Chemical Society. In 2009 – I initiated retirement procedures at Transilvania University, Brasov.
The reason for this blog is given by the awareness that contemporary science ( and whole knowledge too) reached a critical point in its ( unilateral ) development characterized by Cartesianism, in other words through mechanicist and atomist approaches, being absolutely necessary a paradigm shift emphasizing the transition from real to possible, from separability to inseparability.
←The forest ( = environment )…visualized!
Ervin LASZLO, one of the most representative contemporary methodologists, characterizes this critical moment in the following terms:
“The dominant mechanistic and atomistic paradigm no longer serves us: it is not only factually incorrect in view of the latest discoveries of the sciences, it also inspires dangerously misguided behaviors.(,,,) We must no longer just see the trees: we must also see the forest.” (2002, World Futures, vol.58 ).
For instance, the modern science – centered on real, a real ruptured from possible – has no authenticity, being non-fundamental. Indeed the classical knowledge from Galileo to Einstein and from Descartes to Heidegger has no genesis: the systems are either “ thrown in the world” or invoking the tautology “ the real generates real” – a methodological artifact which obviously leaves untouched the question: from where is coming ( and where is going back ) this “ real ”? It is true, Descartes has helped us to conceive and to define / measure the “ itself ” – the real basis of the entire modern science, but paying a fabulous price of departing from an originary coherence ( rough, syncretic, medieval but ALIVE ), to which today we are trying to return on a superior plan. After centuries of Cartesianism we are determined to conclude: analyticity KILLS = the live thinking becomes calculus ( intellection ), the live time becomes extension ( duration ), the animal becomes a production unit and the human being – a consumption unit…
Another very instructive methodological lesson is provided by the destiny of some traditionalist philosophical options of Albert Einstein, characterized by a clear preference to cartesianism: for decades , the great physicist , following ( too tightly ) the special relativity theory conclusions, promoted an exhausted either…or logical position aiming to identify / reduce the existence in broad sense, both local and non-local, with/ to actuality ( reality ) ignoring or , at his best , undervaluing the other ( fundamental ! ) counterpart – potentiality ; last decades developments , especially after 1964 ( J.S.Bell ) and 1980/81 ( A.Aspect and colleagues ) highlight the only one and correct solution :actuality is just a subsystem of potentiality and, correlatively , locality is just a particular case of non-locality , the new, proper logic being of a non-cartesian, synthetical type: both / and.
Decades ago, Niels Bohr drew our attention that the source of schizophrenia of the entire modern vision derives from separation (opposition) between subject / object. Separations ( oppositions ) perhaps deeper such as real / possible, actual / potential , matter / spirit ,.. have impeded the progress of contemporary knowledge toward a genuine synthesis /globalization.
Entered, after 1960, into a new ( non- cartesian ) methodological era, the contemporary knowledge is definitely involved in authentic totalities promotion, the efficient approach of these being impossible without the decisive rehabilitation of some non-mechanical categories ( subject / subjective, possible / possibility, spirit / spiritual ) traditionally treated as typical epiphenomena. In my subsequent papers I’ll bring to the attention of my readers some of the most interesting aspects of this sensational conceptual new perspective / development which – in a non-mystic but non-reductionist manner either – sets, slowly but surely, the mentioned “ epiphenomena ” in the core of contemporary knowledge, recognizing their fundamental, inalienable character. Perhaps the most remarkable result of this reconsideration is the elaboration, in all knowledge areas, of some categories in broad sense, called by me syncategories ( syn from synthesis). These non-Cartesian generalizations ( time in broad sense, space in broad sense, existence in broad sense, holism in broad sense, relativity in broad sense, ether in broad sense, measurement in broad sense, etc. ) will be permanently found at the fore-front of this blog.