Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 INTEGRATION. 2 What is integration? A transformation process, starting with (at least) two constituents: contributing systems or concepts, resulting.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 INTEGRATION. 2 What is integration? A transformation process, starting with (at least) two constituents: contributing systems or concepts, resulting."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 INTEGRATION

2 2 What is integration? A transformation process, starting with (at least) two constituents: contributing systems or concepts, resulting into a third system or concept, a new identity, in which the essence (the "core values") of each starting system or concept are preserved.

3 3 Integration

4 4 Development of the notion of “INTEGRATION” 1.Synthesis of different theories Psychoanalysis vs. behaviourism / surpassing eclecticism 2.Problem Solving technique Better than (1) choice, (2) compromise 3.The principal condition for mental health An integration of needs 4.The essential process in communication Differentiating communication from manipulation / proving 5.Optimal group functioning (Consent /sus) Surpassing democracy= dictature of uninformed majority 6.Practical / Factual integration The drive behind evolution and technical progress 7.Scientific method The only usable in alpha sciences (philosophy, psycho…)

5 5 Application fields for integration Systems (factual) Theories (Conceptual) Starting elements ConstituentsPartial theories RetroductionFunctional reshaping Reformulating -Hypergeneralisation -hyperconcretisattion

6 6 Two different processes? No, rather two stages of one process Stages:Project >>Realisation Factual: (virtual, unconscious, coincidence) “Factual integration” Conceptual:“Conceptual integration” (often delayed)

7 7 (Conceptual) integration is not Compromise: no reformulation / reshaping Wikipedia: rather data accumulation Wilber’s integral approach Other meanings: Therapeutic parallel Body and Mind approach Social integration of minority groups Mathematical procedure

8 8 1. FACTUAL, SYSTEMIC INTEGRATION & EVOLUTION

9 9 Examples of factual integration (1) Mobile “phone” = phone + mp3-player + camera + computer + net browser + watch (& alarm) + gps + agenda + notebook + light + …

10 10 Examples of factual integration (2) Molecule = combination of atoms To complete the external shell of electrons realising the atoms’ “dream”: the octet structure e.g. NaCl

11 11 CO 3 : depletion of external shell

12 12 Examples of factual integration (3) Metazoa = combination of useful functions By 4 tissues: 1.Epithelial: protection against external agressors 2.Muscles: movement, and Digestive tube: food and energy 3.Connective tissue: including bones and blood 4.Nervous tissue: transmitting information

13 13 Examples of factual integration (4) Socialisation, relationships = Mutual fulfilment of needs Material, financial Supportive Affective, emotional Sexual Social Biological

14 14 Evolution Carolus Linnaeus (1707 – 1778) Erasmus Darwin ( ) Jean-Baptiste Lamarck ( ) Charles Darwin ( ) Gregor Mendel ( / rediscovered 1900) Pierre Teilhard de Chardin ( ) 1938 Julian Huxley ( ) James Watson (1928-) & Francis Crick ( ) (Process Philosophy:) Russell, Whitehead, Van der Veken

15 15 Pierre Teilhard de Chardin & Julian Huxley In the evolution of the unverse two fundamental processes occur : 1.More complexity 1.Divergent, centrifugal 2.Convergent, centripetal What emerges, merges 2.More consciousness Huxley’s psychometabolism

16 [1] Complexification (1) Same level (2) One higher level

17 17

18 18 Average (level 3-8) = Average (without 0.25) = (Golden section = ± 2.2 % Arguments for Teilhard’s model 1.Simple one step complexification 2.Gradual acceleration

19 19 [2] Controlling systems 6-9. Internal control 9. Noophase/Noosphere Conscious decisions with internal image of external reality 6-8. Biophase/Biosphere Blind (DNA) or reflexive or learned (cortex) action programs 1-5. External control Lithophase/Lithosphere Balance between external and internal forces

20 20 Steering (Controlling) system In the Biosphere 1. Program & Reflexes “Blind” execution of program steps Progressively with more checking if adequate situation is present By DNA, genes & chromosomes, nervous networks In protozoa, primitive animals, most insects + 2. Learned behaviour New reactions are added during life By cortex In animals esp. mammalia + 3. Internal image of external reality, “consciousness” New behaviour without experiments nor learning By frontal cortex In humans, (apes)

21 21 The present (9 th ) stage: Complexification of (intelligent) metazoa: “socialisation”, “noosphere development”

22 22 Stages 6-8 -> Stage 9

23 23

24 24

25 25

26 26 “Tertiary” Co-regulation Incongruent desires [ -> “secondary” manipulation and conflicts ] spontaneously transformed by integration = constructive/creative conversion of (conflicting) needs into (congruent) desires

27 27 2. CONCEPTUAL INTEGRATION

28 28 Lascaux

29 29 Conceptual Integration Two applications 1.Elaborating action projects 2.Developing hypotheses

30 30 Elaborating action projects (1) Non-integrative style (II-ary, neurosis) –Taking into account some needs / objectives –Taking into account some consequences e.g. short-term consequences –Dealing with conflicts by choice Integrative style (III-ary, synergy, consensus) –Taking all (as much as possible) needs into account –Dealing with incongruencies by integration: retroduction to essence, recombination

31 31 Elaborating action projects (2) (From need to desire) Need 1 Need 2 Need 3 Desire 1 Desire 3 Desire 2 Integrative Desire Need 1 Need 2 Need 3 Non-integrative, conflicts: Integrative:

32 32 1.Communication in relationship 2.“Sociocratic” group collaboration (by consent) 3.Peer to Peer (P2P) projects e.g. Linux, Wikipedia 4.Politics Elaborating action projects(3) (Applications)

33 33 1.There’s only one “truth”, no equivalents 2.The probability that one vision is completely right and the other completely wrong is infinitely less than the probability that both have a part of the “truth” 3.All conflicts / disagreements are only so in appearance, never unsuperable 4.Logic ought to deal with reformulating for reaching an integration, not with looking for the “truth”, defending it, falsifying alternatives 5.Nothing is “true”, only “plausible”. Developing hypotheses (1) (Axiomas)

34 34 Within the reduced model: Within a realistic worldview:

35 35 The integrative “attitude” = a mental approach facilitating integrations All conflicts / incongruencies can be resolved If it doesn’t seem easy, just more time and inspiration are needed. At the end it always succeeds The essence is often hidden Everything that anyone says contains some value, so never say: “I disagree” Truth doesn’t exist, only plausibility Even the most plausible conclusion can / will be improved one day Integration enhances my real self; not choices. My real intellectual superiority is in elaborating integrations, not in proving my truth or in convincing

36 36 Developing hypotheses (2) (Analogy, symbolically)

37 37 1.Retroduce (reformulate) the exaggerated (“educed” - overgeneralised) constituents, by discovering the core values, checking them against other (partial) theories 2.Combine the reformulated constituents 3.Control the plausibility of the integrative hypothesis by a. Reducing it to the original constituents b. Matching it with an existing Corpus of integrative theories in which it has to fit c. Checking the subconscious Developing hypotheses (3) (Procedure for conceptual integration)

38 38 Newton vs. Einstein Constituents: Newton’s law v AB = v A + v B Observations in Einstein’s time: The speed of light is constant Rapid bodies move slower than predicted by Newton’s formula Integration: Einstein’s law: Reduction: If v A and v B are low, the numerator becomes = 1 Hence v AB = v A + v B Developing hypotheses (4) (Example)

39 39 Developing hypotheses (5) (Applications) In Alpha Sciences (where measurements and exact proofs are nearly impossible) integration is the best available method to obtain high plausibility: Psychology, psychotherapy, philosophy, religion, social sciences, politics, art

40 40

41 41 Developing hypotheses (6) (Historical predecessors) In ancient Times Socrates, Plato, Hippocrates, Euclides, Galenus, Egyptian and Babylonic architects, etc… In modern Times Hegel's "thesis, antithesis and synthesis” Whitehead, Teilhard de Chardin Gebser, Gordon, Apostel

42 42 Developing hypotheses (7) (Conclusions 1) In Alpha Sciences { Psychology, psychotherapy, philosophy, religion, social sciences, politics, art } the Method of Integration should be a prevailing methological condition in research and publications (Corpus)

43 43 Developing hypotheses (7) (Conclusions 2) The use of General Systems Theory, as a tool for explaining fundamental processes, supports the integrative method Training -from secondary studies on- in integration and the integrative attitudes -including general education- should be at least as important as “logical” (aristotelic-cartesian) thinking, as well for –personal (communication) –social (creative collaboration, politics) –scientific (plausibility method) –philosophical & religious (constructive humanism) purposes and benefits.

44 44 Thank you.


Download ppt "1 INTEGRATION. 2 What is integration? A transformation process, starting with (at least) two constituents: contributing systems or concepts, resulting."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google