1
VERTICAL INTEGRATION OF SCIENCE:
CONSIDERING THE SYSTEMS SCIENCE
5th International Conference. Proceedings of the HTN 2000 Conference. Moscow,
VINITI, 2000, 265-266.
EMILIA CURRÁS
Academician, University Professor
Gold Medal of Kaula and Fedine Foundations
European Chemist, Ils. Fellow
E.U. Evaluation Expert
KEYWORDS: Systems Science, vertical integration of science, science as unity, unity
of knowledge, new concept of science, social problems, new world order, system
thinking.
ABSTRACT
Science is considered as a whole, as a unity of knowledge, in which the different
branches of wisdom are integrated, forming a complex, evolutive, open and fuzzy
system Each one of the different sciences, parts of the human knowledge, are the
holons in the unity of science, in dialectic interactions. The vertical integration in
science, ascendant or descendant is studied. It means a mentality change a more general
vision, which, may be, can the humanity helps to solve its today´s problems.
Mankind is clearly at a transcendentally important point in history, and also
politically and economically. This crisis situation has been denounced by several
authors and I have also mentioned it in other papers. It is also something that requires
no proof, its indicators and consequences are self evident.
When, about twenty years ago, people began to speak about society being in
crisis, are the effects of this were felt in daily life, it seemed daring and even pessimistic
to think that this was the beginning of a period of transformation or transmutation. To
relate crisis with transmutation was considered the audacity of avan-garde and eccentric
thinkers. So much has been written and the symptoms are so obvious that there is no
alternative but to accept these ideas and realities. Proposed solutions have been
extremely few those applied or adopted even fewer.
Given the situation, why are we incapable of finding solutions and putting them
into practice?. The reason is that we have to change our thought. “Anew man” should be
born with new ways of thinking and of acting in responsibility. For a good number of
years (it is difficult to define how many), thinkers for all parts and all ideologies, have
talked about the change in mentality that is necessary to focus on solutions to the
problems of today. Of those I best I know, I will mention: Augerow C., Chernisyshow
M.Y., Fernando de Elzaburu, E. Laszlo, Alwin Deimer, Heidegger, John Mc Hales,
Fichte and Hegel.
2
If emphasis has been given to the present situation of mankind and the need to
undergo a change in mentality it has been with the idea of upholding the following
reasoning.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF SYSTEMS SCIENCE
One of the changes in the way of thinking, now becoming evident, consist in
considering the superiority of the whole over each of its parts. For example, the Club
the Rome maintains that questions should be dealt with globality, applying local
solutions. R. Rodríguez Delgado, in the `presentation of the Revista Internacional de
Sistemas ( International Review of Systems, Spain), speak of the need to create a
theoretical frame work containing a global vision of knowledge and human activities.
Bogdanov, in his Tektology, advocates a holistic way of thinking as a source of
development which he considers a systemic philosophical principle. Fichte and Hegel
refer to the passing of the philosophy of the facts to that of the environment. Fritjof
Capra offers a new vision of the Universe as a dynamic weaving of interrelated events,
in which no property of the parts is fundamental and is the union of all the peculiarities
and mutual relations that determines the structure of the whole. All these ideas and
postulates likewise outline the principles of systems science.
In fact, from my point of view, systems theory with its vision of a whole, where
mankind can be considered as a complex, evolving and fuzzy system, in which the
participating subsystems are in dialectic interaction among themselves and
simultaneously. With their environment, can provide solutions for our present situation
and the mental impulse we need to implement the much required change in the way of
thinking.
THE PARTICIPATION OF SCIENCE
Science is one of the pillars in the evolution of mankind. Science can be
considered as a unity of the branches of knowledge and as the way to reach these. These
ideas are precisely one of the first indications of the advocated change in thought.
Not long ago, and even today, science was considered to refer only to a
knowledge of nature, and what was objectively real and existing. The study of matters
related to the manifestations of the spirit, such as philosophy and art history, belonged
to the world of the humanities, opposed to, and at odds with science. L. van Bertalanffy
made efforts to demonstrate that both manifestations of the human intellect are
intimately related. Teilhard de Chardin said that science is the sister of the humanities.
Perhaps those who carry out highly specialized and technical activities might still
propose differences. However, the idea of a fraternal union is growing and gradually
spreading.
The idea of science as a unity of the branches of knowledge is not noew. The
postulates of Tao refer to this. However, we know that ideas (which are rarely new and
original) recur in cycles of varying length, tracing a curve of maxima and minima along
a central line which represent the evolution of mankind. We find then, from 2500 BC to
present times, the same ideas reflected at varying intervals by the thinkers of the times:
Albertus Magnus, Hermes Trimegisto, Jarl Marx and more recently Schrödinger and
Morcillo Corveto. From recent times we can mention: Heisenberg, who quantified
3
development in the search for the unity of science; Weizsäcker, who tells us that our
spirit is looking for the unity of science: and Elzaburu, who refers to science as a
knowledge that directs the sense of behaviour, Alexander King generalizes even more
by combining knowledge with the close relationship between phenomena, events and
states of understanding.
Science, as mentioned before, embraces all the learning accumulated to date, the
ways to achieve such learning and the ways of acquiring new knowledge. When
expressed in such a general way, it becomes ambiguous and inconsistent. However, if
one delves into these postulates, one find the inclusion from mere definitions to theories
of applications, scientific methods, research procedures, manufacturing processes, the
influence of various factors such as information, prospecting techniques, in fact
everything that contains science and makes science.
Science is both unique and plural. As a system, it is made up of subsystems,
basic elements which Koestler and Smyties called “holons”. These holons are not
simple but are composed of other subsystems, similarly complex. All this is influenced
by vectors, fluxes and refluxes in dialectic interaction, as I postulate in the article
“Dialectic Interaction in Science” (1989-1990) .
THE VERTICAL INTEGRATION OF THE SCIENCES
Science is therefore composed of the different sciences in a highly complex
integration and system of interrelations. This complexity increases with advances in the
evolution of mankind and of all vital phenomena on our planet, and the future of the
cosmos itself. The process of integration has traditionally been studied from a horizontal
viewpoint. If it is held that all manifestation and successes of the human intellect have a
place in a given aspect of science, i.e. in one of the sciences of which it is formed, such
as historical, legal, chemical or biological, there is understood to be a concordance
between them, relating them on planes at the same level. This line of thought involves
significant difficulties when the real aim is to look for solutions to the crisis which we
are living.
It is true that there are no superior or inferior sciences. All hold equal importance
in the union of the branches of learning, and all should be studies individually as a
complete whole with its own characteristic and peculiarities.
However, when one wants to study the interrelations between some sciences and
others, in processes of integration that provide global views of where to extract practical
and local solutions for the evils in any aspect of our life, be it political, social or
economic, we have to change our way of thinking, our mentality. We have to enter a
new level already postulated by David Walsh, Bela H. Banathy, I. Prigogine, M.
Jackson and F. de Elzaburu (1988), among others.
Let us try then by considering the integration of sciences in a vertical sense.
Each of the different sciences (branches of human knowledge) constitutes a link within
science as a unity. This link in influenced by different links, or sciences, to an extent
that is determined by the environment of knowledge of each in relation to the rest, or to
a specific one under study. In order to achieve complete knowledge of each branch of
the science, one should start with the one which serves as a basis and then move up or
4
down, introducing other more complex sciences or complementary means, within the
environment of learning to which the science under study refers.
It might then appear that we are considering some sciences as principals and
others as being complementary. That could be within each of the sciences.
In one instance a particular science might play a principal role, and a
complementary role in another. Likewise, certain sciences affect all the rest, while
others relate only to a few, within their degree of affinity.
When reading studies about science and other subjects we can find, without
perhaps realizing it, references to these ideas on the vertical integration of sciences. In
the 6th Book of the Tao, for example, it is mentioned that when it is considered that
things integrate, it is possible to understand the nature of Heaven, Earth and all things.
The integration here is downwards, from the supernatural (perhaps only universal), to
the nature knowledge (of nature), to the social, economic and political (composing “all
things”). Eric Schwarrtz refers to the man-cosmos integration. Here it is understood that
the relationship of the aforementioned parts of the science is made by means of an
upwards integration, the opposite of the previous case. Paolo Manzelli postulates that
classical physics does not help in understanding the energy-matter-information
relationship. For this it is necessary to introduce intermediate processes where the
chemical processes play an important role. Likewise, F. de Elzaburu assures us that
biology derives from physics, which means a vertical leap from the latter, considered as
a basis, to the former, as a final climax. Mario Bunge, on the other hand, proposes that
all systems contain five interdependent aspects: cultural, political, economic, biological
and environmental. In other words, five manifestations of a further five branches of
science in ascending degrees of complexity. Bohm and Chew coincide in that the
“conscience” or moral sciences should be included in the future theory of physical
phenomena or physical sciences, if we wish to understand the essential aspects of the
universe. In their fundamental ideologies, these authors coincide with the theories of
Fritjof Capra, and are not far removed from the principles of the Tao of Physiscs. From
another point of view, Karl Popper considers psychology within physics.
These are enough examples to show that the vertical integration of sciences is an
underlying idea in the minds of contemporary thinkers.
STRUCTURE OF THE SCIENCE SYSTEM IN
ITS VERTICAL INTEGRATION
It has to be agreed that the difference branches of human knowledge which make
up the unity of science exert varying degrees and levels of influence on each other. Such
an example is chemistry, which is influenced by physics, biology, meteorology,
zoology, etc. In psychology one has to take into account the influence of sociology,
morals, biology, etc. In information, as a branch of human knowledge, information
science, electronics and philosophy intervene. We likewise should agree that certain
sciences appear to be the basis for acquiring full knowledge of another science. Physical
science is the basis for the study of chemistry, medicine for studying psychology, and
botany is the basis for agriculture. It is also true that certain sciences intervene in the
development of other branches of knowledge. It is evident that history, mathematics
(particularly in its practical and statistical applications), geography, ethics and
5
information in its information science form, are all sciences that should be included in
the study of any science that should be included in the study of any science. The degree
of dependence and influence of a science on others would vary according to each case,
so that the network of relationships appears as complex with concordant and discordant
interrelationships all evolving in space and in time.
Let us imagine a hexahedron with rectangular faces. Internally, this hexahedron
is made up of a series of columns, formed of blocks or bricks of differing height and
width. If we were to build a real model we could use colours for the different blocks and
this illustrates their interactions.
Each column represents a branch of the unity of science. Hence, we would have
physics, chemistry, ecology, economics, law, philosophy, history, etc., each forming a
basic unit, or holon, of the system. This holon in turn is not simple, it is complex and
forms a subsystem of a complexity similar to that of the global unitary system.
The holons are made up of blocks that vertically, either upwards or downwards,
form an complete the column. The blocks, in turn, form branches of science. In other
words, at times a certain science appears as a principal holon and at others as one of the
links forming another holon. This can be illustrated by certain practical cases. In order
to study medicine, it is necessary to start with biology, and perhaps even with
embryology, and then to add links such as sociology, psychology, physics, chemistry,
history, information and finally ecology. When wanting to study ecology, mineralogy
should be taken into account as well as adding botany, zoology, agriculture,
meteorology, sociology, economics, history, statistics, information, an so on. In the case
of philosophy, one would have to being with neurophysiology, which embraces research
on brain processes when creating a line of reasoning, and continue with epistemology,
ethics, and so on.
The contribution of each science to the development of another cannot be the
same in each case. In the development of the historical sciences, for example,
agriculture, mineralogy or ecology do not play the same role as ethics or art because
their influence in the development of agriculture is not so important. Therefore, the
links within the columns are not always of the same size.
At it is understandable, there are mutual and reciprocal influences of varying
intensity between the links themselves and their columns. This is a complicated network
or flux and reflux vectors, where an input loop can become an output flow in another
column. Dialectic relationships are established which affect the evolution of the
principal system, science as a unity, and each of its component parts. This is a
development led by the time –space parameters which then mark a dialectical evolutiontransformation of the whole system in a continuous process of varying intensity.
The system of science as a unity is also immersed in the environment that it has
created, within the planet Earth and within the Cosmos, which is mainly unknown.
Inputs flowing into our system are generally in the form of continuous and intermittent,
but not uniform, items of information. It has been shown how a saturation of
information causes a transmutation in the system. This saturation occurs in increasingly
shorter periods of time, when considered from the standpoint of our human terrestrial
dimension. Events show that at present science is saturated with information, hence its
6
transmutation process, affecting all thoughts of mankind in the present state of crisis.
All this points to a change in mentality, a jump in a higher state of level.
Systems science has its own researches and thinkers specialized in systems
approach, inventions, systems dialectics, who could carry out detailed study of the
vertical integration of sciences. I offers this field of work, just as I did with
“systemometry”, a new branch of systems science which is in period of study.
THE SPACE-TIME PARAMETERS
I would not like to finish this paper without dedicationg a few paragraphs to the
subject of the space-time parameters in which all human, and therefore science as a
unity, activities are carried out. I am not really sure if we clearly understand what these
are, both space and time, in our concept of unique and unrepeatable human beings as
individuals, who are also negligible parts and particles within the Universe or Cosmos
as a whole. As each of us consider ourselves important, we approach all questions
affecting us from our own human point of view, as living beings on the planet Earth.
Space is that in which we move, slightly increased with space flights and large
telescopes. Regarding time, we know that it passes and creates differences in our actions
and behaviour, and we measure it in terms of physical phenomena, likewise related to
our planet.
Philosophical and mathematical studies have in fact been carried out to examine
in depth both time and space, always from man´s subjective point of view and his
existential meditations.
Now, a change of mentality is also needed. Both space and time are arbitrary
dimensions created by man himself to provide an explanation for a series of questions
relating to mankind.
What has to be taken into account is that time is conditioned by space. Whatever
the latter, so will be the former. As an example, for humankind a terrestrial “minute”
has not the same measure as a minute on Saturn, which means that time is conditioned
by space. Everyone agrees up to this point. However, when focussing on certain other
questions we cling to our terrestrial idea and won´t leave it. If we tried to put ourselves
on higher levels with “our feet still on the ground”, with new concepts of space and
time, we could explain many questions which still remain a mystery.
In what we are studying here, the vertical integration of science, we have to
think of the discontinuity in the development of the different branches of science, both
in time and in space. If a certain branch evolves faster than another, in which it is an
intermediate link, a swelling can arise which disorder and unbalance. The whole
column, or branch of science, will undergo a change due to the input. An equilibrium is
regained by studying the phenomenon, taking into account a higher degree of
complexity that provides solutions. In other words, one would have to pass to a new
conceptual level, that is wider and more generalized, according to each specific case. If
electronics evolves faster than acoustics, within the physical sciences column, harmony
no longer exist between the two, nor within the holon itself. An imbalance has been
created. If chemistry, or rather the chemical industry, evolves faster than mineralogy,
7
within the column formed by economics, everything changes. Various examples could
be given with similar phenomena resulting.
Likewise, it should be remembered that different branches of science do not
develop in the same way, neither with the same intensity in different countries not in
different periods in history. These variable, discontinuous and, at times, negative
vectors of flux have to be considered when studying the system of science as a unity, as
well as their influence on mankind´s future and of all life on Earth. This all shows that
questions have to be approached in a different manner, from a higher level that is at
once more global, but at the same time more specific and precise.
Another factor to consider is the development of mankind in its evolution
towards an understanding of the world in which it lives. There is still plenty to be
discovered and invented. Our brain is capable of highly superior development. Human
life on Earth has only just begun
CONCLUSION
This paper attempts to explain my ideas on a new concept of the integration of
sciences in a systemic unity of a greater complexity that considered before. An
ascending or descending vertical integration, might help in interpreting questions
created by mankind and in providing answer that are urgently required. Impairment of
all orders and forms of life should be checked. Solutions should be found for the evils
we suffer socially, poltitically, and economically. Where is this learning to?. Solutions
are urgently needed, so let us look for them from a new perspective. A study of the
vertical integration of sciences, with all its complexity, might provide a small answer.
The matter is for experts in systems sciences.
RECOMMENDED REFERENCES
1. C. Augerou, Evaluating Infromation Systems by consultation and negotiation.
International Journal of Information Management, 15: 6 (1995) 427.
2. L. Bertalanffy, General System Theory. Foundations, Development, Applications
(George Brazilier, New York, 1968).
3. J.V. Blauberg, V.N. Sadosky and Yudin. Systems Theory. Philosophical and
Methodological Problems (Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977).
4. F. Bonsack, Overture vertical et overture horizontale, Bulletin de l´AFG (Juillet
1990) 5.
5. M. Bunge, El enfoque sistémico de los Recursos Humanos (The systemic approach of
Human Resources), Rev. Int. Sist. 1(3) (1989) 247-356.
6. F. Capra, El giro decisivo: una nueva visión de la realidad (The decisive turn: a new
vison of reality) Ecofilosofías (1984) 39-48.
8
7. E. Currás, Intelligence and communication within system theory. In: B.V. Smith and
S. Keenan (eds.). Information, Communication and Technology Transfer, FID, Vol.
663 (1987) 65-74.
8. E. Currás, Science as a system of cyclic process of generation, processing,
accumulation and transfer of scientific information. In: Theoretical Problems of
Information. Place of Information in the Global Problems of the World, FID, Vol. 659
(VINITI, Moscow, 1987), pp. 11-26.
9. E. Currás, Information and Cosmovision of Ecology. In: Hamalainen, S. Koskiala
and A.J. Repo (ed)., Proceedings of 44th FID Conference and Congress, Vol.1
(1988), pp. 9-19.
10. E. Currás, Dialectic interaction in science. In: Actus du Congres Européen de
Systemique (Association Française pour la Cybernetique Économiqu et Technique,
Lausanne, 1989). Also in INICAE 9 (1) (1990) 5-17.
11. E. Currás, Un nuevo concepto de información científics (A new concept of
information in scientific integration). In Proceedings of 44th FID Conference and
Congess, La Habana (September 1990)
12. P. Checkland and S. Howell, Information, Systems and Information Systems (Wiley,
London, 1998).
13. M.Y. Chernishow, Independet automatic Auditory Recognition of Speech Images. A
Model and a aSystem. 4th Systems science European Congrees. Valencia- Ibiza (2024 Sept. 1999) 631-640.
14. O.G. Chorayan. Some Peculiarities of Information Processing in Brain Fuctioning
Ander Environment Uncertainly. 4th Systems Science European Congress.
Valencia- Ibiza (20-24 Sept. 1999) pp 65-972.
15. J. Echeverría, Similaridades, Isomorfimos y Homeomorfismos entre Representación.
THEORIA 13 (31), 1998: 89-112, 25 REF.
16. F. de Elzaburu and J. Martitegui, La crisis mundial. De la incertidumbre a la
esperanza (The world crisis. From incertitude to hope) (Espasa Calpe, Madrid,
1988).
17. N. Fedorova and A. Fromental, The use of western managements tools in Russian
realities today, 4th Systems Science European Congress. Valencia- Ibiza (20-24
Sept. 1999) pp 893-902 .
18. Mircea Flonta, Does the scientific paper accurately mirror the very grounds of
scientifics assessment? THEORIA (27), 1997: 19-31, 13 REF
19. H. Haken, The brain as a complex ans synergetic System, 4th Systems Science
European Congress. Valencia- Ibiza (20-24 Sept. 1999) pp 17-21 .
9
20. A. Iglesias Domínguez, ¿Evolucionismo versus Creacionismo?. Ideología y
Reflexión en la España Contemporánea. GALLAECIA, (18) 1999: 9-24.
21. P. Kapustin, Simulation of Design Thinking in Architectural Teaching Problems and
New Ideas, 4th Systems Science European Congress. Valencia- Ibiza (20-24 Sept.
1999) pp 1119-1124.
22. A. King, The great transition, International Forum on Information and Documents 2
(14) (1989) 3-8.
23. A. Kloestler and J.R. Smyties, Beyond Reductionism (Hutchinson, London, 1969).
24. P. Manzelli, Energía, materia e infromazione (Energy, matter and information),
Civitá Cibernetica 1(IX) (1989) 9-17.
25. J. Massa Rincón, El Orden en el Caos: Una ampliación del Mecanicismo.
ENDOXA (8), 1997: 93-109, 7 REF.
26. C. Ulises Moulines, Esbozo de Ontoepistemosemántica. THEORIA, 13 831), 1998,
141-159, 10REF.
27. G. Nicolás and I. Prigogine, Self-Organization innonequilibrium systems. (Wyley,
New York, 1997).
28. C. París, Marx y su necesidad en el mundo actual, EXODO (37), 1997: 4-11.
29. I. Parvu, La unidad del conicmeinto científico en el marco de un enfoque tipológico
de las teorías (The unity of scientific knowledge within the framework of a
typological approach of theories), THEORIA 27 (1996) 7-17.
30. A. Peccei, D. Ikeda, Antes de que sea demasiado tarde (Taurus, Madrid, 1984)
31. K.R. Popper, El desarrollo del conocimiento científico. Conjeturas y refutación
(Scientific Knowledge development) (Paidos, Buenos Aires, 1967).
32. I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, La nueva alianza. Metamorfosis de la ciencia (The new
alliance, Metamorphosis of science) (Alianza Universidad, Madrid, 1983).
33. A. Quijano Solis, El enfoque sistémico en la evaluación de las unidades de
información, SCIRE, 5,1, (ENERO-JUNIO, 1999) 9-10.
34. R. Rodríguez Delgado, Presentación de la Revista Internacional de Sistemas, Rev.
Int. Sist. 1(1) (1989) 3-4.
35. B. G. Saneev and G. V. Agafovov, A System of Models for Studying the Impact of
Different Energy Development. Strategies on Sustanaible Development of the Lake
Baikal Region. 4th Systems Science European Congress. Valencia- Ibiza (20-24
Sept. 1999) pp 1017-1024.
10
36. W. Shade and W. Rothengatter, Long Term Assessment of Transport Policies to
Achieve Sustanaible. A. System Dynamics Modelling Approach. 4th Systems
Science European Congress. Valencia- Ibiza (20-24 Sept. 1999) pp 1077-1086.
37. Herbert A. Simon, Economics as a Historical Science, THEORIA, 13 (32), 1998:
241-260, 5REF.
38. R.M. Snow, The integration of systemic and interpretative thought, Rev. Int. Sist.
3(1), (1991), 37-68.
39. L. Volkov, Information environment and some aspects of mankind´s intellect. In:
Proceedings of 4th Systems Science European Congress, Valencia-Ibiza (20-24
September 1999).
40. K. Volkopwinski, On the problems of Allocation and Transportation in
Complex Operation Systems, 4th Systems Science European Congress, ValenciaIbiza (20-24 Sept 1999), 881-892.
Madrid, November, 2000