Sunday, August 10, 2008

Thought on Interdisciplinarity in Light of the Olympics Gymnastics

The Chinese have a tradition of acrobatics, and the Russians have a tradition of ballet; both countries use their respective traditions as foundations for their gymnastics -- which is why their gymnastics teams are always so good. The American team, being typical Americans, are specialists in gymnastics. Thus, they are technically good, but quite often lack the flair needed to push a performance over the top. Specialization is great, and is a necessary aspect of a growing economy, but there comes a point when and where specialization-only reaches a brick wall. We see this in a lot of postmodern American and European art and literature, which is all about art and literature (since the artists and writers are specialists, they don't know anything else, and thus can't write about anything else). We see it in a lot of our attempts to solve complex problems with single disciplines, which is perhaps why we don't solve a lot of complex problems (we have the simple ones, like building cars, computers, and airplanes down pat). But we are not yet open to interdisciplinary approaches to much of anything. It perhaps does not help that interdisciplinary approaches are associated with Interdisciplinary Studies, which have been used as places where people who should not have even been allowed through the doors of a university can go when they fail out of underwater basket weaving, meaning nobody respects interdisciplinary studies, or interdisciplinary approaches. Which is a real shame, because interdisciplinarity is in fact difficult, and interdisciplinary studies should reflect that difficulty. In the meantime, other countries that are open to interdisciplinary approaches are going to take that advantage and use it. ONly if the U.S. continues to attract people from other countries will we remain ahead in the world.

5 comments:

Todd Camplin said...

Like my food, keep it separated. Interdisciplinarity goes all to the same place, but doesn't tastes as good. kidding.

Todd Camplin said...

Tony has a new blog, inkoutofsync.blogspot.com

Troy Camplin said...

Can't make guacamole without blending avocadoes, tomatoes, cilantro, onions, and lime juice in exactly the right way.

I'll have to check it out.

John said...

Additionally, interdisciplinarity steps on people's toes. Like Dissanayake said in Art and Intimacy, people who have spent years mastering an esoteric field don't always appreciate it when interdisciplinarians stop by the garden and pick this or that choice blossom to add to their bouquets.

I wonder if this is why some scientists (like E.O. Wilson in Consilience) dismiss chaos theory as a sensationalistic repackaging of old news.

Incidentally, I'm now living in Richardson. I don't have a phone, regular internet, or any furniture yet, but we'll have to get together sometime soon.

Troy Camplin said...

John,

Welcome to Richardson. You'll be able to find me at the Starbucks on the corner of Coit and Campbell before and/or after lunch most any weekday.

I think you're right about many disciplinarians' attitude toward interdisciplinarians. And while I think Wilson is wrong about chaos theory, sometimes repackaging old news helps people to understand it better, or to see more things in the world. I also suspect he hasn't spent all that much time trying to understand it -- ants are understandably more important to him overall.