Document: CHR-3-1-4

Hierarchical thinking and quality: Can ecological science and humanities exchange ideas and styles?

PIRES, J.C.* and T.F.H.ALLEN

University of Wisconsin, Madison WI 53706-1381 USA ¹

Abstract:
In classical times, the external reference was democratic approval; yes, we agree the picture looks like the prince who commissioned it. In modern times, less democratically, experts assert privilege. The external reference becomes independent reality, which is approached by specialist techniques. Cubism captures full face and profile simultaneously, and science achieves prediction, both moving closer to reality. In both modern and classical worlds, quality starts with a novice becoming dextrous, then moving to the status of the craftsman, who produces structures of high quality. The master expands the envelope, and so achieves dynamical quality. In the post modern world, however, external sources of privilege disappear, but structural and dynamical quality persist as criteria for privilege. Science is strong on structural quality of detailed replicability. The humanities are strong in dynamical quality. Accordingly, normative in-groups are differently textured in science and humanities. Science could use more creativity, while the humanities might pay more attention to detail. Hierarchical thinking bridges science with the humanities by emphasizing structural quality within a single level, while also using dynamical quality to deal with the changes between levels. In a post-modern world where ecological problems invoke chimeric complexity, a facility with hierarchical thinking is crucial for achieving full blown high quality. Let's return to the science/humanities unity of Leonardo through hierarchical thinking.

Keywords: hierarchy theory, quality, humanities, postmodern

This abstract is being presented at: 9:15 AM in session:
Symposium # 1: Education and Human Resources Vice President's Symposium: Defining Ecological Thinking as a Goal for Ecology Education.