Abstract
One of the most significant features of scientific advance has been the gradual concrescence of previously distinct theories, methods, disciplines and cognitive modes. Proponents of the conception that the policy sciences should comprise a rationally structured supradiscipline rightly emphasize the desirability of accelerating this slow process of intellectual unification. However, this enterprise continues to be obstructed by failure to realize that interdisciplinary principles sufficient to generate a legitimate unification of scientific and humane concerns of the policy sciences can issue only from philosophical reconstruction. A normative (value-sensitive) mode of general systems analysis adequate to the demands of adaptive social-institutional systems must constitute an epochal modification of the conventional perspective of scientific inquiry.
Under the assumption that the magnitude of the task will not dissuade us from the aim of establishing interdisciplinary principles, attention is concentrated here on a factorization of the specific metatheoretic projects that are thought to be entailed: (1) selection of primitive concepts and commitments of a system-theoretic mode of rational inquiry, and (2) institution of an attending set of rational canons for normative systems analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Whitehead, A. N.,Science and the Modern World, Lowell Lectures 1925, New York: Macmillan, 1948.
Nagel, Ernest, “The Meaning of Reduction in the Natural Sciences,” in A. Danto and S. Morgenbesser, eds.,Philosophy of Science, Cleveland: Meridian Books, 1960, pp. 288–312.
Woodger, J. H.,Biology and Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952.
Quine, W. V., “Ontological Reduction and the World of Numbers,”Journal of Philosophy,61 (March 26, 1964), 209–216.
Kemeny, J. G. and Oppenheim, Paul, “On Reduction,”Philosophical Studies,7 (1956), 6–17.
Popper, K. R., “Truth, Rationality, and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge,” in hisConjectures and Refutations, New York: Basic Books, 1962, pp. 215–250.
Feyerabend, P. K., “Explanation, Reduction, and Empiricism,” in G. Maxwell, H. Feigl and M. Scriven, eds.,Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962, pp. 78–97.
Suppes, Patrick,Introduction to Logic, Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1957.
Schaffner, K. F., “Approaches to Reduction,”Philosophy of Science,34, no. 2 (June 1967), 137–148.
Ashby, W. R.,An Introduction to Cybernetics, New York: John Wiley, 1956, p. 103.
Bradley, D. F., “Multilevel Systems and Biology—View of a Submolecular Biologist,” in M. D. Mesarovič, ed.,Systems Theory and Biology, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1968, pp. 38–59.
von Bertalanffy, Ludwig,General System Theory, New York: George Braziller, 1968.
Rapoport, Anatol, Foreword to Walter Buckley, ed.,Modern Systems Research for the Behavioral Scientist, New York: Aldine Publishing Co., 1968.
Mesarovič, M. D., Sander, J. and Sprague, C., “An Axiomatic Approach to Organizations From a General Systems Viewpoint,” in Cooper, Leavitt and Shelly, eds.,New Perspectives in Organization Research, New York: John Wiley, 1965.
Mesarovič, M. D., “A Conceptual Framework for the Study of Multi-Level, Multi-Goal Systems,”SRC Report 101-A-66-43, Case Institute of Technology, 1966.
Roe, A. and Simpson, G. G., eds.,Behavior and Evolution, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958, pp. 1–2.
Wigner, E. P.,Symmetries and Reflections, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1967, p. 3.
Schrödinger, Erwin,What is Life? and other Scientific Essays, New York: Doubleday, 1956, p. 183.
Lanczos, C.,The Variational Principles of Mechanics, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962.
Bellman, Richard,Adaptive Control Processes, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961.
Rosen, Robert,Optimality Principles in Biology, New York: Plenum Press, 1967.
Lewins, Jeffrey,Importance: The Adjoint Function, New York: Pergamon Press, 1965.
Lévi-Strauss, Claude,La Pensée Sauvage, Paris: Librairie Plon, 1962, trans. George Weidenfeld,The Savage Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This article is based on material to be published in a forthcoming volume,Toward Revitalization of the Contemporary University: Essays Utilizing General Systems and Cybernetic Concepts to Reorient Universities for Greater Social and Human Relevance in the Modern World, edited by R. F. Ericson, Director, Interdisciplinary Systems and Cybernetics Project, Program of Policy Studies in Science and Technology, George Washington University (Gordon and Breach: New York, 1972). Material for this article derives from one element of a program of methodological research for management science conducted with support of The Office of Naval Research, Contract No. N00014-70-C-0328, at Research Analysis Corporation, McLean, Virginia. The conclusions expressed, however, are those of the authors alone. They should not be interpreted as representing the official views of any supporting organization.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marney, M., Smith, N.M. Interdisciplinary synthesis. Policy Sci 3, 299–323 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01413685
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01413685