Integrating Interdisciplinarity through Philosophy

By Ravindra K.S. Choudhary

In the context of current knowledge situation, when every discipline has something to contribute to interdisciplinarity, it seems quite apposite and opportune that philosophy should reinforce and reassert its traditionally cherished role of integrating human knowledge. The Book at hand is an attempt to that end. It is set to take the readers on an enthralling journey across disciplinary boundaries and inspire them to reach a comprehensive conceptual framework for human knowledge at large.
The book delves into the idea and the philosophy of interdisciplinarity, and then unravels the genealogy, dynamics, and myriad configurations of the highly complex phenomenon. It goes on to assess impact, advantages and critical issues involved in interdisciplinarity, while outlining an Indian view of it. The book, thus, explores the conceptual connections, fundamental issues and intrinsic implications of a myriad variety of interdisciplinary study and research, within and beyond academia. The book also attempts to develop necessary theoretical perspectives and a broader conceptual framework in this connection. Ultimately, it seeks to reach, as far as possible, a systematic conceptual account of varied and variegated interdisciplinary studies and researches by integrating them philosophically.
The present work is thus, intended for a wider audience, and not only for the practitioners of philosophy as an academic discipline. It is a must read across the intellectual spectrum, regardless of one’s disciplinary affinities and affiliations. It is wide-ranging in its concerns, far-reaching in implications, and highly resourceful and relevant for generalists as well as specialists, scholars and scientists, researchers and curriculum developers, educational administrators and policy-makers.

• Language: English
• Publisher: D.K. Printworld
• Release date: Mar 6, 2023
• ISBN: 9788124611319

Book preview

Integrating_Interdisciplinary_Through_Philosophy_Front.jpg

Integrating Interdisciplinarity through Philosophy

Integrating Interdisciplinarity

through Philosophy

Ravindra K.S. Choudhary

Cataloging in Publication Data — DK

[Courtesy: D.K. Agencies (P) Ltd. ]

Choudhary, Ravindra K.S. (Ravindra Kumar Singh),

1- author.

Integrating interdisciplinarity through philosophy /

Ravindra K.S. Choudhary.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 9788124610824 (hardbound)

1. Interdisciplinary approach to knowledge.

. Interdisciplinary research – Methodology.

. Education – Philosophy. 4. Knowledge, Theory of.

I. Title.

LCC BD255.C46 2021 | DDC 001 23

ISBN 978-81-246-1131-9 (E-Book)

ISBN 978-81-246-1082-4 (Hardbound)

First published in 2021

© Author

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, except brief quotations, in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission of the copyright holder, indicated above, and the publishers.

The publication of this book has been financially supported by the Indian Council of Philosophical Research. The Responsibility for the facts stated or opinions expressed is entirely of the Author(s) and not of ICPR.

Printed and published by:

D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd.

Regd. office: "Vedaśrī", F-395, Sudarshan Park

(Metro Station: ESI Hospital), New Delhi - 110015

Phones: [phone], 2546 6019

e-mail: [e-mail]

Website: www.dkprintworld.com

For

Riju Svasti, Atman Sambhav

and

Aryaman

Preface

In the context of current knowledge situation, when every discipline has something to say or contribute to interdisciplinarity, it seems quite apposite and appropriate that philosophy should reinforce its commitment and reassert its traditionally cherished role of integrating human knowledge. Philosophical thinking, by its very nature, takes us across the wide spectrum of disciplinary boundaries that inspires and motivates us to reach a composite, comprehensive conceptual framework for human knowledge, life and the world at large. Yet, interdisciplinarity has ironically received an abysmally inadequate attention from contemporary philosophers. It is this realization that encouraged me to undertake this study and venture far afield on conceptual basis.

The primary aim of this work, is to come to terms with the idea of interdisciplinarity, and to this end explore the conceptual connections, fundamental issues and myriad variety of implications of interdisciplinary studies and research, within and beyond academia. There are certain crucial conceptual issues and other implications, that have been given a short shrift in the current discussions on interdisciplinarity. A critical engagement with interdisciplinarity, as it is normally practised nowadays, will show that it is severely lacking in all important theoretical perspectives and a broader conceptual framework. This is primarily due to the fact that disciplinary paradigms and utilitarian goals overwhelmingly dominate the scenario. The present work is, thus intended for a wider audience, and not only for the practitioners of philosophy as a discipline, in the halls and corridors of academia.

The very objective of the present work is, however, not to offer any empirical enquiry into the actual cases of interdisciplinary studies and researches. Such cases are, of course, quite useful in arriving at the conceptual framework of interdisciplinarity, which is deservingly one of our main aims at hand. It is only on the basis of actual cases of interdisciplinary studies and researches, that we can decipher the chief patterns of interdisciplinary formations, and thereby, develop the guiding criteria for determining genuine forms of interdisciplinarity. Hence, we shall here examine some of the select cases of interdisciplinary studies and researches undertaken, in order to inquire into and identify conceptual connections underlying them.

Needless to say, no single person can ever be an expert in all areas of interdisciplinary studies and researches. Still, he or she might have garnered significant experience of such seemingly foreign fields. It is, in fact, neither possible nor desirable to be an expert of everything interdisciplinary. In this knowledge era, however, no one can afford to, or should, remain confined to a specialized discipline. The days are gone when the specialist put on blinkers, in order to shut out from his vision all the world, but one little spot to which he glued his nose (Durant 1953: viii). One is, as of now, required to broaden one’s intellectual horizon by adopting an interdisciplinary approach to generate knowledge.

Thus, the grounds for including or excluding materials on interdisciplinarity, arise mainly from two major considerations. One is my own background of study, research and writings. I have been an ardent student of philosophy for the last three decades and, for the most part of this period, I have also been serving as a university teacher of the subject. Besides writing books and research papers on specialized themes, I have also been in the field of creative writing for quite some time. Thus, I found some of the aspects of interdisciplinarity much more interesting from the philosophico-literary perspective, and these issues are naturally set here to get an extensive treatment. I think, there is nothing unwarranted or outlandish in it. When we are faced with a highly complex and intricate subject like interdisciplinarity, we have to be reasonably philosophical in our outlook, and creative in temperament.

The other consideration is the deep desire to unravel, as far as possible, a systematic conceptual account of our varied and vociferous interdisciplinary studies and researches. The present endeavour is essentially philosophical in nature. It seeks to integrate interdisciplinarity, which calls for a holistic and integral outlook towards any phenomenon at large, and such an all compassive, comprehensive outlook seems to be conceivable best only philosophically. Thus, I have endeavoured to do my best for integrating interdisciplinarity through philosophy. The word philosophy in the title itself, is indicative enough of the intention that interdisciplinarity will be looked at here as a whole. There is, however, no denying the fact that interdisciplinarity covers too wide and diverse a field to be grasped as a whole. Without being oblivious to these peculiarities and the practical difficulties, I shall try here to make as harmonious and sensible, an idea of that whole, as far as I can. So, this work is also intended to serve as an expression of the conception of interdisciplinarity having considerable philosophic autonomy, rather than being merely an approach of study and research.

This work, I must reiterate, is basically concerned with the philosophical issues underlying a myriad variety of interdisciplinary studies and researches, conducted globally over the decades. Considering the primarily conceptual nature of the present concern, I have, time and again, been required to adopt a meta-interdisciplinary standpoint. In such situations, I have to go beyond the first-order interdisciplinary practice and look into the matter from the philosophical angle. There are also occasions, when my approach has been both, discipline-based and trans-disciplinary. A conceptual study into the interdisciplinary study and research is, in fact, a higher order theoretical inquiry; it cannot be carried out quite in the same manner as that of the first-order interdisciplinary practice. Naturally, my own approach in this work, therefore, has not been out and out interdisciplinary in the first-order. Still, I have all along been motivated and convinced by the conviction that the creation of various knowledge domains and platforms, mostly through the process of departmentalization, is basically for the sake of administrative convenience, rather than being reflexive of some natural law.

I hope my arguments, or counter arguments, shall hold me in good stead in putting across my standpoint, though open to any suggestive or creative criticism.

Ravindra K.S. Choudhary

Acknowledgements

In the first place, like any other author of a book of this nature and range, I owe a great debt to a good number of informed scholars and esteemed authors; this work has profited greatly from my close study of numerous conventional and non-conventional sources, authored by scholars and experts from diverse fields. Though it is not possible to mention each one of them individually, I wish to thank them all collectively and put on record all my insightful borrowings.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Prof. Saraswati Mishra of Ranchi University, for her unstinting support and benign guidance as the supervisor of my D.Litt. research work. I would also like to express my gratitude to Prof. D.N. Tiwari of Banaras Hindu University, and Prof. D. Guha of Allahabad University for their constructive criticism and constant encouragement. I am gratefully thankful to all my teachers and mentors, who have guided me throughout my formative years and an eventful academic career. At this moment, I must especially remember the late Rameshwar Kumhar, a teacher of my primary school days, who initiated me into studies in the true sense.

I am extremely beholden to the Indian Council of Philosophical Research, New Delhi, for awarding the publication subsidy grant under which this book has been published. I was also the Resident Fellow of the Council during 2004-05. Besides, I will always be grateful to the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, for providing me the UGC-IUC Associateship, during 2001-04. These two institutions, in fact, shaped my thinking in many profound ways. I experienced a very robust and lively interdisciplinary environment there, which led to my diversification of interests and enrichment in thinking, beyond my formal training and disciplinary associations.

I was appointed as the Institutional Coordinator for NAAC twice, at RSP College, Jharia, about a decade ago, and then recently at the Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag. Both of these assignments provided me with rare opportunities to have a first-hand experience of the colours and contours of interdisciplinary approach and, to delve into the thinking patterns of people, belonging to different domains of knowledge. I am equally thankful to my congenial colleagues at my former and the present places of work for extending purposive cooperation to me, beyond the call of duty. I am gratefully thankful to the authorities of Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag, particularly to the Vice-Chancellor, Pro-Vice-Chancellor and the Registrar, for their help and encouragement.

Very special thanks are also due to Shri Susheel K. Mittal, Director, D.K. Printworld, New Delhi, for his productive involvement in publishing this work. My heartfelt thanks go to Mr Sanjeet K. Singh, Advocate, New Delhi, for being a close witness to the making of this book. I also record my thanks to Sri Shashi Singh, Inktech Computers, Hazaribag, for the help extended to me in getting the manuscript computer typed.

I cannot adequately express, in words, how much I am indebted to my parents, Sri Krishna P.S. Choudhary and Smt. Katyayani, who made many things possible for me at various moments of my life. I thank Reena, my wife, for her love and companionship since the last millennium. My daughter, Riju Svasti and my son, Atman Sambhav, both of whom showed great patience, whenever I was working in my study; they kept the home environment quite conducive for me to study and research. I also thank all my kith and kin who have been supporting me over the years through thick and thin.

Fortunately for me, I had grown up in a caring family, and then found a large friend circle, whose members cared for reading and writing, and thus enthused me. I am thankful to them all for creating such a creative environment. It has always been inspiring for me to be an active part of the world of letters, and to find myself amid readers and writers, books and ideas. It gives me creative energy and enthusiasm at the end of each day.

Ravi. K.S.C.

Contents

Preface

Acknowledgements

1. Introduction

Statement of the Problem

The Need, Aims and Objectives

Method and Approach

Hypothesis and Assumptions

General Plan of the Work

Sources and Materials

2. Idea of Interdisciplinarity

What is Interdisciplinarity?

Two Conceptions of Interdisciplinarity

Interactionist Conception of Interdisciplinarity

Integrationist Conception of Interdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity as Method and as Content

Interdisciplinarity as Content

Interdisciplinarity as Method

Interdisciplinarity and its Common Confusables

Multidisciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity

Transdisciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity

Postdisciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity

Disciplinarity, Disciplinary Paradox and Interdisciplinary Pursuits

The Idea of Boundary and the Genesis of Discipline

Avoiding the Ethnocentrism of Disciplines

Conversation or Conversion?

Why Interdisciplinarity?

Social Factors

Cognitive Factors

Situational Factors

3. Philosophy of Interdisciplinarity

Why Philosophy of Interdisciplinarity?

What is the Philosophy of Interdisciplinarity?

Meta-interdisciplinarity

Characterizing Genuine Interdisciplinarity

Cognitive Advancement

Quality Aspect

Creativity and Critical Thinking

Integration and Synthesis

Disciplining Interdisciplinarity: The Question of Method

Scientific Method and Interdisciplinary Principle

Historicity and Genealogical Development

Need to avoid Two Extremes: Scientism and Anti-scientism

Value Dimension

The Realm of Humanities

The Way Out

Specialization and Generalization

Comparative Studies and Interdisciplinary Research

Interdisciplinary Relevance of Philosophy

Philosophy as a Second-order Activity

4. A Genealogy of Interdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity: The Classical and the Contemporary

A Genealogy of Interdisciplinarity

Indeterminacy of the Interdiscipline

Deconstructing the Logic of Identity and Difference

Idea of Identity and Interdisciplinary Developments

The Interdisciplinary is not Adisciplinary

An Alternative View of Interdisciplinarity

5. Dynamics of Interdisciplinary Formations

Interdisciplinary Dynamism

Extra-disciplinary Factors and the Environment

Philosophy’s Inter-disciplinary Settings

A Glimpse of the Extra-scientific

Discovery and Justification

Need for the Humanistic Understanding

Science as a Social Activity

Are Sciences More Hospitable to Interdisciplinarity?

The Case of ICT Considered

Neo-Disciplinarity

6. Classifying Interdisciplinarity

Chief Patterns of Interdisciplinary Formations

Area Specific Formations

Concept Specific Formations

Technology-driven Formations

Breakthrough-generated Formations

Value-oriented Formations

Hybrid Formations

Language-game Formations

Rhizomatic Formations

Limited and Generalized Forms of Interaction

Devising the Classificatory Principles

Varying criteria of classification

General unity of human knowledge

Classification of Interdisciplinarity by Degree and Forms of Integration

Classification based on the degree criterion

Transdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity

Cross-disciplinarity

Pluri-disciplinarity

Multidisciplinarity

Classification based on the manner of integration

Interdisciplinarity of Neighbouring Disciplines

Interdisciplinarity of Problems

Interdisciplinarity of Methods

Interdisciplinarity of Concepts

The System-Theoretic Classification of Interdisciplinarity

Ontological Forms of Interdisciplinarity

Regional Concrete-Science Interdisciplinarity

Borderland Interdisciplinarity

System-Transborder Interdisciplinarity

System-Complex Interdisciplinarity

Epistemological Forms of Interdisciplinarity

Socio-organizational Forms of Interdisciplinarity

Some Other Ways of Classifying Interdisciplinarity

A Critical Note

7. Impact and Advantages of Interdisciplinarity

Avoiding the Specialist Fallacy

The Need for a New Philosophy of Expertise

Interdisciplinary Litigation and Border Warfare

Impact of Interdisciplinarity on Philosophy

Contracting and Retreating Effect

Expanding and Regaining Effect

Intensifying and Deepening Effect

Feminism and Interdisciplinarity

Advantages of Interdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity widens our intellectual horizon

Interdisciplinarity is conducive to the growth of critical outlook

Interdisciplinarity is particularly helpful in solving complex problems

Interdisciplinarity often gives rise to novel forms of knowledge and newer understanding

Interdisciplinarity is more natural to our cognitive experience and lived texture

Interdisciplinarity involves integration of our diverse intellectual pursuits and promotes holistic thinking

Interdisciplinarity promotes the culture of collaboration and teamwork

Interdisciplinarity helps us avoid the ill-effects of compartmentalization and over-specialization

Interdisciplinarity helps improve the applied edge of our various specialized pursuits

Interdisciplinarity has a remarkable democratic character

Interdisciplinarity enhances the problematics of an inquiry quantitatively as well as qualitatively

Interdisciplinary Democracy

Interdisciplinarity Creates Something New

8. Critical Issues Involved in Interdisciplinarity

Missing the Disciplinary Rigour

Care, cultivation and habit

Field, method, subject matter

Departmentality

An Unnatural and Uneasy Alliance

The Case of Cognitive Science

Cognitively not Well-founded

Ignoring Basic Research and Theoretical Issues

Market-friendliness

Interdisciplinary Democracy Criticized

Abnormalities and Deformities in Knowledge Production

Sociobiology: An illustrative Case in the Point

Pitfalls of Achieving Independent Status

Need to be Disciplinary First

9. An Indian View of Interdisciplinarity

India: An Ideal Setting for Interdisciplinarity

The Dominant Interdisciplinary Format

Linkage between Knowledge and Power

Transformation Required, Not Just Information

Parā-vidyā and Aparā-vidyā: The Distinction and Its Interdisciplinary Implications

The Issue of Hierarchy

Irreducible to the Division between Philosophy and Science

Intention and Rationale behind the Distinction

Going beyond Narrow and Immediate Concerns

The Vānaprastha Perspective and Its Interdisciplinary Relevance

10. Concluding Thoughts

Summing up Discussions and Findings

Main Trends in Interdisciplinarity

Interdisciplinarity as an autonomous field of inquiry

Interdisciplinarity as an exercise in ever renewed integration

Nature of Interdisciplinary Thinking

Relational and synthetic thinking

Contextual thinking

Situated and social epistemology

Becoming, rather than Being

Complexity and contingency

Fluid and flexible expertise

Democratic character

Transformational

Interdisciplinarity: One or Many?

Issues in Knowledge Integration

Idealistic integration

Limited integration

Pragmatic integration

Interactional integration

Integrating Interdisciplinarity through Philosophy

Interdisciplinary Communication

Habermas–Klein Model

Kuhn–MacIntyre Model

Bataille–Lyotard Model

Philosophical Synthesis

Weltanschauung

Heuristic Effect

Value-orientation

Bibliography

Name and Title Index

Subject Index

1

Introduction

Interdisciplinarity today has emerged as an overriding principle of study and research within and beyond academia. What explicitly distinguishes the current knowledge situation from the earlier one is its variegated nature, hybrid character, co-evolutionary dynamics and myriad interdisciplinary configurations. Frequent boundary-crossings, increasing mutualism of different disciplines, interoperability of corridors in academia, teamwork and collaborative ventures, desire for integration and synthesis now figure more prominently in the contemporary intellectual landscape, than ever before.

The metaphor of the tree of knowledge having a unitary root and shoot system as used by Descartes, at the beginning of the modern age, seems to be too simplistic and hopelessly inadequate to capture the contemporary knowledge situation. With the inset of information revolution and interdisciplinarity, human knowledge can no longer be likened to a single unitary tree. Now it is like a gigantic banyan tree which is constantly embracing wider and newer fields as its roots grow not only underground, but it has also prop roots that grow down from the branches and then develop into new roots and trunks.

As of now no discipline can be studied meaningfully, either in isolation or in a rigorous hierarchical fashion. Many a time, different disciplines have a considerably common conceptual base, mutually shared horizons of interface and interaction, analogous method and approach, and very often, undistinguishable problematics. There is now a growing realization that the current situation is highly complex and problems can be addressed quickly and more satisfactorily when dealt with in the broader background, beyond disciplinary compartmentalization.

In effect, anyone involved in active research in any field within or without the university system in place has some acquaintance with interdisciplinarity; he or she knows well what it all means to be a part of the interdisciplinary practice. The difference and demarcation among various disciplines now seem to be superfluous in the face of dynamic ways in which ideas and advancements in one field influence study and research in other fields as well. Our thoughts and ideas, many of the concepts we use, much of our relevant bibliography, methods, tools and techniques all mark a sharp departure from the traditional modes of discipline-bound thinking. (Choudhary 2017g: 210-12).

What is trending now is the celebration of crossing disciplinary boundaries, accepting inputs from seemingly divergent domains, and recognizing the need for a holistic perspective towards them. All this, however, is not adequate for having a systematic understanding of what interdisciplinarity really is and what its implications are. The present work is an attempt to unravel and understand this extremely complex and pervasive phenomenon called interdisciplinarity, and to look into the underlying philosophical issues and its wider implications for our intellectual landscape at large.

Statement of the Problem

The more a complex phenomenon we are set to deal with, the lesser are our chances to be able to spell out the problematics in simple and clear terms. Interdisciplinarity is so complex a subject that our problem at hand can be best formulated in terms of some sets of questions:

i. The dictionary meaning of interdisciplinarity generally equates it with an approach of study and research that involves different sources and streams of knowledge. In its common usage too, the term refers to an exercise that deals with an interface and interaction of two or more disciplines. But interdisciplinarity is not so straightforward a phenomenon as it is commonly conceived or defined in a dictionary. Thus, our problem, in the first place, is to get clear about the very idea of interdisciplinarity: What is interdisciplinarity? Is interdisciplinarity simply an idea, an intellectual construct, a cognitive experience, an academic scheme, or a heterogeneity of all these?

ii. In attempting to place interdisciplinarity in the historical context, some scholars, rather loosely, trace its origin long back in classical philosophy and pedagogy of the West. They generally tend to associate it with the historical quest for unified knowledge. But for many others of our generation, interdisciplinarity is characteristically a postmodern phenomenon. There are still others who associate interdisciplinarity with novel developments at the frontiers of knowledge. Thus, the questions naturally arise: What is the genesis of interdisciplinarity? How is the contemporary interdisciplinarity different from the historical forms of interdisciplinarity?

iii. At the first blush, interdisciplinarity seems to be more of an approach to research than any specific content of it. Interdisciplinary approach has been found particularly helpful in dealing with some complex questions, addressing broader issues and integrating human knowledge. These are the goals whose fulfilment, whether on a limited or a grand scale, clearly lie beyond the scope of any single discipline. In spite of all this, the question here arises: Is the distinction between methodological approach and specific content with regard to interdisciplinarity plausible enough?

iv. Since interdisciplinarity, in this knowledge era, has emerged as an overriding principle of knowledge production, its application and dissemination, it should not be practised in a casual or a parasitic manner. For, no amount of sheer eclecticism, or mere boundary crossing can lead us towards true interdisciplinarity. Hence, our problem also consists of the questions: Is there any way of disciplining interdisciplinarity? What are, or should be, the guiding principles of interdisciplinary study and research?

v. An interdisciplinarian is primarily interested in the first-order inquiry; he or she is concerned mainly with the inputs derived from the area of intersection and shared problems of two or more disciplines. But his concern may itself be subject to the focus of still higher order of inquiry called meta-interdisciplinarity, which deals with the assumptions, goals, methodologies and criteria of interdisciplinary study and research in general. Interestingly, philosophy is often regarded as a higher or second order conceptual inquiry upon the first-hand findings of various sciences. We are primarily concerned here with understanding interdisciplinarity conceptually, and so at this level, our problem naturally takes a philosophical turn: What are the conditions under which interdisciplinary claims are either meaningful, or genuine, or warranted? What are the philosophical foundations and justifications of interdisciplinary claims?

vi. Interdisciplinarity in general, by its very nature and origin, has developed a remarkable indeterminacy around itself. There is no fixed course of interdisciplinary formations. Yet they represent, after all, the developments of one and the same human knowledge situation; hence, there must be some general patterns underlying them. We are thus faced with the questions: What are the chief patterns of interdisciplinary formations? Why are certain specific areas of knowledge more hospitable to interdisciplinary configurations than others?

vii. The very recognition of patterns is, no doubt, useful in many ways, but not enough for getting into the heart of the matter. We are also required to classify the phenomena under question. The more complex, vast and varied phenomena are, the greater is the need for classifying them logically. In much of our philosophical encounter with interdisciplinarity, it is the type rather than the particulars, which seems to constitute the focus of our interest. Interdisciplinarity is an extremely complex and ever evolving phenomenon in a great variety of forms. Consequently, we are faced with the problem of its classification: What are the main kinds of interdisciplinarity?

viii. Interdisciplinarity, as it has emerged and is being practised nowadays, is basically an idea of the Western provenance and the rest of the world took it up mostly through the colonial legacy. The widespread interdisciplinary format is still dominated by the Western ways of thinking. If interdisciplinarity has to be faithful to its true sense, it must be inclusive and broad-based as to take into account other living traditions as well. India has a long and rich intellectual tradition which accords great importance to diversity and dialogue leading to a more integral and holistic world view. Thus one of the interesting challenges we face is: Can we make the way for the development of an Indian view of interdisciplinarity?

ix. After the rise of interdisciplinarity in the contemporary times, it is now no longer possible to be a scholar or a scientist the way it was before. Interdisciplinarity has made a great impact upon our ways of study and doing research. It has also been gaining popularity among people within and without academia, who often view it as an intellectual virtue requiring no further justification. But philosophically, all this gives us reason enough to enter into a critical engagement with interdisciplinarity. How has interdisciplinary thinking changed the intellectual landscape at large? What are its advantages and implications for the study and research in general? What are the main concerns in this connection? Is there any way of improving the situation?

x. The special cases of interdisciplinarity which involve limited interaction of a few disciplines is quite common and comprehensible. What we need to be discerning more about is, a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon in general. Interdisciplinarity involves, as a minimum, two different disciplines and, as a maximum, that is as an ideal, it involves all disciplines. So, a major problem of interdisciplinarity consists in how to fit in all the distinct parts or variants into a single conceptual framework: How can we integrate myriad interdisciplinary formations into a systematic framework? How can we arrive at a philosophical framework of our varied and divergent interdisciplinary practices?

There are a lot of intriguing issues involved in interdisciplinarity. We have just outlined some of the central problems that the present venture poses at its initial stage. New problems are bound to come up as soon as our inquiry would proceed further and we shall look into them at length in due course.

The Need, Aims and Objectives

The present venture strives for a systematic exposition of the philosophical issues underlying interdisciplinary study and research. The common tendency often treats such issues as secondary, but they are in fact, fundamental. If they were really issues of secondary nature, the present venture would not be needed at all. For the present, following aspects are set to receive the focus of our attention:

i. We have felt the need to undertake this task due to a certain realization concerning the state of affairs in the field of interdisciplinarity. What is generally going on in the name of interdisciplinary study and research, has conceptually been quite confusing on several counts. The area in question has developed much indeterminacy around itself; it severely lacks in a sound philosophical framework. Pursing any interdisciplinary study and research just for the sake of pointing out incidental interface and interaction between different disciplines may eventually turn out to be a shoddy and superficial venture. Thus if interdisciplinarity has not to be a facile exercise, it must have some guiding principles, justificatory criteria and ultimately some conceptual framework.

ii. In the face of so much specialization and fragmentation of knowledge in the current era, a sensible researcher cannot help but feel the pangs of intellectual discomfort. The primary aim of this work therefore, is: To present a systematic account of the philosophy of interdisciplinarity as far as possible. It seeks to show that numerous variants of interdisciplinary study and research must reflect in the long run, the essential unity, at least moderately, of all human knowledge. For, it may arguably be contended that interdisciplinarity is after all rooted in the idea of integration and unity of human knowledge.

iii. With this larger end in view, the objectives of the present work have been set as thus:

a. The attitudes and approaches that we generally adopt towards different disciplines are many, varied and often conflicting with one another. Obviously, not all but only a few of them can genuinely be called interdisciplinary. For, interdisciplinarity does not amount to simply crossing disciplinary boarders, fetching diverse inputs from different domains and mixing them up for bringing about something new and exciting; it is something more than these. Further, it is neither possible nor desirable for a single person to have a first-hand grasp of everything interdisciplinary. Hence, our main objective in the present work is: to elucidate the philosophical foundations and justificatory principles of various interdisciplinary claims.

b. Interdisciplinarity is mostly viewed nowadays as an antidote to the ill-effects of overspecialization and compartmentalization of knowledge. But, it is also important to realize that the very idea of interdisciplinarity presupposes a multiplicity of basic disciplines, each having its own domain with a sharp focus on frontline research, to advance the concerned field. Specialization and generalization need not be at loggerheads over how to make a headway in the field of education and research. These two significantly constitute the intellectual matrices of our cognitive experience. So, our objective also consists in: looking into how disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity are complementary to one another at a deeper level.

c. With the emergence of information revolution and the resulting knowledge explosion, many new sort of relationships among the traditional domains of knowledge are springing up. In the midst of their ever changing linkages and tie-ups and co-evolution, there lie some discernible patterns. What is more, the most spectacular advances in human knowledge often occur in the areas of interface and interaction. In this confluence, a substantial give-and-take may take place between/among them and as a result constructive engagement may develop. All this may further lead to quite interesting developments, even leading to neo-disciplinarity state. The present endeavour thus, also intends: to identify the chief patterns of interdisciplinary formations which may lead to the birth of new disciplines and novel forms of knowledge.

d. Different domains of knowledge, for example, are like beads for making a necklace, but without a common connecting thread there would be no necklace, but only unconnected beads. Philosophy, by tradition, has been playing the role of this connecting thread among different disciplines. This integrative role of philosophy has become crucial and compelling than ever before. In this age of overspecialization and fragmentation, it has become imperative to integrate things into a whole, as far as possible. So our ultimate objective is: to put forward a moderate philosophical framework of myriad and diverse interdisciplinary pursuits.

Method and Approach

The extremely complex and multi-dimensional nature of our problem at hand is indicative of the limitations of the available methods. The problem, at the first glance, suggests that no particular method all alone could be adequate enough in exploring interdisciplinarity. This is mainly so because an interdisciplinary study involves two or more disciplines simultaneously and each one of them may rely on remarkably divergent methods.

The solution to this methodological conflict may be proposed by suggesting that we should go for the method that has so far been found most successful. The scientific method may thus come up as the chief contender. Our interdisciplinary understanding has also been dominated by the models and metaphors imported from science. Many may even tend to go in this connection up to the extreme called scientism. But the opponents of scientism may also argue that the scientific method, no matter how successful it is in the realm of the physical, cannot serve as the model for the humanistic understanding.

The scientific method is basically experimental in nature, which concentrates in putting a hypothesis to the test in terms of empirically verifiable consequences to establish an appropriate theory. But our task at hand is to enquire into the philosophy of interdisciplinarity. So the much celebrated experimental method seems to be inadequate and impractical in view of the very comprehensive and experiential nature of the philosophical problem at hand.

It is also important to note that the question of methodology, whether in sciences or humanities, is basically an epistemological problem, and epistemology by tradition constitutes a branch of philosophy. Research in general is basically an epistemological activity as its ultimate aim is to augment human knowledge. The justification of interdisciplinary claims also requires the defenders to move into the philosophical areas of epistemology and logic. Philosophical issues are thus invariably involved wherever we stand in this debate.

Keeping all this in view, certain points can be made here about the method and approach to be adopted in the present study:

i. Our method, in the first place, will be analytical and critical. We will analyse different disciplines in general, with a view to discover their interdisciplinary concerns and interconnections. We will also analyse critically some of their leading concepts and theories which are of wider interdisciplinary significance. It is, however, not enough to be analytical, as our task at hand is basically integrative.

ii. Deductive and inductive methods will be used widely. Different disciplines, varied interdisciplinary achievements and tendencies therein may be conceived, in this connection, as particular instances or set of instances for inductive generalizations. For example, by employing the inductive method, some general patterns of interdisciplinary formations are discernible. Such generalizations may serve, in a moderate sense, as our major premises, and specific details can be inferred from them by adopting deductive method.

iii. As to approach, I have made here a considerable use of what may be called thinking in collaboration. Instead of being evangelical, seeking to implant my own views and theories into others, or following in the footsteps of some intellectual giant, I have gone for collaborative thinking. I have tried to develop my views through constructive criticism in concert with certain representative ideas and leading theories of the concerned field. In the arena of interdisciplinarity, we are required to rely less on independent and individualistic work and more on thinking corporately.

iv. The outcomes thus achieved would have wider cross-disciplinary bearings and they may assume further significance with reference to broader philosophical framework. Hence, our method is also constructive in the sense that it is intended to culminate in a world view. We can neither think nor act cogently without holding some view of life and the world at large. Interdisciplinary thinking is no exception to man’s felt need for a world view.

v. Accordingly, our approach to the problem in general will be conceptual and integrative. A comprehensive philosophical investigation into the nature of things at large, is really required for understanding interdisciplinarity. Scientists are often fond of reductionism. But we have to understand different disciplines not only in juxtapositions, but also as an organic whole though moderately. Hence, the basic methodological requirement for the present is to approach the issues in an integrated and holistic manner.

vi. This work, being primarily philosophical in nature and dealing with a very complex and comprehensive subject, is designed to emerge as a methodological mosaic of analysis and synthesis, deductive and inductive, historical and experimental, explanatory and hermeneutic methods. Our overall strategy consists in making suitable use of various available methods as per the demand of the specific context.

Thus, we will try here to employ a methodological synthesis. The present work is set to remain faithful to the variegated nature of interdisciplinarity not only in content but also in method.

Hypothesis and Assumptions

What we are looking for the present is a systematic understanding of interdisciplinarity supported by a philosophical framework. Closely related to this philosophic goal is the underlying hypothesis of the work. Our hypothesis is:

There is a substantial unity or system underlying all human knowledge, so much so that various domains of knowledge ultimately cannot remain isolated from each other, and so, there is always a need and some scope for integrating our seemingly divergent cognitive efforts, leading towards the goal of a comprehensive philosophic understanding of this highly heterogeneous and dynamic knowledge situation.

This also makes our main contention amply clear. What is, however, important to mention is that there are certain noteworthy assumptions behind our hypothesis:

i. One basically belongs to at least one discipline by education or training, and he or she is considerably aware of what that distinctive discipline really is.

ii. There exist simultaneously, some other disciplines as well, and also a tendency of more or less compartmentalization prevails among them.

iii. It is important, as well as possible, to make a distinction between an actual interdisciplinary practice and the conceptual understanding of it.

iv. One can considerably understand the general nature and role of other disciplines along with myriad extra-disciplinary factors.

v. One is open to, and aware of, the actual or potential interaction between/among different disciplines.

vi. Despite considerable differences, one can go for a constructive dialogue with a discipline other than one’s own.

vii. Life and the world are of systematic and discernible nature which finds exquisite expression in human knowledge at large.

viii. Having some world view, either explicitly or implicitly, is not only natural to humans, but it is necessary too.

General Plan of the Work

The general plan of the present work is thought up to cover the subject matter in ten chapters:

1. The First Chapter is the introductory one. It is devoted to the preliminaries of the work — the problem and plan, aim and objectives, method and approach, hypothesis and assumptions, etc. By clarifying these, at the very outset, we wish to set the stage for a full-scale study of the subject in the chapters to follow.

2. The Second Chapter is an attempt to get clear about the idea of interdisciplinarity. It is a nebulous, yet a richer concept, and we are required to have a clear idea about it. We need to know not only what interdisciplinarity is, but also what it is not. Interdisciplinarity is considered here, not only as a method or organon, but also as a content or object of study. Further, we will also try to look into the complex relationships interdisciplinarity has developed with its common confusables, such as multidisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and postdisciplinarity. We will go on to analyse the culture of discipline-centric thinking and the attending idea of disciplinary boundary which are the characteristics of the modern education. Finally, we will see how interdisciplinary conversation may be achieved, and why interdisciplinarity is vital for our various intellectual ventures.

3. The Third Chapter is concerned with what the philosophy of interdisciplinarity is and why there is a need for it. No great leap of imagination is required to realize that interdisciplinarity, as it is commonly practised nowadays, lacks adequate justificatory criteria and comprehensive conceptual framework. So, it is mandatory to look into the philosophical issues involved in the interdisciplinary study and research. We need a philosophy of interdisciplinarity so as to understand the phenomenon thoroughly through the meta-level thinking, determine its substantial forms and show key methodological requirements for its standard practice. In this connection, it is also important to see how philosophy as a discipline in itself is challenged and transformed by its encounter with interdisciplinarity in the contemporary scenario.

4. The Fourth Chapter focuses on the genealogy of interdisciplinarity. It intends to read interdisciplinarity genealogically in the backdrop of historical settings. An attempt is also made here to show that contemporary interdisciplinarity is often seen as a typical postmodern phenomenon, and as such, it is distinctively different from the historical forms of interdisciplinarity. It has acquired an indeterminacy, making the logic of essence significantly redundant for its understanding. The point in general which has received focal attention here, is that the interdiscipline embodies hybrid identity and heterogeneous principles. The very nature and character of an interdiscipline marks a sharp departure from the classical conception of fixed and monolithic identity based upon certain essential quality. Interdisciplinarity occurs in the middle, which is shared by two or more disciplines, but this interdiscipline is nor reducible to any one of them alone. Interdisciplinarity, however, does not amount to being anti-disciplinary; it must accord due importance to the existing disciplines and make constructive use of their interaction.

5. The Fifth Chapter is devoted to the dynamics of interdisciplinarity. An attempt is made here to delve deep into the nature of interdisciplinary dynamism and analyse closely those aspects and issues which are philosophically significant for our main concern at hand. Extra-disciplinary factors, along with the contexts of discovery and justification, become highly significant in this connection. The interdisciplinary settings of philosophy and that of science have thus been discerned here in general. All this may lead us significantly to the need for humanistic understanding of things, and also to the view of science as a social activity. It shall also be interesting to look into how such interdisciplinary dynamics at times gives rise to neo-disciplinarity and novel forms of knowledge.

6. The Sixth Chapter is set to deal with the problem of classifying interdisciplinarity. So, it opens up with a multi-pronged attempt to discriminate specific forms and formations of interdisciplinarity. We have many different forms of interdisciplinarity flourishing simultaneously at several forums of study and research. The current intellectual landscape is remarkably patterned by complex interdisciplinary formations. But, there can be no singular classificatory principle in accordance of which the whole variety of interdisciplinary forms could be classified at one go. Hence, we have employed here multiple ways of classifying them on the basis of varying classificatory principles. This chapter is thus, an attempt to offer an account of some of the leading ways of classifying interdisciplinarity.

7. The Seventh Chapter is set to assess the impact and advantages of interdisciplinarity. The full impact of interdisciplinarity is yet to be felt, however we can see how it has transformed the terrains of study and research in general. It has in fact given rise to a new philosophy of expertise. Interdisciplinary explorations at times, result in bitter border disputes between different disciplines which call for something of a philosophical adjudication. Philosophy too, as an academic discipline, has undergone a sea change in its wake. Interdisciplinarity has broken many boundaries, removed barriers, busted binaries, and, forged many links and broadened our intellectual horizon. It seems to have struck a democratic cord in many