Norma ROMM connects reflexibility to interdisciplinary practice, in which both agents are at the same time participant and observer (1998, p.67, as quoted from BAWDEN by Romm)
She also tackles the difference between interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity, which "often amounts to a dialogue of the deaf in which incompatible research approaches are pursued in parallel with little or no communication between them : (as quoted from M. JONES in his paper "It all depends what you mean by discipline")
In fact in multidisciplinary meetings, reflexibility becomes generally drowned in a confuse and overbearing noise.
In a note in her paper N. Romm makes some observations about transdisciplinarity, but disclaims any intention to develop this aspect.
This is lamentable because it would seem that transdisciplinarity emerges as a set of practices by disciplinary specialists acting among them in a constant reflexive way that leads them to create multi-cross- (i.e. trans-) disciplinarian concepts and models.
S.L. PAYNE reworked the subject in a subsequent article, but the differences between interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity remain still unstated (1999, p. 173-181). This is quite obvious in the general litterature.
- 1) General information
- 2) Methodology or model
- 3) Epistemology, ontology and semantics
- 4) Human sciences
- 5) Discipline oriented
To cite this page, please use the following information:
Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science (2020). Title of the entry. In Charles François (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics (2). Retrieved from www.systemspedia.org/[full/url]
We thank the following partners for making the open access of this volume possible: