NOOSPHERE: THE ECOLOGY OF INTELLECTUAL ENVIRONMENT

Having buried his brother Levin began to think about life and death in a different aspect. He couldn't get rid of these thoughts. They tortured him. He re-read Plato twice, Spninoza, Kant and some other phylosophers. But every time when he either read or even invented some objections against some of the theories he got into one and the same "trap": the obscure meaning of the words "spirit, "liberty", "freedom","substance. Gradually he began to understand the meaning of these words. But every time when real life took him away from these thoughts and afterwards when he returned to his meditations - all his mental artificial structures tumbled down like the hous of cards. / L.Tolstoy. Anna Karenina. Part V111, ch.1X /.

We must admit even nowadays we understand the meaning of the words "liberity", "freedom", "spirit" or "substance" no more than Leo Tolstoy did. And what about scientific terms? At the first sight it may seem that everything is clear in this sphere. For example specialists in terminology write: "It is well known that scientific and business language must be exact, laconic and simple without alternatives"/2, p.107/. N.I.Tupolski in his book on the problems of edicational texts for higher school writes that special and exact terminology is one of the essential aspects of teaching language, that a scientific term has only one specific meaning /3, p.107/.

A.M.Sokhor claims that "precise meaning of scientific terms" creates difficulties for students. Nobel price winner R.Feynmann writes that in physics every word has its precise meaning /5, p. 9-1 / but on page 4-2 he claims that "It is important to realise that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy is"; and "If you insist upon a precise definition of force, you will never get it!" /p.12-2/. A.Einstein and L.Infeld claim that forces are vectors /6, p.106/ but L.Cooper objects: forces are not vectors /7, p.41/. Scientific and teaching books in this country and abroad have many contradictions as well (sometimes even factual errors). It is enough to consider the definition of "force", "work", "energy", "electric charge" etc and compare the usage of these terms in teaching books /8-11/. In this connection some problems arise: whether these discrepancies are of importance and whether it is necessary to get rid of them. If so, what are their sources, the reasons of their stability and methods of doing away with them.

1. Can Essential Errors in Teaching Books be Neglected ?

Two aspects of this problem may be considered. First of all the aspects of the formation of a personality. It is well known that children are eager to study in the first years of school, but after some years of learning many of them become quite passive. One of the main reasons of this phenomenon is that they do not understand the factual material which they are taught. This incomprehension is due to many factors which are well known : not adequate teaching texts, poor teachers' qualification and bad living conditions.

"Inheritance of incomprehension" as a result of errors in teaching texts is also important. This influences even those pupils who want to study. If a pupil hasn't understood something but he wants to get a good mark he just learns the material by heart - he has no other way. As a result he gets accusmtomed to his incomprehension and knows that his passive activity gives good results (marks). These factors do not give the possibility to open the potential abilities of a person and this is dangerous for the development of a personality.

Mankind has reached such a level in its development that its influence on the biosphere may be crucial even without nuclear wars (see /1/). The only way out of this situation was found by V.I.Vernadski: mankind must take under control the biosphere development (that is noosphere is to be developed). But the solution of this problem is possible only when people understand the interaction between mankind and environment. The trial - and - error method which has been effective in solving partial local problems can't be used. To solve this problem the generations of people must fully comrehend the utmost importance of not undertaking any incompetent actions.

2. Sources of Contradictions and Reasons of their Viability

All kinds of scientific knowledge have the last word in science. The process of development of any theory is not rectilinear and is contradictory. At present we deal with the remnants of these contradictions. Why do they still exist? There are some reasons:

• First. Theoretical knowledge is necessary for an engineer in his practical work only for various calculations. Correct calculations may camouflage the errors in theoretical conceptions.
• Second. There are no reliable criteria of the effectiveness of teaching and learning. Any defects in design and production result in the bad quality of products but they can't be improved by themselves. In teaching there is no direct connection between the system of training and its results. Human being as every living being is a selforganizing system. A great role in the life of any human being plays an unconscious model of the world (subconsciousness). All new ideas (inventions, discoveries) are the function of unconsciousness because they can't be deduced logically. In other words subconsciousness very often acts in spite of consciousness and overcomes traditional theoretical errors without man's impact. As a result mankind always has talented people who become outstanding specialists in spite of the deficiences of education (there is a saying that no teaching system can spoil a good man). But we can't estimate how many potential talents became ordinary people.
• Third. In connection with the changing of scientific vision of the world and more riged demands to the exactness of theoretical conceptions it happens that some ideas which had been considered correct drop out of the modern conception system. But it is hard to comprehend this phenomenon because there is no direct motivation for it.
• Fourth. The author of a teaching book in physics in particular deals with practically unlimited scope of information. He is an expert in the field of his professional interest. As for the other aspects he relies on the competence of his predecessors especfially if their ideas are conventional. Besides he is eager to explain and give a full picture of the most difficult aspects. The more so because there are no methods of location and correction of these errors.
• Fifth. Authors of teaching books usually lack humanitarian education.

3. Methods of Eliminating Essential Errors in Teaching Books

As far as we are concerned with the problems of regulating knowledge which is the product of thought it is not enough to use the results of natural and technical sciences for its analysis and development. It is necessary to apply those humanitarian subjects which deal with mentality and its development: dialectics, psychology, logics, theory of definitions, linguistics, terminology and pedagogigs. Mostly this aspect is considered in /8/.

This paper deals with the development of some ideas concerning the context analysis. An attempt is made to analyse the polysemantic category of the word "force".

Let us begin with the familiar expression "subject of thought". As a rule we use it mechanically. But actually it must play the main role in the analysis of texts. It is easy to realize that we can think of "the objective reality" - of the sphere of objects; of "the subjective reality" - the sphere of feelings, thoughts, senses of perception and sphere of language that is symbols and signs which we use to describe the subjective reality.

As far as we are concerned with knowledge (thoughts) we shall not discuss feeling (senses of perception) but we shall investigate the sphere of ideas. Thus it is reasonable to divide the objects of thoughts into three categories: objects from the sphere of things, objects from the sphere of ideas and objects from the sphere of symbols (signs).

The next topic which must be considered is the role of a language in the process of communication between people. Every person has its own thoughts, other do not know them. If I want to tell somebody about my thoughts I must put them in the form of natural verbal language, mathematical formulas, diagrams, drawing etc. Thus the listener or reader learn my thoughts indirectly through texts, diagrams etc. His perception of familiar symbols gives the impetus for his own thoughts which are naturally different from mine. If I want this difference to be insignificant I must be sure of logical representation of my ideas, correct grammar forms and simple conformity between words, mathematical symbols, conventional grafic designation in diagrams and the objects of thoughts on the other hand. Hence we must know exactly what every word and symbol which are used in other languages mean in our language. In other words it's no use asking "What force is?". The question must be put in the nominal aspect: "There is the term "force". What does it mean? (What object of thinking does it designate?)". As far as we came to the conclusion that "the objects of thoughts" can be logically divided into three categories it is now necessary to divide nouns into three categories as well: the names of things, the names of ideas and names of names that is names of simbols. Thus a very important step in putting objects of thoughts into categories is to attribute a term to one of them.

It is necessary to give a more precise definition to the term "concept". The problem of the word "concept" is not solved though people tried to do it more then two thousand years ago /12, p.68/. For example A.V.Usova points out that more than 30 attempts have been made to define the term "concept" /13, p.10/ and that neither of its definitions contains the essence of this term /26/. In our opinion the most adequate is the idea that the essence of every concept has multiple choice of judgements. The recognition of this idea gives the possibility to achieve the objectification of a concept. As far as the judgement has the form of a sentence and the concept has the form of a term it is necessary to write down a number of sentences containing the term denoting the concept in question. It might seem that the cluster of these sentences represents the concepts in the objective form if we deal with an object from the sphere of ideas. But as a rule having written such a cluster we realize that many judgements contradict each other. The reason is that a term denotes different objects of thought that is we observe the polysemantic phenomenon mostly connected with categories. Thus the objectification of a concept is possible only by means of non-contradictory cluster of sentences dealing with the definite object from the sphere of ideas.

Let us apply these ideas for the elucidation of the meaning of the term "force". It is impossible to produce a great number of different sentences which include this term in our paper. But every reader can do it himself.

4. The Meaning of the Term "Force"

1. Forces are presented for the students as the results of interaction of bodies /14, p.3/.
2. In mechanics a quantity which is a measure of mechanical interaction of physical bodies is called a force /14, p.11/.
3. The main object of mechanics is the study of the motion of physical bodies due to the action of forces /14, p.11/.
4. In mechanics interaction of bodies resulting in the change of motion is called a force.
5. In classical mechanics intensity and directivity of mechanical interaction of bodies are characterized by physical forces of simply forces introduced by vector quantities /15, p.42/.
6. Interaction of two point bodies as a result of the Newtonian gravitation is achieved by two forces applied to each of them /15, p.42/.
7. The action of one body on another is called the reaction force of connection /15, p.44/. Further on there will be no referencies.
8. Physical forces always occur as a result of interaction of a body or a physical point with another body.
9. The forces resulting from the interaction of bodies in nature must always exist in couples.
10. Very often one may not consider bodies as being the sources affecting the material point of forces.
11. Every body is accelrated under the action of other bodies. Measure of this action is called a force.
12. A force is the influence of one body on another resulting in the accelration of the latter.
13. A force is the measure of interaction of physical bodies, that is the object of nature.
14. The action of physical bodies on a physical point in question resulting in acceleration of the motion of this point is called a force.
15. n mechanics interaction of bodies resulting in acceleration of both bodies are called forces.
16. From now on a force may be considered a physical field which has length, motion, energy and even mass as it was discovered at the begining of the century.
17. Forces represent a measure of mechanical interaction of bodies.
18. The change in motion of bodies is the result of the action of forces.
19. Forces are the result of the action of physical bodies.
20. Physical bodies interact as a result of the action of forces.
21. A force is the vector quantitative measure of the intensity of interaction.
22. Every force is trasferred by the interchange of quantums.
23. Force of interaction is trasferred by means of a certain mediator is called a field.
24. Electric force or more exactly mutual repultion or attraction of charges ...
25. Returning to the problem of the main types of forces and the resulting interactions ...
26. There is only one force causing weak electromagnetic and strong interactions.
27. Four fundamental forces control the physical world surroundings us: gravitational, electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear forces.

    Besides there are many formulas containing force (second Newton's law, Hook's law, Stoks' law etc). The fact that usually these formulas are expressed in the mathematical form is not very significant: mathematical relations can be expressed with words.

    Even the outline of the abovementioned definitions show that many of them are incompatible. From points 2, 5, 11, 13 and formulas we learn that a force is a physical quantity ("measure"). Besides that a force is a measure (17, 21); the result of body interaction (1, 8); the interaction itself (9, 15); action (7, 14); active influence (4) and the influence of one body on another (12). Then we can observe that the motion of a body changes under the influence of forces (13,18) or other bodies (11) - hence the words "body" and "force" are synonyms. Further: the interaction of bodies takes place under the influence of forces (6, 20); forces result in interactions (25, 23); they are transferred by quantums or fields (22, 23); their sources are physical bodies (9, 18); a force is a physical body itself which folllows from (13). As a result forces are a physical field (16) and they control the world (27).

    One may observe that the great variety of sentences containing the term "force" is quite startling. There is no question of on "object of thought". It is quite obvious that in many cases the term "force" denotes a physical quantity characterizing the intensity of body interaction that is it denotes an object from the "sphere of ideas" (definition of physical quantity see /16/). In other cases this term is the synonym of the term "body interaction", that is it denotes an object from the "sphere of things". But what is the meaning of all the other statements? What is the meaning of a widely used phrase "A body is acted upon by a force". What acts on a body: an action or a quantity? In many other sentences the term "force" denotes some mythical object from the "sphere of ideas", a kind of a chimera.

    A question arises whether school children or students can understand anything in this chaos of ideas when P.Feynman himself couldn't manage it (see Introduction) ? What are the possible proposals?

    One might offer two programs: a minimum-program and a maximum-program. As far as this confusion in teaching books exist and will not soon be get rid of it is necessary that students should read this paper and then to teach them to comprehend the polysemantic category because it concers not only the term "force". To simplify this task it is possible to use letter indices for term "force".For example "Force-B"- quantity, "Force-D" - action, "Force-X" - chimera. The maximum-program may recommend to use the term "force" only as a physical quantity (sentence 24 shows that in other cases it is easily substituted by other terms).

    In general in scientific and teaching books there is much material about the term "force". But as a rule the authors contradict each other or even themselves. A deep analysis into the ideas of specialists in mechanics concerning this very important "object of thoughts" is made by P.V.Harlamov /17/. He came to the conclusion that a force is not an objective reality but a physical quantity characterizing the intensity of body interactions that is the object from the "sphere of ideas". The main difference between his investigation and the ideas offered in this paper is that P.V.Harlamov considers the problem mainly on the basis of theoretical mechanics and this paper deals with logical and methodological aspects of the problem.

    Summary

    During the last decade people realized the necessity to regulate the interaction between mankind and environment on the planetary scale. It may be achieved only on the basis of complete comprehension of the problem. This is impossible without high level of culture of thinking which demands in its turn the development of the ecology of intellectual media. The key to solving this problem is the subject of humanities studying the process of thinking.

    REFERENCES

    1. N. N. Moiseev Ecology of man from the point of view of a matematician. - Мoscow : Molodaya Gvardija, 1988. - 254 p.
    2. The culture of a language in technical literature: //Transactions. - Moscow :Nauka , 1982. - 217 p.
    3. N. I. Tupalsky. General problems of higher school teaching books. - Мinsk, 1976. - 183 p.
    4. A. M. Sokhor. Explanation in the process of teaching. Elements of didactical conception. - Мoscow, 1988. - 128 p.
    5. Feynman R.P., Leighton R.B., Sands M. The Feyman lectures on Physics. - USA, 1964.
    6. A. Einstein, L. Infeld. The evolution of physics. - Мoscow: Nauka, 1965. - 327 p.
    7. L. Kuper. Physics for everybody. - М.: Mir, 1973. v.1 - 479 p.
    8. K.K. Gomojunov. Improvement in teaching technical subjects. Methodological aspects of the analysis of teaching books. - Leningrad, 1983. - 206 p.
    9. K.K. Gomojunov. Exactness in the definitions // The questions of psychology. - 1986. N 3. - P. 97-103.
    10. K.K. Gomojunov. Scientific terms and their interpretation from one position. News of higher shool. - 1987. N 2. - С.27-30.
    11. K.K. Gomojunov. Reason or condition? //Methodics and pratice of teaching in the technical high scool. - Leningrad: LPI, 1985. P.123-129.
    12. M.E. Kochiev. The phylosophical problems of reseach character are necessary //News of higher shool . - 1987. - N 8. - P. 67-70.
    13. A.V.Usova. The development of scientific ideas in the process of teaching at school. - Мoscow: Pedagogics, 1986. - 176 p.
    14. A.A. Kosmodemjansky. The course of theoretical mechanics. Мoscow, 1965. - Part 1. - 539 p.
    15. A. Ju. Ishlinsky The basis of classical mechanics //News of higher shool . 1987. - N 5. - P.41-48. Regulation of the system of metrological concepts // Задачи современной метрологии и высшая школа :
    16. K.K. Gomojunov. Межвузовский сборник научных трудов. М.: Изд-во ВЗМИ, 1987, - С. 101-109.
    17. P.V. Kharlamov. The motion of force in Newton's mechanics. Механика твердого тела. - 1988. -N 20 - С.46-67.

    The paper is published in the book (in Russian):

    Оптимизация педагогической работы в вузе: Тематический сборник научных трудов / Под ред. А.К.Тащева.-Челябинск:ЧПИ, 1989. - С. 56-65.

    ---

    Go to home page Go to previous page

    ---

    webmaster@unilib.unilib.neva.ru