1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
|
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<title> Ici THK — Included Third </title>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="../assets/css/style.css">
</head>
<body>
<header>
<h1> <a href="../index.html">Ici THK</a> </h1>
<h2> Included Third </h2>
<h3> Quantic Logic</h3>
</header>
<main>
<article>
<section id="concept">
<h4>About the Concept</h4>
Included Third logic considers the relation between objects rather then objects themselves, as explained by Stephane Lupasco the included third takes place as a element associating the 2 elements of a contradiction, letting one and other possibility to both exist. This logic trains us towards inclusive thinking taking in account all parameters even if they are not in the direct scope of the observer. </section>
<section id="sources">
<h4>Sources</h4>
<h3> <a href="../authors/basarab-nicolescu.html"> Basarab Nicolescu refers to the notion developed by Stephane Lupasco </a> </h3>
</section>
<section id="exploitation">
<h3> Quantum physics has taught us how to think.</h3>
The notion of the included third is directly derived from a quantum physics understanding, while traditional excluding binary logic considers: what cannot enter in the resolution of a problematic is excluded and becomes unacoutable in the decision process, it hinders “an individual’s (or group’s) ability to make effective choices and to transform those choices into desired outcomes”, as decisional process becomes excluding, biased.
From a different stance, included third logic transforms contradiction into something inclusive; each time there is a relation, it considers there is also an included third derived from this relation that is part of the conditions of its existence, allowing for a multiplicity of possibilities.
In a decisional and in an analytical process, when aristotelian logic's asks us to choose between either A or non A, as a premisce for our reasonning and acting, included third logic insists both A and non A are valid, as what associates them is a relational process, an Included Third. An included third logic allows us to view the complexity of our environment, making it difficult to think our reality the in the sole limit of the observer's knowledge and context; it forces us to acknowledge the always included third that can take multiple forms. Typically it becomes impossible to think in terms of what benefits a nation, or exclude cosequences like pollution, indeed, if one situated point of view is valid, other assumptions are equally, and our system and life happens in the relation between all elements.
</section>
<section id="resistance">
Included Third is a useful relational concept in political thinking, it can be activated in political terms to respond to reductionnist and protectionists discourses.
</section>
<section id="detournament">
Included Third logic is processual, and results in always in transformation resolution, in order to allow for effective realisation it must be associated to decisional processes and clear political positionning.
</section>
<section id="tree of significance">
<h4>SYNONYM:</h4> Quantum Logic
<h4>ANTONYM:</h4> Exclusive thinking, Reductionism, Domination.
<h4>HYPERNYM:</h4> A larger logic still needs to be understood.
<h4>HYPONYM:</h4> Aristotelian logic is included.
</section>
</article>
<nav>
<ul>
<li><a href="../authors/bernard-aspe.html">ASPE</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/karen-barad.html">BARAD</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/muriel-combes.html">COMBES</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/stephane-lupasco.html">LUPASCO</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/deborah-lupton.html">LUPTON</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/lynn-margulis.html">MARGULIS</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/gilbert-simondon.html">SIMONDON</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/subrosa.html">SUBROSA</a></li>
<li><a href="../authors/etc.html">Etc.</a></li>
</ul>
</nav>
</main>
</body>
</html>
|
