Thinking, in general, and philosophical reflection, in particular, often run the risk of losing touch with reality and drifting in a void. A void may be the physicist’s delight but it is the philosopher’s fatal pitfall. The surest way to avoid it is to keep close to reality. The trouble is that reality, as philosophers know, is a rather complex and confusing notion, notwithstanding Dr. Johnson’s famous refutation of Berkeley’s subjectivism by kicking a stone. As far as the discussion concerning the ecology of knowledge, the aspect of reality which is most relevant is the present intellectual situation. Not only is the very idea of an ecology of knowledge a product of that situation, it is a reflection about that situation. Moreover, the reflection is guided as much by a desire for pure knowledge as by a search for some laws and guidelines for the best possible development of knowledge and culture. As far as our interests are concerned, the present intellectual situation is the most important factor in the search for a better future, not just because it is present, i.e., the only one actually existing, but also because it is the most developed stage of knowledge we know of and the one which exercises the most determining influence on humankind and therefore on its future.

Just as one can easily get lost in a forest, with equal ease an observer of the present intellectual scene can get lost in its maze. The richness of factors and elements, the complexity of relations between them, the plurality of individuals, of events of all sorts, of modes and aspects of things, in short multiplicity in the fullest sense of the word, is the most striking aspect of the present situation of man. His intellect is faced with an object of overwhelming richness, complexity and dynamism. Is there anything new in this situation? In itself complexity is nothing new or surprising. It is a fundamental aspect of nature. Humans have always been surrounded by a very complex nature and their intellectual development progressively reveals to them nature’s seemingly inexhaustible richness of forms of organization. But besides containing limitless variety, nature also presents the quite intellectually satisfying, and psychologically reassuring aspects of regularity and stability. Above and beyond all change and diversity, there is apparent order and permanence. They render nature intelligible and make human life possible. Man has always adjusted to the complexity of nature, as do all other successful forms of life.

The problem is that the multiplicity found in nature is not the only kind of plurality with which humans have to contend. Besides the ever present, and constantly better known multiplicity of species, individuals, systems of various degrees of complexity, and all sorts of relations, there exist the constantly growing, manmade multiplicity and complexity of human products, material and intellectual. Let us consider the intellectual level. The very effort to understand the complexity of nature results in the plurality of concepts, mental constructs and their corresponding verbal counterparts. Produced to make the world intelligible to us, the universe of mental products itself becomes a subject increasingly more difficult to grasp, and well beyond anybody’s capacity to comprehend totally. Knowledge grows and its richness becomes in turn a source of unintelligibility and the cause of various serious problems for humans. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the growth of knowledge produces a parallel growth in two other areas, namely, those of material products and existential situations.

To satisfy his insatiable and evermore sophisticated desire for possessions, man surrounds himself with a mushrooming multiplicity of artifacts. The growing ability to do things results in the multiplication of kinds of activity, occupations and existential situations. Adding insult to injury, that which is meant to express knowledge and to be the means of communications par excellence, namely, language, has transcended in its growth the capacities of individual minds. The specialized vocabularies of different branches of knowledge have themselves become a source of incomprehensibility.

There are some important differences between the natural and the human-produced orders of multiplicity. Within the time limits of the existence of humanity, the natural plurality may be considered as more or less stable in its broad outlines. Instead, the man-produced multitude is constantly growing. Not only does it increase the number of entities and their variety, but the rate of this increase grows at a fast pace. In some important areas, such as science, it does so exponentially. While nature is being mastered more and more, the human-made multiplicity is getting increasingly out of hand. The consequences of man-made plurality and of its growth are in themselves many, varied and evermore important. Overpopulation, pollution, problems of classification, inability to form a harmonious and satisfactory picture of the world, are some examples of the consequences of man-made plurality. It is fair to say, that a large portion of the problems besetting humanity today are a result of this plurality and of its impact on the individual, on societies and on humanity as a whole.

As if the increase of multiplicity facing humans was not enough, the present situation, whether intellectual or existential, is characterized by instability. This is again a human-induced factor. The more we think the more we know, the more active we are and the more we do. Consequently, the more change we produce. The relationship between thinking and change is sufficiently general and fundamental to be expressed in the form of a law:

Law V: "Thought induces change."

 

The more we know, the more change we produce. We will be analyzing some of the multiple consequences of the development of knowledge, but let us now point out that change occurs on the intellectual and physical levels. As a result we find ourselves in a highly unstable existential situation, bereft of a fixed intellectual framework. The fluidity of the situation is the result not only of increasing intellectual output. It is also due to the absence of dominant ideologies, theories, points of view and hierarchies of values. We live in an era of growing intellectual pluralism. Hand-in-hand with the pluralism goes the loss of faith among Western peoples in the absolute superiority of Western rationality and the emergence on the world scene of non-Western intellectual traditions and perspectives. It is interesting to note that this process occurs at the same time as the rapid development of science and technology and the extension of a Western type of education throughout the world, inducing progressive Westernization of non-Western cultures and growing worldwide behavioral homogeneity.

Further major elements of the contemporary intellectual situation are: the intellectual dynamism, the efficiency of thought and the impact of knowledge on humans and on nature. These factors are closely interrelated and essential to producing the uniqueness of the present-day situation. They distinguish it from all previous epochs of human history. Intellectual dynamism is the implosive effect of the existence and activity of a great number of "knowers." Not only are there more knowers than ever before, but they are better educated and more knowledgeable. They are aided by a much greater store of knowledge, which is vastly more accessible and available to increasingly greater numbers of individuals. This in turn makes possible better utilization of existing knowledge and of intellectual potential. The more knowers there are, and the greater the body of knowledge, the greater will be the pressure on individuals and societies to acquire existing knowledge and to further the development of knowledge. Thus the body of knowledge and knowers form a self-energizing system bound by positive feedback. We will discuss the consequences of this fact in some detail.

The efficiency of thought which characterizes present knowledge is an essential element of this system. It manifests itself in two ways, namely, in the production of new knowledge and in its practical results, i.e., in technology. The increased capacity to produce new knowledge is the consequence of the development of powerful intellectual tools as well as advances in the technology of experimentation. In the sphere of analytic thought, let us mention advanced mathematics, logic, cybernetics, or information theory. The advances in analytic thinking, important as they are, would be insufficient to give us the integrative perception of reality so necessary in the present situation of humanity. Fortunately they are accompanied by even more impressive developments in systemic, i.e., integrative, thinking. Suffice it to mention the development of general systems theory, hierarchy theory, interdisciplinary studies and generalist studies.

Further, the efficiency of thought is intrinsically related to the development of the knowledge industry as both its consequence and cause. Though the expression ‘knowledge industry’ may displease and even give rise to objections, it is well-justified as nowadays the production and dissemination of knowledge is a true and massive industry. It involves a large and growing number of highly qualified individuals, large and growing sums of money, complex organization and great amounts of sophisticated equipment. Moreover, it generates increasingly more wealth. One of the important new insights is the realization that knowledge is a crucial economic resource and has to be treated as such. An essential element of the knowledge industry is the technology and the production of research apparatus. Perhaps the most distinctive trait of contemporary knowledge is its largely experimental character. The ability to produce increasingly more advanced research tools is crucial to the advancement of the most dynamic element of knowledge, namely, science. Scientific knowing implies doing, which in turn presupposes knowing how to do. The prodigious development of knowledge is the result of the close cooperation and the feedback relationship between theoretical and practical cognition.

The more efficient knowledge is, the greater its impact on humans and nature. The more humans know, the more they can do and thus transform the conditions of their own life and their environment. The more knowledge there is, the greater the number of aspects of human life that is affected, and more profoundly so. Intellectual, psychological, social, economic and political spheres are constantly and increasingly influenced by the development of knowledge. As far as nature is concerned, human interaction with it becomes increasingly more massive, more invasive, more transforming and occurs in an ever wider radius. This is obvious and well-publicized. What is perhaps less evident is the resulting change of the status of nature in human perception. Primitive humans look at nature in fear and awe. For them nature is the supreme power, the life giver and the life taker. The regularity which they discover in nature is the foundation of intelligibility and of the notion of law, first natural, then human. Reverence for nature goes hand in hand with the conviction of total subordination to nature, of which primitive humans consider themselves an integral part. The demiurgic activity of Western people has changed radically the attitude towards nature. It has dethroned it from its exalted position and transformed it into a source of raw materials for industry. Thus, through increasingly more sophisticated activity made possible by the development of knowledge, the traditional source of intelligibility lost its preeminent status, leaving the question of the justification of intelligibility and of order in nature and in human affairs wide open.

To think is to order, said Aristotle. Intelligibility follows from unity; multiplicity as such is unintelligible. To become intelligible, things have to be reduced to some order or unity. As we have seen, human activity, even strictly intellectual activity, produces increasing multiplicity and makes the efforts of an overall comprehension more complex, not less. Is this an accidental result of human development; has development gone wrong? Or has the resulting complexity some redeeming features, some positive role and therefore a deeper meaning? Is the present intellectual situation just so much sound and fury, or does it signify something? Let us try to throw some light on the problem.