Synthesiology as sustainability science

Abstract

I first became interested in sustainability in the late 1960s. At the time I was developing a general design theory with the objective of constructing an intellectual framework for the creation of artifacts—artificial things—compatible with nature. But my article introducing this concept was rejected several times over, both in Japan and overseas, and it did not appear in print as an academic treatise until 1975. Looking back, I can see that this design theory, being a form of artifactual engineering or synthesiology, was considered outside the purview of conventional science. Synthesiology is a term for the theory of integration of scientific and technological knowledge from different disciplines with the needs of society. Traditionally, science starts with an object of study that it analyzes in order to understand it. The analytic results accumulated by scientists contribute to the development of new scientific disciplines. As the analytical process advances, its object of study grows narrower; as analysis becomes more specific and detailed in its focus, scientific disciplines themselves become increasingly narrow and specialized. The problem is that, if these analytic results are to be used to contribute to society and solve the problems we face, we must have a framework, and a logic supporting that framework, for integrating a massive assemblage of analytic results and applying them to society. Unfortunately, conventional science has treated that task as outside its purview. That is why my proposal of a general design theory failed to gain recognition in academic circles for so long. I do not mean to sound as if I reject the priority that science places on analysis. By concerning itself exclusively with the coherence of ideas and knowledge within specific disciplines, modern science has enabled us to generate tremendous quantities of knowledge from analysis within those disciplines at an accelerated rate. Researchers, functioning as workers on the production lines of knowledge, have contributed to the construction of the vast system of science we have today. It is thanks to research in these various specialized disciplines that we have access to previously untapped resources and previously undeveloped applications for those resources. These achievements have fueled the industrialization of society and the economic growth it generates. As we continue to construct an increasingly artifactual environment for ourselves, however, little thought has been given to the coherence or compatibility of knowledge between different scientific disciplines. As a result, incompatibilities and contradictions have arisen within that environment, and, most ominously, between it and the surrounding natural environment. These contradictions have caused environmental degradation on a global scale and now threaten the very survival of humanity. Precisely because modern science concerns itself only with the compatibility of knowledge within specific disciplines, it is late in recognizing incompatibilities and contradictions on this larger scale and now finds itself hard put to halt the process of global environmental degradation. If we are to surmount this crisis, we need to develop a body of scientific knowledge fundamentally different from what we have now. I believe that this new body of knowledge will be generated by a process of synthesis based on abduction—a method of hypothetical reasoning, first described by the H. Yoshikawa (&) National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), 1-3-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8921, Japan e-mail: yosikawa@mb.rosenet.ne.jp