advance seviyede ingilizce bilenler helpppp

sorun bu beyler

Transdisciplinary paradigms and syntagms in mechatronical knowledge

Transdisciplinarity has four pillars of knowledge: learning to know, learning to do, and learning to be and learning to live with others (Delors 1996). There is one very obvious inter-relation between these four pillars of the new system of education: how to learn to make (to do) while learning to know, and how to learn to be while learning to live together with (Nicolescu 1996). To learn and to understand are the most two important issues of the transdisciplinary mechatronical knowledge in the integrative process through modeling and control in the design of mechatronical systems with the physical and mathematical modeling (Stiffler, 1992). To achieve knowledge in transdisciplinary mechatronical context, it is necessary to reconfigure the framework of the way these four pillars of transdisciplinary knowledge are working. For this aim, they were put together, in a new framework, learning to learn as achieving information and knowledge, as an objective extrinsic logical issue, and learning to understand as an ethic-semantic issue, the subjective spiritual dimension of knowledge. Learning to learn to know by doing, and learning to understand to be by living together with other people are two syntagmatic guidelines to achieve both necessary integrative semiophysical skills in a synergistic communicational context, structural-functional semiophysical system, with its technical efficiency (knowing what and how we know), and ethic-semantic value of semiosycal products in an ethic authoritative context with its axiological coefficient (knowing how and why we live) (Pop 2008). Every pillar of transdisciplinary knowledge can be integrated in this framework to explain the mechatronical perspective of achieving knowledge in the informational society with a new transdisciplinary mechatronical epistemology, new creative logics of the included middle, and new mechatronical ontology. Learning to know becomes a ring of the extrinsic active knowledge chain, with its aspects of “what”, “how” and “why” questions, related with the message (quantitative and qualitative aspects, “know what”), with the manner of the communicational process, code and channel (“know how”) and finally with the context (“know why”). We need training in the methods which help us to distinguish what is real from what is quite illusory with an intelligent access to the fabulous knowledge of our age, in the context of the emergence of continuously connected beings to build a new scientific spirit. We need to establish bridges between the different disciplines and between the meanings of these disciplines and the capabilities of the inside transdisciplinary potentialities as an indispensable complement to the disciplinary approach. We need to adapt the disciplines to the necessary and continuously changing of professional exigencies, with a permanent flexibility always oriented towards the actualization of their inside. We need to open windows towards the knowledge field in the information based society. All these have to be done being of a big importance for mechatronical knowledge, but only “learning by doing” (Pop 2008, Nicolescu 2002). As a ring of the extrinsic active knowledge chain, “by doing”, represents the “acquiring a profession necessarily passing through a phase of specialization in a challenging world, with changes induced by the computer revolution with excessive specialization risks, reconciling the exigency of competition with equal chance and opportunity for all” (Nicolescu, 1996). Learning by doing could be, in the transdisciplinary approach of mechatronics, an apprenticeship in creativity (Siegwart, 2001, Boden 1994), discovering what is new, bringing to light the creative potentialities, generating the conditions for the emergence of the authentic person, working at the top level of creative potentialities (Boden 1994; Nicolescu 1996).The intrinsic reactive branch of the mechatronical transdisciplinary knowledge, of the “learning to understand”, involves the spiritual dimensions of the knowledge process without which the knowledge couldn’t be understandable (English 2000; Pop 2008). The first step is “learning to be”, a permanent apprenticeship in which teachers inform the students, as much as students inform the teachers, in a permanent teaching-learning process, so that the shaping of a person inevitably passes through a transpersonal dimension with fundamental tensions between the material and the spiritual, discovering the harmony or

86

disharmony between individual and social life, testing the foundations of our believes in order to discover that which is found underneath, questioning in a scientific spirit being a precious guide for us (Nicolescu 1996, 2002). The transdisciplinary approach is based on the equilibrium between the outside (with its extrinsic active knowledge aspect) of the person and his inside (with its intrinsic reactive knowledge aspect) in an equilibrium balance. So, transdisciplinary mechatronical knowledge, with its extrinsic active (learning to know by doing) and intrinsic reactive (understand to be by living with) components is presented in a new original syntagmatic-paradigmatic manner. The knowledge by „learning to learn to know by doing” involves „creativity through quality and innovation (to know-what, how, why)”, working in „action through competence and performance (by doing-who, what, how and why)”, as extrinsic active component, characterized by the efficiency of knowledge process. On the other hand there is the knowledge component “by understanding to be by living with”, which presupposes „authenticity through integrity and excellence” (to be-who, how), together in „participation through communion and apprenticeship (by living with-to whom)”, as intrinsic reactive component, characterized by its axiological ethic-semantic parameter (Pop, 2006).

@22 buraya kadar çevirdim panpa ( türkçesinde bazı yerlerde boşluklar var )

transdisciplinary paradigms and syntagms in mechatronical knowledge

transdisciplinarity has four pillars of knowledge: learning to know, learning to do, and learning to be and learning to live with others (delors 1996). there is one very obvious inter-relation between these four pillars of the new system of education: how to learn to make (to do) while learning to know, and how to learn to be while learning to live together with (nicolescu 1996). to learn and to understand are the most two important issues of the transdisciplinary mechatronical knowledge in the integrative process through modeling and control in the design of mechatronical systems with the physical and mathematical modeling (stiffler, 1992). to achieve knowledge in transdisciplinary mechatronical context, it is necessary to reconfigure the framework of the way these four pillars of transdisciplinary knowledge are working. for this aim, they were put together, in a new framework, learning to learn as achieving information and knowledge, as an objective extrinsic logical issue, and learning to understand as an ethic-semantic issue, the subjective spiritual dimension of knowledge. learning to learn to know by doing, and learning to understand to be by living together with other people are two syntagmatic guidelines to achieve both necessary integrative semiophysical skills in a synergistic communicational context, structural-functional semiophysical system, with its technical efficiency (knowing what and how we know), and ethic-semantic value of semiosycal products in an ethic authoritative context with its axiological coefficient (knowing how and why we live) (pop 2008). every pillar of transdisciplinary knowledge can be integrated in this framework to explain the mechatronical perspective of achieving knowledge in the informational society with a new transdisciplinary mechatronical epistemology, new creative logics of the included middle, and new mechatronical ontology. learning to know becomes a ring of the extrinsic active knowledge chain, with its aspects of “what”, “how” and “why” questions, related with the message (quantitative and qualitative aspects, “know what”), with the manner of the communicational process, code and channel (“know how”) and finally with the context (“know why”). we need training in the methods which help us to distinguish what is real from what is quite illusory with an intelligent access to the fabulous knowledge of our age, in the context of the emergence of continuously connected beings to build a new scientific spirit. we need to establish bridges between the different disciplines and between the meanings of these disciplines and the capabilities of the inside transdisciplinary potentialities as an indispensable complement to the disciplinary approach. we need to adapt the disciplines to the necessary and continuously changing of professional exigencies, with a permanent flexibility always oriented towards the actualization of their inside. we need to open windows towards the knowledge field in the information based society. all these have to be done being of a big importance for mechatronical knowledge, but only “learning by doing” (pop 2008, nicolescu 2002). as a ring of the extrinsic active knowledge chain, “by doing”,

trans paradigma disiplinleri ve mekatronik bilginin nitelikleri

trans-disiplin 4 parça bilgi türüne sahiptir. "öğrenmek için öğrenmek , yapmak için öğrenmek , olmak için öğrenmek ve diğerleri ile yaşamak için öğrenmek" delors (1996).eğitimin yeni sisteminin bu 4 parçası arasında çok açık bir ilişki vardır ."nasıl yapmak için öğrenilir bilmek için öğrenilirken ve nasıl olmak için çalışılır başkalarıyla yaşamayı öğrenirken" nicolescu (1996) . öğrenmek ve anlamak mekatronical trans-disiplinel bilginin en önemlimli konularıdır modelleme ve control işleminin içinde mekatronical sistemlerin fiziksel ve matematiksel modellemeleriyle birlikte .
mekatronical trans-disiplinin kaynağındaki bilgiye ulaşmak , bu dört parçanın trans-disiplin bilgi yapısının tekrar yapılanması ve çalışması için gereklidir. bu amaç için ; yeni bir yapının içinde birleştiler. öğrenmek için öğrenmek bilgiye ulaşmak ve dışardan gelen mantıklı nesnel konular gibi , anlamak için öğrenmek ise anlamlı etik konular ve öznel bilginin boyutu gibi örneklendirebiliriz. bilmek için öğrenmenin öğrenimi yapmak iş tarafından be olmak için anlamayı öğrenmek ...
bilgi toplumu içinde bilgiye ulaşmanın mekatronical perspektifini açıklamak için trans-disiplinli bilginin tüm paçaları, bu yapının içinde trans-disiplinli mekatronical bilgi kuramı ve var olan yeni yaratıcı düşünceler , yeni mekatronical ontoloji ile birleştirilebilir. bilmeyi öğrenmek aktif bilgi zincirinin ikincil(dıştan) bir halkası olur ve onların "ne" "nasıl" ve "neden" gibi soruların görünüşleri ile mesajı arasında "bilinen ne" (nitelik ve nicelik yönleri) "nasıl bilinir" ve "neden bilinir" üçlemi ile bağlantı kurulmuştur . bizim bu metodlarlardan eğitim almaya ihtiyacımız var , hangisinin hayal hangisinin gerçek olduğunu , çağımızın harika bilgisi ve zeki kullanımıyla birlikte ayırt etmekte yardımcı olacaktır ve ortaya çıkan kaynaklar sürekli olarak yeni bir bilimsel ruh inşa etmek için bağlantı içindirler. bizim farklı disiplinler , bu disiplinlerin anlamıyla ve içindeki kaçınılmaz tamamlayıcı disiplin yaklaşımları gibi trans-disiplin olasılığı olan kapasiteler arasında köprüler kurmaya ihtiyacımız var. profesyonel ihtiyaçların sürekli olarak değişmesi ve gerekli olması yüzünden bu disipline esneyebilen kalıcı şeyler ile sürekli olarak onların içine doğru yönlendirmeyi gerçekleştirmeye adapte olmaya ihtiyacımız var. pencerelerimizi bilgi alanındaki topluma dayandırılmış bilgiye doğru açmaya ihtiyacımız var. "yaparak öğrenmek"gibi mekatronical bilgi için büyük bir öneme sahip olan herşey yapılmış olmak zorundadır. (pop 2008, nicolescu 2002) . aktif bilgi zincirinin ikincil(dış) halkası gibi "yaparak" ,