Talk:Multidisciplinary approach: Difference between revisions
→OR etc: new section |
→OR etc: + relevance etc |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== OR etc == |
== OR etc == |
||
I have removed this problematic content, broadly per [[WP:POV]]/[[WP:OR]]: <blockquote>Multidisciplinary work is often seen as revolutionary by skill-centred specialists, but it is simply a fundamental expression of being guided by [[holism]] rather than [[reductionism]], as described by [[Jan Smuts]] in his 1926 book ''Holism and Evolution''. One of the major barriers to the multidisciplinary approach is the long-established tradition of highly focused professionals cultivating a protective (and thus restrictive) boundary around their area of expertise. This tradition has sometimes been found not to work to the benefit of the wider public interest, and the multidisciplinary approach has recently become of interest to government agencies and some enlightened professional bodies who recognise the advantages of systems thinking for complex [[problem solving]]. <p> The use of the term "multidisciplinary" has in recent years been overtaken by the term "[[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]]" (a Google ratio of 25M:36M in January 2014) for what is essentially holistic working by another name. The former term tends to relate to practitioner led working while the latter term tends to carry a more academic overtone.</blockquote> I think this sort of discussion needs to be set in context using [[WP:RS|reliable secondary sources]] (and without the [[WP:OR|original research]] on Google hits). [[Special:Contributions/86.181.67.166|86.181.67.166]] ([[User talk:86.181.67.166|talk]]) 16:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
I have removed this problematic content, broadly per [[WP:POV]]/[[WP:OR]]: <blockquote>Multidisciplinary work is often seen as revolutionary by skill-centred specialists, but it is simply a fundamental expression of being guided by [[holism]] rather than [[reductionism]], as described by [[Jan Smuts]] in his 1926 book ''Holism and Evolution''. One of the major barriers to the multidisciplinary approach is the long-established tradition of highly focused professionals cultivating a protective (and thus restrictive) boundary around their area of expertise. This tradition has sometimes been found not to work to the benefit of the wider public interest, and the multidisciplinary approach has recently become of interest to government agencies and some enlightened professional bodies who recognise the advantages of systems thinking for complex [[problem solving]]. <p> The use of the term "multidisciplinary" has in recent years been overtaken by the term "[[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]]" (a Google ratio of 25M:36M in January 2014) for what is essentially holistic working by another name. The former term tends to relate to practitioner led working while the latter term tends to carry a more academic overtone.</blockquote> I think this sort of discussion needs to be set in context using [[WP:RS|reliable secondary sources]] (and without the [[WP:OR|original research]] on Google hits for semantically distinct terms). This is important to avoid misunderstandings: for instance, members of multidisciplinary health care teams may be implementing [[Evidence-based medicine|evidence]] based on reductive methods of study in order to provide patient care in a holistic way. [[Special:Contributions/86.181.67.166|86.181.67.166]] ([[User talk:86.181.67.166|talk]]) 16:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 17:07, 13 January 2015
 | Systems Redirect‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
I think this page would benefit from having more examples — The previous unsigned comment was added by User:OComm2014 (Talk, Contributions) at 01:15 UTC on 21 October 2014
OR etc
I have removed this problematic content, broadly per WP:POV/WP:OR:
Multidisciplinary work is often seen as revolutionary by skill-centred specialists, but it is simply a fundamental expression of being guided by holism rather than reductionism, as described by Jan Smuts in his 1926 book Holism and Evolution. One of the major barriers to the multidisciplinary approach is the long-established tradition of highly focused professionals cultivating a protective (and thus restrictive) boundary around their area of expertise. This tradition has sometimes been found not to work to the benefit of the wider public interest, and the multidisciplinary approach has recently become of interest to government agencies and some enlightened professional bodies who recognise the advantages of systems thinking for complex problem solving.
The use of the term "multidisciplinary" has in recent years been overtaken by the term "interdisciplinary" (a Google ratio of 25M:36M in January 2014) for what is essentially holistic working by another name. The former term tends to relate to practitioner led working while the latter term tends to carry a more academic overtone.
I think this sort of discussion needs to be set in context using reliable secondary sources (and without the original research on Google hits for semantically distinct terms). This is important to avoid misunderstandings: for instance, members of multidisciplinary health care teams may be implementing evidence based on reductive methods of study in order to provide patient care in a holistic way. 86.181.67.166 (talk) 16:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC)