Hi,
I have been trying to figure out what my position on reductionism might be, but I am running into problems. Does reductionism mean a belief that the best strategy is always to analyze complex things in terms of simpler components (with, I presume, a small number of irreducible parts)? Or is it a belief that everything in nature is nothing more than a sum of simple components? --John On 9/5/08 12:13 PM, "Jack Leibowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To Gunther: I dont think the word is horrible. Please note the quotes around the word in my e-mail. Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: "Günther Greindl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Young but distant gallaxies Hi, > This doesn't mean strictly remaining with restraints belonging under the > heading of that horrible word "reductionism". Why do you think that the word is horrible? (be specific please ;-) Cheers, Günther -- Günther Greindl Department of Philosophy of Science University of Vienna [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://www.complexitystudies.org/ Thesis: http://www.complexitystudies.org/proposal/ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
