Re: Medical science and Rosennean Complexity

[Dan Fiscus <***>]

Tim,

Re: this excerpt that you wrote:

Tim Gwinn wrote:

> The question, as I see it, is whether the solution to a _specific_ problem
> _requires_ stepping outside of that set of reductionistic models in order to
> solve that problem. If not, then - as alot of science, technology and
> medicine has already shown - we can find the answers we seek with
> reductionistic aproaches alone, regardless of the complexity of the
> underlying system.

I agreed to as much in my last email to Jack, but now I wonder.

I wonder if these answers are of the same quality as we'd have if
we could answer/solve the same questions/problems with complex
models/science? I think another issue that is becoming clearer all
the time is that reductionist/mechanist "solutions" also create new
problems. In fact, it may be that in general the value or effect of
the problems (side-effects) are of more weight, greater difficulty
than the value of the solutions (main effects). My evidence that
this may be true is my usual noting of the myriad, interacting,
increasing, worsening set of global, systemic environmental
problems. All the accumulated "residue" or neglected, ignored or
denied side-effects of billions of cases of solving isolated problems
via mechanistic/reductionism is coming home to roost at the
global and systemic scale.

The alternative that is needed is a kind of solution that is a real
net solution - some mode of science + technology for which in the
integrated, total accounting of all main and side-effects the whole
effect is positive for life as a whole, with some balance of "good
for the one" as in organism or person and "good for the many" as
in interdependent biosphere boat we are all in.

That truly net positive science + technology is the great promise
I see in Rosen's work, and also the near magic I see operable in
life itself (but life as organisms-in-ecosystems, not just organisms).
Life already knows how to make things better as it goes, to not
only solve a local problem but to have the side-effects be beneficial
too. Good example is soil - it is an emergent, systemic property of
myriad actions of zillions of organisms and it increases both the
productivity and the productive capacity of life systems like forests.
Pretty good models + technology when your residue or waste is so
darn good. And 180 degree different from the trajectory we are
heaed in. Anything good about our waste products? Ever been to a
land fill?

Dan