Re: Rastetter

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

Dan,

Is your reference to Rastetter about this article?:
* Rastetter, E.B.: 1996, ?Validating models of ecosystem response to global
change?, BioScience, 46, 190-198.

I searched for the paper online, but only found some by other authors who
mentioned some of the arguments in it. It sounds very interesting and
relevant to dynamical modelling of Rosennean complex systems. Do you know if
it available online?

Regards,
Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:*** Behalf Of Dan
> Fiscus
> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 9:52 AM
> To: ***
> Subject: Re: Empirics and Life
>
>
> Howard and Judith,
>
> An interjection here from listening in...
-snip-
>
> The models or hypotheses they pose may not be testable
> by experiment. If experiment depends on control for
> meaningfulness (have to control the variables involved,
> hold "all else constant", all else being equal, otherwise no
> clear link between treatments and results, causes and effects)
> and if control as in truncation from other perhaps infinite
> influences is impossible, then experiment in the traditional
> sense of a crucial, objectivist test may be out the window.
> In the field of models for climate change this has been
> acknowledged - that crucial testing cannot be done, nor can
> model validation. Rastetter called this type of problem
> "trans-scientific" (not sure if he was the first). The people
> developing syntropy from Luigi Fantappie have said the
> same about syntropy which depends on the future to
> determine the present - you can't develop or test such
> science in the traditional, experimental way.
>
> But, what is another way beyond experiment? On that I
> agree with Howard that there is room for contribution and
> creative work, and (my preference) collaborative in a spirit
> of harmonious teamwork (more fun that way). All under
> my dual research headings that I think Dr. Rosen may
> have liked, What is the Meaning of Life, and How to Save
> the World.
>
> Dan