[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

Re: Reductionist model



John Mikes wrote: So it is no 'shame' if all conventional sciences (incl. biology) are deemed reductionistic, we only try to step ahead one step. Mathematics (IMO) is not, it is a unique ideational world on its on (some say: a language, but it is much more than that). Applied Math, however, within the  (lately strongly physicalized) sciences IS reductionistic, since it works in equational fashion with the limited model assigned (sum-) values, which were already in the time of Aristotle  less then the total. Heisenberg was a genius. I wonder if all this is heretic in RR's words, I feel it is OK in the sense I caught from his ideas.
 
There is no way to be a heretic here, because that implies an orthodoxy-- but I know what you mean. And you can rest assured that his attitude was very much as you expressed yours to be. Pure mathematics, in its entirety, is a complex system in its own right, according to "RR". Applied math, on the other hand, is the equivalent of a model; it is being used to represent limited aspects of a natural system, which makes it a reduction.
 
Judith