Reductionism and Practicality

Cosmos and History 10 (1):78-85 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Like most domains of science, the study of the mind has been tackled at many scales of analysis, from the behavior of large groups of people, to the diffusion of ions across cellular membranes. At each of these scales, researchers often believe that the critical phenomena of interest, and the most powerful explanatory constructs and mechanisms, reside at their scale of analysis, with finer scales argued to be incapable of predicting the interesting phenomena, while coarser scales are purported to miss critical mechanistic subtleties. Here we argue by analogy that, for better or worse, researchers at all scales are correct: phenomena at each scale of analysis are intractable from other scales; thus, while reductionism is a useful scientific goal, it will not obviate the need for macroscopic research, constructs, and formalisms.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,654

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Religiosity Scales: What Are We Measuring in Whom?Marsha Cutting & Michelle Walsh - 2008 - Archive for the Psychology of Religion 30 (1):137-153.
Religiosity Scales: What Are We Measuring in Whom?Marsha Cutting & Michelle Walsh - 2008 - Archive for the Psychology of Religion / Archiv für Religionspychologie 30 (1):137-153.
Magnitude scales, category scales, and number scales.Stanley J. Rule - 1989 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12 (2):288-288.
Two Cheers for Reductionism.Matthew R. Silliman - 2006 - Social Philosophy Today 22:59-70.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-06-08

Downloads
18 (#703,405)

6 months
2 (#648,997)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references