Reductionism

[synthesis]

Has anyone heard of this philosophy called Reductionism? Personally, I think it could be of great usage towards a future Communist society.

Essentially, what it boils down to is this: All psychology reduces to biology, all biology reduces to chemistry, all chemistry reduces to physics, and all physics reduces to mathematical logic.

Convenient, eh? Unfortunately, I don't think our current psychology is advanced enough to really apply that yet, but I think that in terms of a planned society and economy, Reductionism could be invaluable.

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

WTF :blink:

can you give another example i didn't really get that one

[redstar2000]

I think in its most literal meaning, reductionism means reducing a phenomenon into its constituent parts.

It has a bad reputation in some circles these days, due to the observation that, in many cases, the "whole" is very different from the sum of its parts.

Anyway, here's a short introduction that turned up on a google search...

http://smith2.sewanee.edu/gsmith/Texts/Eco...ductionism.html (http://smith2.sewanee.edu/gsmith/Texts/Ecology/OnReductionism.html)

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[synthesis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2003, 10:20 PM
WTF :blink:

can you give another example i didn't really get that one
Okay, so in theory:

1) All psychology (or things of the science of psychology) can theoretically reduce to equations involving biology. Correct?
2) All biology (or things of the science of biology) reduces to equations involving chemistry. Correct?
3) All chemistry (or the things of the science of chemistry) reduces to equations involving physics. Correct?
4) All physics can be determined using simple mathematical formulas. Correct?

Does that make more sense?


I think in its most literal meaning, reductionism means reducing a phenomenon into its constituent parts.

It has a bad reputation in some circles these days, due to the observation that, in many cases, the "whole" is very different from the sum of its parts.

That is certainly a valid criticism, but its basis lies in the fact that our sciences are not yet developed enough to actually utilize reductionism properly.

However, Reductionism could very well be the key to fully-defined artificial intelligence. Couldn't such a thing be used to regulate Communist society?

[synthesis]

4) All physics can be determined using simple mathematical formulas. Correct?

Uh, wait, I didn't mean that. I just meant physics could be calculated using algebra and calculus and things of that kind.

[Discontinuity]

If I follow this correctly... then reductionism would argue that human behaviour (psychology) can be predicted by mathematical logic?

I can see how this would make sense, but I don't see the point of it. So you condense all human sciences into one another, like so many Russian dolls, but how does that help explain anything?

We would be able to perfectly predict human behaviour, if we were able to perfectly monitor a living being, and were able to perfectly understand the processes involved in said being, and possessed perfect knowledge of physics, and were able to perfectly relate that into mathematical terms... Yes, so if we were some sort of god-beings, we could tell if someone was going to go insane by plugging in a bunch of variables.

But what does that prove?

AI, I can see Reductionism having some use, because we'd still be working on something that is limited by our understanding... A person, or any living being for that matter, is too complex for it too work. Perhaps if you could explain the advantages outside of the development of artificial intelligence.

[BuyOurEverything]

Well I think it's a given that theoretically everything can be broken down into mathematical formulas. I don't think we could ever actually understand how we work because I don't think the brain is capable of understanding itself no matter how it's broken down but I do think it could be an extremely vital tool for technology and understanding the universe.

[CompadreGuerrillera]

this sounds alot like a robot or computer would think, err fucntion, so by this you kind of eliminate thought if anything can be explained by a formula, and "logic" prevails, well then wouldnt you just be a computer, a computer does things at tremendous speeds a human could NEVER do. the thing is that we would never really think like that, perhaps were not ready, or we just dont. Period.

I mean we are humans, and humans are illogical, and tend to believe in "illogical" things, i.e. systems of gov't, religion, and i think that what you are talking about would CONTRADICT communsim in many if not all ways. Communism is not inclined towards our natural state, and it certainly is NOT "logical"its not"efficient"

one would argue, but were commies we revolve around industry, wed be efficient, the thing is our future gov't will NOT be efficient, strong, and certainly not quickly. We have a whole lot of work to do, and i dont think that this belief should be regarded as a possibility.

Secondly, what would discovering everything about the universe(if we could) what would it get us?? we would never be any step closer or behind if employed en masse, this idea. We would NEVER understand it, with this type of thinking, any sooner than we would back in the 13th century-like Islamic states today

just my long 2 cents