更改

罗森的工作提出了一种方法论，目前分子生物学家除了对科学的还原论方法的运用之外，还需要发展这种方法论。他称这种方法为关系生物学。他确切地将关系这个术语归功于他的导师尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基，在罗森第一次就这个专题发表报告之前，拉舍夫斯基就集合理论关系在生物学中的重要性发表了几篇论文。罗森对生物学的关系方法是尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基对 n 元关系处理方法的延伸和扩展。拉舍夫斯基在过去20年中发展了一些有机体集合，作为生物和社会“有机体”的代表。

罗森的工作提出了一种方法论，目前分子生物学家除了对科学的还原论方法的运用之外，还需要发展这种方法论。他称这种方法为关系生物学。他确切地将关系这个术语归功于他的导师尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基，在罗森第一次就这个专题发表报告之前，拉舍夫斯基就集合理论关系在生物学中的重要性发表了几篇论文。罗森对生物学的关系方法是尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基对 n 元关系处理方法的延伸和扩展。拉舍夫斯基在过去20年中发展了一些有机体集合，作为生物和社会“有机体”的代表。

Rosen's relational biology maintains that organisms, and indeed all systems, have a distinct quality called ''[[organization]]'' which is not part of the language of reductionism, as for example in [[molecular biology]], although it is increasingly employed in [[systems biology]]. It has to do with more than purely structural or material aspects. For example, organization includes all relations between material parts, relations between the effects of interactions of the material parts, and relations with time and environment, to name a few. Many people sum up this aspect of [[complex systems]]<ref>{{Cite journal  

Rosen's relational biology maintains that organisms, and indeed all systems, have a distinct quality called ''[[organization]]'' which is not part of the language of reductionism, as for example in [[molecular biology]], although it is increasingly employed in [[systems biology]]. It has to do with more than purely structural or material aspects. For example, organization includes all relations between material parts, relations between the effects of interactions of the material parts, and relations with time and environment, to name a few. Many people sum up this aspect of [[complex systems]]<ref>{{Cite journal  

<!-- 独特品质是不是不太合适？

<!-- 独特品质是不是不太合适？

  -->罗森的关系生物学认为，有机体，甚至所有的系统，都有一种被称为组织的这种品质不是还原论语言的一部分，例如分子生物学，尽管它在系统生物学中被越来越多地使用。它涉及的不仅仅是纯粹的结构或物质方面。例如，组织包括物质部分之间的所有关系、物质部分相互作用的效应之间的关系、与时间和环境的关系等等。许多人总结复杂系统的这一方面时说，整体大于部分之和。在某种意义上，部分之间的关系和相互作用之间的影响必须被视为附加的关系部分。

  -->罗森的关系生物学认为，有机体，甚至所有的系统，都有一种被称为组织的这种品质不是还原论语言的一部分，例如分子生物学，尽管它在系统生物学中被越来越多地使用。它涉及的不仅仅是纯粹的结构或物质方面。例如，组织包括物质部分之间的所有关系、物质部分相互作用的效应之间的关系、与时间和环境的关系等等。许多人总结复杂系统的这一方面时说，整体大于部分之和。在某种意义上，部分之间的关系和相互作用之间的影响必须被视为附加的关系部分。

Rosen said that [[organization]] must be independent from the material particles which seemingly constitute a [[living system]]. As he put it:

Rosen said that [[organization]] must be independent from the material particles which seemingly constitute a [[living system]]. As he put it:

罗森说，组织必须独立于看似构成一个生命系统的物质粒子。正如他所说的:

罗森说，组织必须独立于看似构成一个生命系统的物质粒子。正如他所说的:

Rosen's abstract relational biology approach focuses on a definition of living organisms, and all [[complex system]]s, in terms of their internal ''organization'' as [[Open system (systems theory)|open system]]s that cannot be reduced to their interacting components because of the multiple relations between metabolic, replication and repair components that govern the organism's complex biodynamics.

Rosen's abstract relational biology approach focuses on a definition of living organisms, and all [[complex system]]s, in terms of their internal ''organization'' as [[Open system (systems theory)|open system]]s that cannot be reduced to their interacting components because of the multiple relations between metabolic, replication and repair components that govern the organism's complex biodynamics.

罗森的抽象关系生物学方法关注于对生物体和所有复杂系统的定义，就其内部组织而言，它们是开放的系统，不能被简化为它们相互作用的组成部分，因为控制有机体复杂生物动力学的代谢、复制和修复组件之间是一种多重复杂关系。

罗森的抽象关系生物学方法关注于对生物体和所有复杂系统的定义，就其内部组织而言，它们是开放的系统，不能被简化为它们相互作用的组成部分，因为控制有机体复杂生物动力学的代谢、复制和修复组件之间是一种多重复杂关系。

He deliberately chose the `simplest' [[Graph (discrete mathematics)|graph]]s and categories for his representations of Metabolism-Repair Systems in small categories of sets endowed only with the discrete "efficient" topology of sets, envisaging this choice as the most general and less restrictive. It turns out however that the efficient entailments of <math>(M{,}R)</math>systems <!--{{clarify|date=September 2013}}--> are "closed to efficient cause",<ref>[http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mikuleck/PPRISS3.html Donald C. Mikulecky Robert Rosen: The well posed question and its answer - Why are organisms different from machines?]</ref> or in simple terms the catalysts ("efficient causes" of metabolism, usually identified as enzymes) are themselves products of metabolism, and thus may not be considered, in a strict mathematical sense, as subcategories of the [[category (mathematics)|category]] of sequential machines or [[automata]]: in direct contradiction of the French philosopher [[Descartes]]' supposition that all animals are only elaborate machines or ''mechanisms''. Rosen stated: "''I argue that the only resolution to such problems'' [of the subject-object boundary and what constitutes objectivity] ''is in the recognition that closed loops of causation are 'objective'; i.e. legitimate objects of scientific scrutiny. These are explicitly forbidden in any machine or mechanism.''"<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rosen|first=Robert|date=June 1, 1993|title=Drawing the boundary between subject and object: Comments on the mind-brain problem|journal=Theoretical Medicine|language=en|volume=14|issue=2|pages=89–100|doi=10.1007/BF00997269|pmid=8236065|s2cid=24953932|issn=1573-1200}}</ref> Rosen's demonstration of "efficient closure" was to present this clear paradox in mechanistic science, that on the one hand organisms are defined by such causal closures and on the other hand mechanism forbids them; thus we need to revise our understanding of nature. The mechanistic view prevails even today in most of general biology, and most of science, although some claim no longer in [[sociology]] and [[psychology]] where reductionist approaches have failed and fallen out of favour since the early 1970s. However those fields have yet to reach consensus on what the new view should be, as is also the case in most other disciplines, which struggle to retain various aspects of "the machine metaphor" for living and complex systems.

He deliberately chose the `simplest' [[Graph (discrete mathematics)|graph]]s and categories for his representations of Metabolism-Repair Systems in small categories of sets endowed only with the discrete "efficient" topology of sets, envisaging this choice as the most general and less restrictive. It turns out however that the efficient entailments of <math>(M{,}R)</math>systems <!--{{clarify|date=September 2013}}--> are "closed to efficient cause",<ref>[http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mikuleck/PPRISS3.html Donald C. Mikulecky Robert Rosen: The well posed question and its answer - Why are organisms different from machines?]</ref> or in simple terms the catalysts ("efficient causes" of metabolism, usually identified as enzymes) are themselves products of metabolism, and thus may not be considered, in a strict mathematical sense, as subcategories of the [[category (mathematics)|category]] of sequential machines or [[automata]]: in direct contradiction of the French philosopher [[Descartes]]' supposition that all animals are only elaborate machines or ''mechanisms''. Rosen stated: "''I argue that the only resolution to such problems'' [of the subject-object boundary and what constitutes objectivity] ''is in the recognition that closed loops of causation are 'objective'; i.e. legitimate objects of scientific scrutiny. These are explicitly forbidden in any machine or mechanism.''"<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rosen|first=Robert|date=June 1, 1993|title=Drawing the boundary between subject and object: Comments on the mind-brain problem|journal=Theoretical Medicine|language=en|volume=14|issue=2|pages=89–100|doi=10.1007/BF00997269|pmid=8236065|s2cid=24953932|issn=1573-1200}}</ref> Rosen's demonstration of "efficient closure" was to present this clear paradox in mechanistic science, that on the one hand organisms are defined by such causal closures and on the other hand mechanism forbids them; thus we need to revise our understanding of nature. The mechanistic view prevails even today in most of general biology, and most of science, although some claim no longer in [[sociology]] and [[psychology]] where reductionist approaches have failed and fallen out of favour since the early 1970s. However those fields have yet to reach consensus on what the new view should be, as is also the case in most other disciplines, which struggle to retain various aspects of "the machine metaphor" for living and complex systems.

他有意地选择“最简单的”图和类别来表示只赋予离散集合的“有效”拓扑小类别集合中的代谢-修复系统，并且设想这种选择是最一般和限制较少的。然而，事实证明 (M{,}R)系统的有效衍生是“有效因果闭合的”。唐纳德·c·米库勒基·罗伯特·罗森: 这是一个恰当的问题及其答案——为什么有机体不同于机器？或者用简单的术语来说，新陈代谢的催化剂(新陈代谢的“有效原因”，通常被认为是酶)本身就是新陈代谢的产物，因此，从严格的数学意义上来说，可能不会被认为是连续机器或自动机范畴的子范畴: 这与法国哲学家笛卡尔的假设直接矛盾，即所有的动物都只是复杂的机器或机制。罗森说:“我认为，解决这些问题(主体-客体边界和什么构成客观性)的唯一办法是承认因果关系的闭环是‘客观的’;即科学审查的合法对象。任何机器论或机械论都明确禁止这些操作。”罗森关于“有效闭合”的论证，是为了在机械论科学中提出这样一个明确的悖论: 一方面，生物体是由这种因果闭合定义的，另一方面，机制又禁止它们; 因此，我们需要修正我们对自然的理解。这种机械论的观点甚至在今天的大多数普通生物学和大多数科学中依然盛行，尽管有些人声称社会学和心理学中的还原论方法已经失败，并且自20世纪70年代初以来已经失宠。然而，这些领域尚未就新观点应该是什么达成共识，大多数其他学科也是如此，这些学科努力保留生命和复杂系统的”机器隐喻”的各个方面。

他有意地选择“最简单的”图和类别来表示只赋予离散集合的“有效”拓扑小类别集合中的代谢-修复系统，并且设想这种选择是最一般和限制较少的。然而，事实证明 (M{,}R)系统的有效衍生是“有效因果闭合的”。唐纳德·c·米库勒基·罗伯特·罗森: 这是一个恰当的问题及其答案——为什么有机体不同于机器？或者用简单的术语来说，新陈代谢的催化剂(新陈代谢的“有效原因”，通常被认为是酶)本身就是新陈代谢的产物，因此，从严格的数学意义上来说，可能不会被认为是连续机器或自动机范畴的子范畴: 这与法国哲学家笛卡尔的假设直接矛盾，即所有的动物都只是复杂的机器或机制。罗森说:“我认为，解决这些问题(主体-客体边界和什么构成客观性)的唯一办法是承认因果关系的闭环是‘客观的’;即科学审查的合法对象。任何机器论或机械论都明确禁止这些操作。”罗森关于“有效闭合”的论证，是为了在机械论科学中提出这样一个明确的悖论: 一方面，生物体是由这种因果闭合定义的，另一方面，机制又禁止它们; 因此，我们需要修正我们对自然的理解。这种机械论的观点甚至在今天的大多数普通生物学和大多数科学中依然盛行，尽管有些人声称社会学和心理学中的还原论方法已经失败，并且自20世纪70年代初以来已经失宠。然而，这些领域尚未就新观点应该是什么达成共识，大多数其他学科也是如此，这些学科努力保留生命和复杂系统的”机器隐喻”的各个方面。

== Complexity and complex scientific models: (''M,R'') systems ==

== Complexity and complex scientific models: (''M,R'') systems ==