46
个编辑
更改
跳到导航
跳到搜索
第7行：
第7行： − + 第14行：
第14行： − 还原论是一种有关现象之间的联系的哲学观点，现象可以用其他更简单或更基本的现象来描述<ref name="MerriamWebster" /> 。它基于理智的和哲学的立场，将一个复杂的系统解释为其各部分的总和<ref name=":0" />。+ + 第34行：
第35行： − + 第115行：
第116行： − + 第129行：
第130行： − 一些强有力的还原论者认为，行为科学应该成为基于遗传生物学和文化系统研究的“真正的”科学分支。在他的《盲眼钟表匠书中，Dawkins 引入了术语层次化简论来描述这样一种观点，即复杂系统可以用组织的层次来描述，每个组织只能用层次中下一个层次的对象来描述。他以计算机为例，用分层还原论来解释硬盘驱动器、处理器和内存的操作，而不是逻辑门的层次，或者更简单的半导体介质中的电子层次。+ + + + 第142行：
第146行： + +
本体论还原论
[[René Descartes, in De homine (1662), claimed that non-human animals could be explained reductively as automata; meaning essentially as more mechanically complex versions of this Digesting Duck.]]
[[René Descartes, in De homine (1662), claimed that non-human animals could be explained reductively as automata; meaning essentially as more mechanically complex versions of this Digesting Duck.]]
勒内·笛卡尔（[[René Descartes, in De homine (1662), claimed that non-human animals could be explained reductively as automata; meaning essentially as more mechanically complex versions of this Digesting Duck.|René Descartes]]）在其1662年出版的《人论》(De Homine)中宣称：非人类动物可以还原地解释为自动机，本质上是一种更复杂的机械版本的消化鸭。
勒内·笛卡尔（[[René Descartes, in De homine (1662), claimed that non-human animals could be explained reductively as automata; meaning essentially as more mechanically complex versions of this Digesting Duck.|René Descartes]]）在其1662年出版的《人论》(De Homine)中宣称：非人类动物可以还原地解释为自动机，本质上是一种更机械化的复杂版本的消化鸭。
还原论是一种有关现象之间的联系的哲学观点，认为现象可以用其他更简单或更基本的现象来描述<ref name="MerriamWebster" /> 。它基于理智的和哲学的立场，将一个复杂的系统解释为其各部分的总和<ref name=":0" />。
Methodological reductionism: the scientific attempt to provide explanation in terms of ever smaller entities.
Methodological reductionism: the scientific attempt to provide explanation in terms of ever smaller entities.
方法论还原论: 试图用更小的实体来提供解释的科学尝试。
方法论还原论: 一种用尽可能小的对象来提供解释的科学尝试。
# '''Theory reductionism''': the suggestion that a newer theory does not replace or absorb an older one, but reduces it to more basic terms. Theory reduction itself is divisible into three parts: translation, derivation and explanation.<ref name=Ney />
# '''Theory reductionism''': the suggestion that a newer theory does not replace or absorb an older one, but reduces it to more basic terms. Theory reduction itself is divisible into three parts: translation, derivation and explanation.<ref name=Ney />
[[Nancey Murphy]] has claimed that there are two species of ontological reductionism: one that claims that wholes are nothing more than their parts; and atomist reductionism, claiming that wholes are not "really real". She admits that the phrase "really real" is apparently senseless but she has tried to explicate the supposed difference between the two.<ref name=":4">Nancey Murphy, "Reductionism and Emergence. A Critical Perspective." In ''Human Identity at the Intersection of Science, Technology and Religion''. Edited by Nancey Murphy, and Christopher C. Knight. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010. P. 82.</ref>
[[Nancey Murphy]] has claimed that there are two species of ontological reductionism: one that claims that wholes are nothing more than their parts; and atomist reductionism, claiming that wholes are not "really real". She admits that the phrase "really real" is apparently senseless but she has tried to explicate the supposed difference between the two.<ref name=":4">Nancey Murphy, "Reductionism and Emergence. A Critical Perspective." In ''Human Identity at the Intersection of Science, Technology and Religion''. Edited by Nancey Murphy, and Christopher C. Knight. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010. P. 82.</ref>
南希·墨菲（Nancey Murphy） 断言有两种本体论还原论: 一种声称整体不过是它们的部分; 而另一种则是原子论还原论，认为整体不是“真实的（really real）”。她承认，“真实的（really real）”这个短语显然毫无意义，但她试图解释这两种还原论之间假定的差异<ref name=":4" />。
南希·墨菲（Nancey Murphy） 断言有两种本体论还原论: 一种声称整体不过是它们的部分；而另一种则是原子论还原论，认为整体不是“真实的真实（really real）”。她承认，“真实的真实（really real）”这个短语显然毫无意义，但她试图解释这两种还原论之间假定的差异<ref name=":4" />。
In science, reductionism implies that certain topics of study are based on areas that study smaller spatial scales or organizational units. While it is commonly accepted that the foundations of chemistry are based in physics, and molecular biology is based on chemistry, similar statements become controversial when one considers less rigorously defined intellectual pursuits. For example, claims that sociology is based on psychology, or that economics is based on sociology and psychology would be met with reservations. These claims are difficult to substantiate even though there are obvious associations between these topics (for instance, most would agree that psychology can affect and inform economics). The limit of reductionism's usefulness stems from emergent properties of complex systems, which are more common at certain levels of organization. For example, certain aspects of evolutionary psychology and sociobiology are rejected by some who claim that complex systems are inherently irreducible and that a holistic method is needed to understand them.
In science, reductionism implies that certain topics of study are based on areas that study smaller spatial scales or organizational units. While it is commonly accepted that the foundations of chemistry are based in physics, and molecular biology is based on chemistry, similar statements become controversial when one considers less rigorously defined intellectual pursuits. For example, claims that sociology is based on psychology, or that economics is based on sociology and psychology would be met with reservations. These claims are difficult to substantiate even though there are obvious associations between these topics (for instance, most would agree that psychology can affect and inform economics). The limit of reductionism's usefulness stems from emergent properties of complex systems, which are more common at certain levels of organization. For example, certain aspects of evolutionary psychology and sociobiology are rejected by some who claim that complex systems are inherently irreducible and that a holistic method is needed to understand them.
Some strong reductionists believe that the behavioral sciences should become "genuine" scientific disciplines based on genetic biology, and on the systematic study of culture (see Richard Dawkins's concept of memes). In his book The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins introduced the term "hierarchical reductionism" to describe the opinion that complex systems can be described with a hierarchy of organizations, each of which is only described in terms of objects one level down in the hierarchy. He provides the example of a computer, which using hierarchical reductionism is explained in terms of the operation of hard drives, processors, and memory, but not on the level of logic gates, or on the even simpler level of electrons in a semiconductor medium.
Some strong reductionists believe that the behavioral sciences should become "genuine" scientific disciplines based on genetic biology, and on the systematic study of culture (see Richard Dawkins's concept of memes). In his book The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins introduced the term "hierarchical reductionism" to describe the opinion that complex systems can be described with a hierarchy of organizations, each of which is only described in terms of objects one level down in the hierarchy. He provides the example of a computer, which using hierarchical reductionism is explained in terms of the operation of hard drives, processors, and memory, but not on the level of logic gates, or on the even simpler level of electrons in a semiconductor medium.
一些强还原论者认为，行为科学应该成为基于遗传生物学和文化系统研究的“真正的”科学分支（参见理查德·道金斯（Richard Dawkins）的模因概念）。在他的《盲眼钟表匠》一书中，道金斯引入了“层次还原论”来描述这样一种观点，即复杂系统可以用组织的层次来描述，而每一个组织的层次结构只能用层次结构的下一级对象来描述。他以计算机为例，从硬盘、处理器和内存的角度阐释了层次还原论，而不是基于逻辑门的层次，或者更简单的半导体介质中的电子层次。
Ontological reductionism takes two forms: '''token ontological reductionism''' and '''type ontological reductionism'''.{{Citation needed|date=July 2020}}
Ontological reductionism takes two forms: '''token ontological reductionism''' and '''type ontological reductionism'''.{{Citation needed|date=July 2020}}
本体论还原论有两种形式: 表征本体论还原论和类型本体论还原论。
Quantum Holonomy theory is a theory of the lowest possible reduction.
Quantum Holonomy theory is a theory of the lowest possible reduction.
Token ontological reductionism is the idea that every item that exists is a sum item. For perceivable items, it affirms that every perceivable item is a sum of items with a lesser degree of complexity. Token ontological reduction of biological things to chemical things is generally accepted.
Token ontological reductionism is the idea that every item that exists is a sum item. For perceivable items, it affirms that every perceivable item is a sum of items with a lesser degree of complexity. Token ontological reduction of biological things to chemical things is generally accepted.
表征本体论还原论是认为存在的每一项都是一个和项。它确信每个可感知的事物是复杂程度较低的事物的总和。将生物事物还原为化学事物的表征本体论已被普遍接受。
Others argue that inappropriate use of reductionism limits our understanding of complex systems. In particular, ecologist Robert Ulanowicz says that science must develop techniques to study ways in which larger scales of organization influence smaller ones, and also ways in which feedback loops create structure at a given level, independently of details at a lower level of organization. He advocates (and uses) information theory as a framework to study propensities in natural systems. Ulanowicz attributes these criticisms of reductionism to the philosopher Karl Popper and biologist Robert Rosen.
Others argue that inappropriate use of reductionism limits our understanding of complex systems. In particular, ecologist Robert Ulanowicz says that science must develop techniques to study ways in which larger scales of organization influence smaller ones, and also ways in which feedback loops create structure at a given level, independently of details at a lower level of organization. He advocates (and uses) information theory as a framework to study propensities in natural systems. Ulanowicz attributes these criticisms of reductionism to the philosopher Karl Popper and biologist Robert Rosen.