In biology students get taught these days that even when you know all parts of a system you don’t necessarily know what the system does.
This is only true if you have insufficient math/computing ability to simulate the interactions of the system’s parts. For it to be otherwise, either your information would have to actually be incomplete, or magic would have to happen.
Thanks to Heisenberg your information is also always incomplete.
In real life you do have insufficient math/computing ability to simulate the interactions of many systems.
Whether weak reductionism is true doesn’t matter much for this debate.
People who believe in strong reductionism find appeal in Pua theory.
They believe that they have sufficient mental resources and information to calculate complex social interactions in a way that allows them to optimize those interactions.
Because of the belief in strong reductionism they believe in Pua based on anecdotal evidence and don’t believe in acupuncture based on anecdotal evidence.
This is only true if you have insufficient math/computing ability to simulate the interactions of the system’s parts. For it to be otherwise, either your information would have to actually be incomplete, or magic would have to happen.
Thanks to Heisenberg your information is also always incomplete. In real life you do have insufficient math/computing ability to simulate the interactions of many systems.
Whether weak reductionism is true doesn’t matter much for this debate. People who believe in strong reductionism find appeal in Pua theory.
They believe that they have sufficient mental resources and information to calculate complex social interactions in a way that allows them to optimize those interactions.
Because of the belief in strong reductionism they believe in Pua based on anecdotal evidence and don’t believe in acupuncture based on anecdotal evidence.