Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
The opposite of pluralism is not reductionism, it is monism. The opposite of reductionism is holism.
adding reference
Anonymous
Adding reference
Anonymous
I find #3 has a good point, which, if not incorporated, deserves to be reacted to.
Re #3, yes, pluralism and reductionism aren’t opposites. E.g., people will speak of pluralist and monist accounts of causality. People speak of set-theoretic monism/pluralism.
Reductionism is more likely to be contrasted with emergentism, and holism with individualism.
Reductionism is more likely to be contrasted with emergentism, and holism with individualism.
I am not sure about this:
Emergence applies within reductionism, not in contrast to it: It is in a reductionist theory (like the quark model) that we have to explain how complex bound states (like hadrons) are emergent from non-complex constitutents (quarks). In non-reductionist theories (like chiral perturbation theory or holographic QCD) these complex structures are just there, not emergent from something else.
And the antonym of “individualism” surely is something like “collectivism”, no? That’s a pair rather remote from the metaphysical realm of reductionism/holism, to my mind.
Added references
Mirna Džamonja, A New Foundational Crisis in Mathematics, Is It Really Happening?, in: Reflections on the Foundations of Mathematics, Synthese Library 407 Springer (2019) [doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15655-8_11, arXiv:1802.06221]
Michèle Friend, Varieties of Pluralism and Objectivity in Mathematics, in: Reflections on the Foundations of Mathematics, Synthese Library 407 Springer (2019) [doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15655-8_15]
Anonymouse
Adding reference
Anonymouse
1 to 10 of 10