Debates & Issues : Reductionalism & Holism Flashcards
What is reductionism?
> the view that the best way to explain anything is by describing the basic constituent
elements (I.e., its basic parts), and then explain how the interaction of these elements give rise to the phenomena in question.
They justify their reason by arguing that the nature of everything that exists is causally dependent on the interaction of the smaller parts.
Therefore to understand something we should look at the lower leve; of explanation.
What are levels of explanation?
> Lower levels of explanation are closely tied to biological influences: genes, neurons, neurotransmitters, hormones and biological structures.
Middle levels of explanations focus on the scale of an individuals psychology: an individuals cognitive abilities, personality or interactions with the environment.
The highest levels of explanation relate to social groups, organisations and cultures.
What is Biological Reductionism?
> This is the view that the lowest level of explanation that can be used to meaningfully explain behaviour is at the level of biology.
EG. The biological explanation for OCD.
What is Environmental reductionism?
> This is the view that the lowest level of explanation that can be used to explain behaviour is in terms of simple stimulus response.
S-R reductionism is a behaviourist form of reductionism. Behaviourists use classical and operant conditioning to explain how a learner acquires and strengthens stimulus-response (S-R) connections.
They justify their view on the basis that since all behaviours are learnt from the environment through S-R connections, then S-R connections are the basic constituent elements of behaviour.
Comparing environmental reductionism and biological reductionism.
- Both accept reductionism meaning they both agree the way to explain behaviour is in terms of constituent elements of behaviour.
- They have different views about what the constituent elements : environment in the form of S-R connections vs biological elements.
Outline Holism.
- The view that it only makes sense to explain phenomena at the level of a whole system, rather than in terms of the interactions of constituent parts.
- It is a challenge to reductionism as it claims the whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts.
- defenders of holism ofter justify their view by claiming the phenomena often have properties that are only observable when considering the phenomena as whole. Thus, reductionism fails to account for these properties and see the functioning of the whole system.
What is a limitation of reductionism?
It fails to account for emergent properties. Emergent properties are novel characteristics that appear only at a higher level of explanation. For example, the
component parts of water - hydrogen and oxygen - are highly flammable, but when they combine together into the more complex molecule of water, the fire-resistant property of water emerges. A reductionist approach can fail to account for emergent properties as when psychologists explain behaviour
with reference to constituent parts alone, they can overlook the properties that arise from the whole system. In contrast, the holistic approach emphasizes the importance of
considering high-level systems in their entirety. By examining these higher-level systems, the holistic approach embraces the claim that a system can have properties that cannot be detected at the level of its constituent parts. . It
could be argued that some of the great psychological questions, such as the nature of consciousness, remain
mysterious as psychologists have adopted a reductionist approach and therefore missing how consciousness may be a
property that only emerges at the level of the whole system.
Why is a strength of the reductionist approach that it is arguably more scientific than the holistic approach?
Researchers using the scientific method seek to construct theories that produce testable hypotheses. By testing
these hypotheses in empirical research, researchers can seek to falsify their theories. One reason reductionist theories are better suited to the scientific method relates to formulating hypotheses.
The simpler theories of a reductionist approach, which reduce complex phenomena down to constituent elements,
facilitate the creation of clear, specific hypotheses. In contrast, holistic theories avoid simplification, making it harder to create simple hypotheses. Secondly, the reductionist approach lends itself to empirical research better than holism. Once a reductionist theory has specified constituent elements, it’s relatively easy to isolate specific variables that can be manipulated and measured in empirical research. ). In contrast, the complexity of
holistic theories makes isolating specific variables difficult, making it challenging to isolate specific variables and test their individual effects in empirical research. Finally, reductionist theories are more falsifiable than holistic theories. Because reductionist theories are better suited to hypothesis testing, it is easier to falsify a theory by showing it
cannot make valid predictions.
Why might reductionist research have weaker ecological validity than holistic?
In practical terms, reductionist research involves reducing an explanation to a simple set of variables that can be tested in an experiment. For example, Asch’s explained conformity in terms of a small set of variables e.g., group
size. The problem here is that to test the causal relationship between a small set of variables, experimenters are
forced to control for the influence of many other variables, and doing this often leads to laboratory style
experiments which bear little resemblance to the messiness of the real world. Ultimately reductionism may help
researchers develop theories that can be tested in a laboratory, but this comes at the expense of ecological validity.Holistic explanations, on the other hand, may be harder to test, but in trying to include a variety of different
variables, they are arguably more realistic
