Holism vs. Reductionism

Introduction

The overall objective of the research paper exemplifies as well as determines the prevalent concepts of holism as well as reductionism in the context of they normally relate to system thinking. Reference to holism is normal as an alternative reference to system thinking, explaining how the parts link to one another as well as explaining the existent evolution of the contemporary entities from the old entities. As a result, the general consideration is that holism offers a better explanation when examining system thinking when compared to reductionism (Magalhães, 2006). Reduction, however, plays a major role in the detection of the parts, outlining how these parts normally operate as well as the working condition that their parts normally operate. The application of both holism and reductionism offers a better explanation of the systems operating in nature as well as offering precepts that normally improve system thinking. The aspect of system thinking is normally evident in all spheres of the universe by understanding the operations as well as the interconnectedness of these systems (Jackson, 2006).

Reductionism

The proponents of reductionism identify themselves with the classical Newtonian presupposition that those dynamics that relate to any complex system are easily comprehensible from the examining of the properties of the parts. Thus, the understanding of the complex systems is only possible after breaking it into its components and consequently examining each of the components individually via the disciplined as well as sub-discipline approaches. The main chain, in this case, is the identification of the point of entry to the system to be able to address the various aspects of the systems. The moment the comprehension of the parts finalized, it is possible to establish the dynamics of the entire system (Verschuren, 2001). The attribute that guide the understanding of the reductionism approach is the assertion that the properties that the parts normally have ended up contributing to the comprehension of the whole. Conversely, the total comprehension of the properties is only possible via the dynamics of the entire system (White, 2005).

Through this approach, the comprehension and the ultimate solving of a solution are conducting the research to outline the properties of the parts that makes up the problem. Thus the attempts to understand the operations of a big system are only possible if the system gets broken down into the constituent parts and consequently each part studied separately via the different application methods. The description of the system, as a result, is normally possible from the description of the subsystems that make up the system, ignoring the possible relationships that were existing between the portions of the subsystem. The problems that are prevalent in each level are normally handled separately and at the same time through the application of dissimilar strategies that would not assist in solving the problem if the entire scenario is involved. The overall premises of the reductionism approach are that there is no consideration of the wholeness of the system as its focus is predominantly on the individual fragments (Ahn, et al., 2006).

There is the possibility that the issues under analysis in the reduction processes could be higher tasks. In this context, there is a huge prevalent risk in the event the issues being dealt with involve the pre-structuring of the issues that has reduced together. The interconnection of the becomes a difficult task in the event that the parts are normally dependent on each other resulting in the difficulty associated with realizing the required output. The general assertion regarding reductionism is that the comprehension of the interconnectedness existing between the various subsystems is more important than the aspect of being concerned with the quality of the systems (Hauc and Vrecko, 2006).

Holism

 Proponents of holism normally argue that the relationship that exists between the parts and the systems is normally more symmetric in comparison to reductionism. The principal emphasis of the approach is on the importance that the whole possesses in the understanding of the system in comparison to the constituent parts. In the case, the assertion is that the whole plays a more significant role in the comprehension of the operations of the system when compared to the total sum of the properties of their parts. The focus of holism in system thinking is on the comprehension of the relationship that is prevalent between the various components of a system. The emphasis, in this case, is about the interconnectedness, interactions as well as interdependencies prevalent in these components. It offers the basis to check as well as comprehend the object or system under assessment in its wholeness (Jackson, 2003).

The researchers who normally employ the approach in their studies can examine the processes prevalent in a system and be in a position to generate conclusions relating to the complex issues under the study. The approach makes it possible to comprehend the systems in their collective nature such and the operations in an organization as well as the teamwork of a group of employees. Application of the holistic concept allows the spontaneous understanding of both the verbal as well as physical behaviors. The assumptions that normally guided the holistic approach is that the properties that the parts normally possess are significant in the comprehension of the properties that the entire system through the assessment of the dynamics of the whole. In this case, it is more significant to complete processes via joining of the components through the holistic approach to present the individual applying the system with better insights into the same system. The application of holism normally does not present any evident contradictions when compared to reductionism (Freeman, 2005).

Reductionism has its focus on the properties whereas holism deals with the relationship that is prevalent in these systems. Thus, it is imperative that we outline the fact the two approaches normally operate to complement rather than conflict each other. Holism entails the potential to utilize the psychic bio-models that that normally takes into consideration the cultural as well as existential dimensions. Additionally it takes into consideration all the alternative aspects that normally have an impact on being off the diverse parties. The concept relates to the complex thinking and takes into consideration the wholeness of thinking about the systems (Magalhães, 2006).

Comparison between Holism and Reductionism

The holistic approach appreciates the complex nature that different systems normally have along with their imminent uncertainty. Holism normally possesses myriad of attributes easily considered to be an advantage over reductionism. Unlike reductionism holism normally provided a holistic approach in the context of addressing phenomena. Reduction, on the other hand, holds the position that the collective nature of the attributes relating to a system offers the perfect basis for explaining the system. The total of these attributes relating to the system helps in explaining the entire system. Holism divides the interconnections that are prevalent in a system aiding the comprehension of the entire system. Reductionism breaks the complex system into the constituent parts and analyzes each component as a different element of the system (Østreng, 2005).

            Reductionism does not take into consideration the relationship existing between the parts but the properties that each subsystem possesses. Holism makes it possible to comprehend the behavior as well as attitudes prevalent in a system via offering explanation relating to the principles. Reduction on the other hand through the application of the unitary data relating to the components of the system makes it possible to explain systems that do not have adequate data for explaining the entire system. Unlike holism, the reduction does not have the ability to generate philosophical basis relating to a study as it cannot offer a perfect explanation relating to the various systems (White, 2005).

Conclusion

The paper has presented the basic ideas relating to the concepts of reductionism as well as holism. There has an adequate clarification of the manner in which reductionism differentiates the dissimilar components of the system. Additionally the manner in which holism plays the role of promoting the comprehension of the entire system as a whole has been clear.  Additionally it is clear that the diverse aspects of system thinking in our lives as well as the fact that the application of its concepts is in almost every sphere. The overall assertion in the paper is that the two concepts need not be treated as being in opposition to each other but as completing each other.

References

Ahn, Andrew C, Tewari, Maneesh, Phillips, Russell S. 2006.  Reductionism limits. Journal of Medicine. 3(6):709-713.

Freeman, Joshua. 2005. Towards a Definition of Holism. British. Journal of General Practice. 55(511):154-155.

Hauc, Anto, and Vrecko Igor. 2006. Strategy start-up and strategy implementation through the production of multiple projects. Journal of Communications and Information Sciences. No.1.vol3.issue1.7

Jackson, M.C. (2003). Systems thinking: creative holism for managers. (pp. 3-5).England,UK:John Wiley&Sons Ltd.

Jackson, Michael. 2006. Creative Holism systems approach for complex problem situations. Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 23(5), 647-657. doi: 10.1002/sres.799

Magalhães, Rodrigo. 2006. 

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in graduate paper writing service if you need a similar paper you can place your order from custom research paper writing service.