The Implications of Interactions for Science and Philosophy

TL;DR

This paper argues that considering interactions in scientific and philosophical contexts challenges reductionism and supports holistic, contextual, and meaningful perspectives, offering solutions to longstanding problems.

Contribution

It introduces a comprehensive framework where interactions lead to non-reductionist views, proposing alternatives like holism and contextuality to better understand complex phenomena.

Findings

Interactions imply non-reductionism and non-materialism.

Considering interactions enhances understanding of complex phenomena.

A worldview including interactions can address scientific and philosophical problems.

Abstract

Reductionism has dominated science and philosophy for centuries. Complexity has recently shown that interactions---which reductionism neglects---are relevant for understanding phenomena. When interactions are considered, reductionism becomes limited in several aspects. In this paper, I argue that interactions imply non-reductionism, non-materialism, non-predictability, non-Platonism, and non-nihilism. As alternatives to each of these, holism, informism, adaptation, contextuality, and meaningfulness are put forward, respectively. A worldview that includes interactions not only describes better our world, but can help to solve many open scientific, philosophical, and social problems caused by implications of reductionism.