The paper is focused on the comparison between the analytical or reductionist approach and the system approach. The latter is more inclusive than the reductionist epistemology, which is able to justify the component approach, but fails to suitably grasp the interactions among the several constituents, thus running the risk to neglect or even miss the overall complexity. The systemic approach, by adopting methodological pluralism, does not exclude the component approach, but it relies on it as on a level of enquiry which in some cases may be sufficient, while in others may require further completion.

Corvi, R., Bridges, Arches and Bricks, <<RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEOSCOLASTICA>>, 2015; 2015 (107): 37-41 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/72310]

Bridges, Arches and Bricks

Corvi, Roberta
2015

Abstract

The paper is focused on the comparison between the analytical or reductionist approach and the system approach. The latter is more inclusive than the reductionist epistemology, which is able to justify the component approach, but fails to suitably grasp the interactions among the several constituents, thus running the risk to neglect or even miss the overall complexity. The systemic approach, by adopting methodological pluralism, does not exclude the component approach, but it relies on it as on a level of enquiry which in some cases may be sufficient, while in others may require further completion.
Inglese
Corvi, R., Bridges, Arches and Bricks, <<RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEOSCOLASTICA>>, 2015; 2015 (107): 37-41 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/72310]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/72310
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact