In his work Anticipatory Systems, #RobertRosen carefully introduces readers with knowledge of Cybernetics to the foundations of mathematics so that the formal limits of methodological approaches like #modelling, reasoning and #deduction in their domain of #science becomes obvious. Later he would do the same for a more general audience in Life Itself. The reasoning is very similar, clear, and formally sound. Still scientists will sheepishly adhere to believe in #reductionism.
I believe Rosen is complaining here only about one particular type of #reductionism - #computationalism.
I think he was very well aware that all anticipatory systems must maintain some (reduced) # model of reality in order to **anticipate** how things in their environments that may affect them are likely to unfold.
Science cannot dispense of "good reductionism" such as, for example, Searle's Biological Naturalism.
The excerpt is from R. L. Kuhn's "Landscape of Consciousness"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610723001128#sec9
Yes. Rosen distinguished between #modeling and #simulation, arguing that the latter is not based on a genuine form of modeling relations.
So, as I've said, he questions the validity of using #computational approaches in biology, not reductionism per se, which is a much larger philosophical topic explained in another Wikipedia article😀 .
@Kihbernetics
In his writing Rosen covers reductionism as a philosophical and as a methodological stance as covered in the Wikipedia article below. It has nothing to do with using a reduced (minimal) model to formally describe properties of a natural system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems