Philosophy of Science 72 (4):531-556 (2005)
|Abstract||To understand the behavior of a complex system, you must understand the interactions among its parts. Doing so is difficult for non-decomposable systems, in which the interactions strongly influence the short-term behavior of the parts. Science's principal tool for dealing with non-decomposable systems is a variety of probabilistic analysis that I call EPA. I show that EPA's power derives from an assumption that appears to be false of non-decomposable complex systems, in virtue of their very non-decomposability. Yet EPA is extremely successful. I aim to find an interpretation of EPA's assumption that is consistent with, indeed that explains, its success.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Carlos Maldonado, The Study of Complex Systems and the Question Concerning the Philosophy of Knowledge.
Elias Zafiris (2005). Complex Systems From the Perspective of Category Theory: II. Covering Systems and Sheaves. Axiomathes 15 (2).
Andreas Wagner (1999). Causality in Complex Systems. Biology and Philosophy 14 (1).
Elias Zafiris, Complex Systems From the Perspective of Category Theory: II. Covering Systems and Sheaves.
Meinard Kuhlmann (2011). Mechanisms in Dynamically Complex Systems. In Phyllis McKay Illari & Jon Williamson (eds.), Causality in the Sciences. Oxford University Press.
Tadeusz Wieslaw Zawidzki (1998). Competing Models of Stability in Complex, Evolving Systems: Kauffman Vs. Simon. Biology and Philosophy 13 (4).
Added to index2010-04-15
Total downloads30 ( #40,824 of 549,045 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,252 of 549,045 )
How can I increase my downloads?