Showing posts with label Reductionism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reductionism. Show all posts

Friday, May 11, 2018

A prisoner to Modernism

[T]he Christian life on the whole trades on holy mysteries, the American evangelical movement, although citing Scripture as its one true authority, has significantly failed to account for the mystery-laden qualities of this life. Much of this failure is attributable to epistemological matters. We have already seen indications of this difficulty even in such a promising work as Boyer and Hall's The Mystery of God. Despite their appeal to mystery, which they claim must transcend reason because of the superabundance of God’s life, they nevertheless feel compelled to give reason some kind of prevailing acknowledgment, saying awkwardly that, even while transcended, reason still must operate. Of course theological reflection is reason-oriented; we as creatures are rational and use our rational capacities in our theological efforts. The reference to reason in Boyer and Hall’s presentation, however, is awkward by its inclusion as a postscript of sorts, as if its presence was necessary to register, even if in terms of an afterthought. Their implicit assumption is that whatever theology amounts to, even theology surrounding the mystery of God, it needs to be affirmed as rational in some sense. One could hypothesize that a fear is operative in Boyer and Hall in particular and within evangelicalism in general, one that has to do with avoiding certain methodological alternatives. If this hypothesis is true, then some options are simply to be avoided and others maintained at all costs.—Pentecostalism as a Christian Mystical Tradition, page 84

<idle musing>
Ouch! That is too true. Evangelicalism sold out to Modernism long before it sold out to Trump and the Republican Right.
</idle musing>

Thursday, January 09, 2014

Further thoughts on reductionism

Reading Whole has made me reflect a bit more on the phenomenon of reductionism. It still holds sway in the academic community, the hard sciences, the medical world, and popular culture.

The one place it isn't the supreme paradigm is in industry. Oh, it used to be—think of the motion-study experts of the early 20th century. They were extremely reductionistic; every motion was studied in an effort to make every motion efficient. But all that started changing with Deming and his marble experiment. In a nutshell, he showed that reductionism wasn't the answer; the system was bigger than the sum of its parts.

Sure, the change didn't happen overnight, but the corner had been turned. The dominant industrial paradigms of today, Toyota Production System and the Theory of Constraints are systemic approaches. Another good example is Peter Senge's Fifth Discipline approach to problem solving. The result has been the dissolution of what is called "silos" in the industry. Silos are narrow concentrations on your specialty to the virtual exclusion of other aspects of an organization; they are named after the round silos found on farms. The assumption behind siloing is that nothing outside my specific area has any affect on what happens. Right! It is extremely reductionistic.

So why did atomization fall out of favor in industry but nowhere else? Simple; follow the money!

In industry, throughput means more income (this is hugely simplified, but bear with me!). When one part of an industry adopts a systemic approach, their throughput increases and their costs drop. They can afford to sell things for less than their competitors with no reduction in quality. Money talks! Pretty soon, their competitive advantage is adopted by others.

Now look at the medical and food industries. Keeping people sick and fat is good for business. Healthy, fit people don't eat as much junk food. They don't need prescriptions. They don't get sick as often. They don't guzzle carbonated, sugared beverages.

In short, they don't contribute to the bottom line of the food and medical industries...no conspiracy theories needed. In our money-oriented society, where results are measured by quarterly Wall Street results, there is no incentive to keep people healthy via a whole foods, plant-based diet.

I could go on, and probably will over the next few weeks...