What do we know ? — Don Wade

you can map out the territory, but the map is not the territory

and a map also tells you nothing about what and why the territory is, it just maps it out

Suggest you define your terms; describe the issue; and give your own thoughts.

Suggest you define your terms; describe the issue; and give your own thoughts. — T Clark

Most people on this philosophy forum are probably familiar with the term "Epistemology" in their own (search for knowledge). They will also probably recognize the term "Reductionism" as being a form of philosophy that is often quoted "as an intellectual and philosophical position that interprets a complex system as the sum of its parts." (Wikipedia).

A phrase often quoted in gestalt: "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts." deals with how we (humans) deal with visual information as being a whole, parts of a whole, or something greater. In many cases the terms-of-description seem the same, or at least similar.

Modern science doesn't seem to recognize gestalt as a "real" science because gestalt recognizes "emergence" - which doesn't seem to fit with reductionism. My question is: Aren't these two systems similar?

They will also probably recognize the term "Reductionism" as being a form of philosophy that is often quoted "as an intellectual and philosophical position that interprets a complex system as the sum of its parts. — Don Wade

A phrase often quoted in gestalt: "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts." deals with how we (humans) deal with visual information as being a whole, parts of a whole, or something greater. — Don Wade

Generally, you'll find that, although you think the definitions of terms such as these are obvious, other people will think they mean something different. Those types of differences often spin discussions into confusion here on the the forum. The terms "gestalt" and "reductionism" also have more complex implications and applications than your over-simple definitions indicate. You've given us very little to work with.

I'll leave it at that and bow out of the conversation.

Generally, you'll find that, although you think the definitions of terms such as these are obvious, other people will think they mean something different. Those types of differences often spin discussions into confusion here on the the forum. The terms "gestalt" and "reductionism" also have more complex implications and applications than your over-simple definitions indicate. You've given us very little to work with. — T Clark

Thanks for the input. Not a lot of information...but enough. In order to learn anything new, we need enough "starter-information" to, in essence, to "prime-the-pump". I didn't do that. Sorry.