Holism versus Reductionism in Modern Social Science

1 Holism (system thinking vs Reductionism)
Holism
Many scholars look at holism from different perspectives by applying it in different study
areas they major in. However, a look at the various definitions as applied in different fields point
out various outstanding aspects of holism that helps us define holism in regards to sciences.
Michael Correll and others define holism as “a philosophy” which portrays or stresses on the
idea of a “whole is greater than the sum of its parts”. This aspect of holism being a philosophy is
further highlighted by M. Esfeld (2014) in his paper philosophical holism where he noted that the
paper was based on a position that holism is a philosophical position.
H Primas (2013) in his book gives another angle of holism in the field of biology as a thesis
which states that parts of an organic whole will have certain characteristics patterns. These
patterns however will only exist while that part of an organic whole exists within the whole but
not outside that given whole. In his book, Looijen (2015) in reference to reductionism as applied
in biology says that holism represents an impossibility of reducing theories describing higher
levels into lower level states. To drive his point, Looijen gives another view with example that
“it is impossible to reduce theories about biological wholes into constituent parts of Physico-
chemistry.
Breaking it down.
From the various definitions and applications of holism above, we can derive out the core
aspects of holism. The fundamental attribute of holism or system thinking is the consideration of
something as a whole irrespective of the field it`s being used on. For example, in technological
world, we could be considering a whole system rather than the various components in the
system. In an organization, the system would be the whole organizational structure,
encompassing the various departments, values and traditions. Holism, is therefore focused on

2 Holism (system thinking vs Reductionism)
considering the whole system and that the behavior of any component in the system behaves in a
certain manner while inside that system.
Reductionism.
Just like Holism, reductionism has been defined in different ways in the different disciplines. A
critical look at the various aspects of reductionisms as applied in the different field is necessary
for one to fully understand what reductionism actually means. There exists three types of the
term which when defined, one can then draw conclusions on what reductionism is focused on.
(Payne, 2012). On a broader perspective, Looijen (2012) attributes reductionism as a claim of a
possibility of reducing all concepts theories and laws designed for a higher level to concepts,
theories and laws for a lower level. In this respect, the author argues that it is possible to break
down Biology concepts into chemistry or physics and vice versa.
Epistemological Reductionism
Brigand and Love (2008) defines this type of reductions as “the idea that the knowledge about
one scientific domain (typically about higher level processes) can be reduced to another body of
scientific knowledge.” These authors in this definition purports that one scientific theory or a
field of science can be explained by another field or theory.
Ontological reductionism
This type of reductionism has been defined as “the idea that each particular biological system is
constituted by nothing but molecules and their interactions”. This definition is focused on the
field of biology and it asserts that all biological objects, which in other field such as science and
modern day technology would be referred to as system, is composed of physical and

3 Holism (system thinking vs Reductionism)
physiochemical properties to which they can be reduced into. In other words, all substances or
fundamental forces that exists in biology are present in non –living things as well. (Weber, 2004)
Methodological reductionism
Methodological reductionism is built on the idea that for a complex systems or phenomena to be
understood, one has to analyze the simple components of that complex system of phenomena.
Components. This is enhanced by Nitti and Strumia, eds (2002) who relates methodological
reductionism to Constituent reductionism which “accepts that when a complex system is actually
decomposed, the resulting fragments will just be those corresponding to the expected
constituents.” In
Breaking it down.
From the above definitions and concepts of reductionism, the idea of a system consisting of
independent components is the defining factor. Reductionisms relies on the particular
components to have characteristics that will determine the overall system. This is in contracts
with Holism which looks at a system as a whole and one has to consider all the components of
that system only when it forms part of that system. Reductionism on the other hand disintegrates
the system into the smaller components which then can be analyzed to give the overall analysis
of the system to which they form. As defined by Mittelstrass, (pg 49, 2014), reduction “involves
tracing back entities, concepts or theories to others.” Therefore instead of looking at the overall system,
reductionism goes into the genesis of that system so as to study the building blocks of that system.
Holism vs reductionisms Comparison