Oversimplification problems reductionist
08
Aug
As there is much current information, but little quality information, the 
reductionist principle, we should always adopt a simpler solution, like that of Ockham’s razor, between two explanations, choose the easier it seems today lead us to very complex things , which is a paradox with the principle of “simplification” reductionist.
The most reductionism is Manichaeism, that is entirely good or bad, it was something settled in the fourth century by Augustine of Hippo, to say that evil is the absence of good, but the problem returned with Hanna Arendt in “The banality of evil” or Martha Nussbaum “The fragility of goodness” or good, as some prefer translators.
Fractals are a good example of complexity, but there is the ideal simplification of numbers, the butterfly effect is another example, Edgar Morin wrote about the complex thinking.
In 1995, the Italian Piergiorgio Odifreddi, dedicated to the “liar’s paradox” of Epimenides, according to which all Cretans would be lying by a “systemic” logic.
Epimenides showed the error of worshiping gods that could not help them at all, and told them to put sheep in the Areopagus high that they would show them the place that God wanted to be worshiped. It was then that an act “mystical” the sheep down the Areopagus and went to a place where there was no kind of idolatry, there is the altar of the Unknown God that the Bible speaks, but curiously Christians are unaware of its origin.
Einstein doing a fairly simple radiciocínio, he said: “We can not solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them”, ie those who are in a systemic logic may collapse without solving their problems or become liars saying it has no problems, technology is one of these.
The problem or the proper use of technology should be treated in its complexity, it is there.
