"The unbroken is greater than the sum of it's parts"?
Question: True or false?
Answers:
True
Wow, that's Gestaltist.
It depends on which whole, and what parts.
And it's "its", not "it's".
false. Scientifically impossible. Here's an example: 5=5
1+1+1+1+1=5
Quote:
"The skill to reduce everything to simple fundamental law does not imply the potential to start from those laws and re-erect the universe..The constructionist hypothesis breaks down when confronted with the twin difficulties of clamber and complexity. At each stratum of complexity entirely new properties appear. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry. We can in a minute see that the whole become not merely more, but very different from the sum of its parts."(Anderson 1972)
It is term Emergence. An emergent behaviour or emergent property can appear when a little simple entities (agents) operate in an environment, forming more complex behaviours as a collective. If emergence happen over disparate size scales, then the justification is usually a causal relation across different scales. Chemistry (including the evolution of both elements and molecules over time) can contained by turn be viewed as an emergent property of the law of physics. Biology (including biological evolution) can be viewed as an emergent property of the law of chemistry.
One might conclude that emergent structures are more than the sum of their parts because the emergent writ will not arise if the various parts are simply coexisting; the interaction of these parts is centralized. Emergent structures can be found in oodles natural phenomena, from the physical to the biological domain.
So it is possible that the complete is greater than the some of it's parts: Whole = sum of (parts) + information
True.
The technical residence for this is Synergy - thus a team is more than a short time ago the sum of the members ability.
Thus the behaviour of a adjectives system cannot be completely predicted by the behaviour of its components or groups of its components.
In Chemistry it can be recognised when, within attempting to isolate one element out, from, a complex (compound) or to separate out atoms or molecules from compounds, the behaviors of individual isolates are not explained by the behaviours of the complex. Only by studying the sum of the parts i.e. the wholes be they able to discover the group synergy. The associative potentials of the oodles parts. Which are, indeed, greater than when the individual parts work seperately, the individual behaviours of the parts cannot predict the behaviours of the whole.
Personally I reckon the description of a troop is sufficient to explain this statement, however as it is in chemistry I thought I have better add some historical chemistry to the expanation.
Think of a completed motor or a pile of parts to make a sports car.
Which would you prefer!!
True in most cases on the font that an engine with petrol runs whereas a can of petrol doesn't move
More Questions and Answers...