Reductionism and Holism (as used in psychology)

[grahamg]

Reductionism vs. Holism​

The reductionist approach to science is frequently contrasted with the holistic approach, which approaches things as a whole rather than focusing on the individual parts. The holistic approach does not discount the importance of each individual component but instead suggests that understanding the whole requires looking at how these parts work on different levels as well as how they interact and influence one another.

Reductionism is an approach that is used in many disciplines, including psychology, that is centered on the belief that we can best explain something by breaking it down into its individual parts.

If you want to understand something, the reductionist approach would propose simply taking a look at each of its constituent pieces. If you wanted to understand a car, for instance, you would look at each part of the engine, body, and interior.

https://www.verywellmind.com/reductionism-definition-and-examples-4583891

Drawbacks​

While reductionism has some important benefits, it also has a few significant downsides that should be noted.

Ignores Other Factors Contributing to a Problem​

The clear downside of reductionism is that it is so totally focused on the smaller elements that contribute to a phenomenon that it fails to account for other forces that might play a role as well.3

In our above example, researchers taking a biological approach for explaining depression might focus their studies on chemical reactions and balances within the body that contribute to symptoms of depression. While this type of research might lead to important medical advances in the treatment of depression, it excludes other variables such as cognitions, hereditary influences, personal problems, substance abuse, and other variables.

Does Not Account for the Whole​

While reductionism can lead to exploring components of a phenomenon in greater depth, it also misses how these variables interact with one another. Few things have only one simple cause. Reductionism might allow researchers to look at each component individually, but it does not really explore how each of these smaller elements work together

 

[oldman]

How does anyone arrive at these conclusions? Are these simply opinions or is there real data or experiences to prove the science behind it. I am assuming that science is involved in the equation somehow.

Where I get lost is that I don’t fully understand the variables used in reductionism. Is this something real or someone’s made up method to understand a person’s reasonings as to why they do what they do or am I not even in the ballpark?

I guess that I am coming across as being somewhat dubious to these idioms, for lack of a better word. Maybe use more layman terms would make this more understandable.

 

[grahamg]

How does anyone arrive at these conclusions? Are these simply opinions or is there real data or experiences to prove the science behind it. I am assuming that science is involved in the equation somehow.
Where I get lost is that I don’t fully understand the variables used in reductionism. Is this something real or someone’s made up method to understand a person’s reasonings as to why they do what they do or am I not even in the ballpark?
I guess that I am coming across as being somewhat dubious to these idioms, for lack of a better word. Maybe use more layman terms would make this more understandable.

You're right in thinking "Reductionism" is something "made up", or as you say "a made up method to understand a person etc.,...".
It is a tool some professionals use, hence of interest.

 

[Lavinia]

How many people with problems really want to analyse the causes? Some of us are fascinated by the psychology of human existence, but most cannot and do not want to see beyond the immediate. This is what politicians are up against when canvassing for votes. So long as the bins are emptied and potholes attended to, most of the electorate do not concern themselves with the country as a whole.

 

[Knight]

And why would anyone want to limit themselves to only one process? A combination of both seems to me to be the best way to understand what you want to know.

Why no drawbacks to the holistic approach?

One man standing back describing a car doesn't tell you why the battery isn't charging. The one standing back can observe & offer an opinion as to why the charging system is failing. One man with a working knowledge of how the various parts combine to charge the battery can tell you why.