The classical sciences like physics, chemistry, biology and psychology
are similar, they seem to be largely completed and self-contained
fields. The major phenomena and subfields are well known, and the
available research methods are applied to all common phenomena.
The unsolved problems seem to lie between and beyond the disciplines,
when things start to get very complex, for example between psychology
and neuroscience, or between biology and molecular genetics.
We can not really say how genes generate a living organism
or how neurons interact to produce a mind in detail. And
there is still a large gap between mental processes, abstract
thoughts or subjective feelings on the one hand,
and concrete brain circuits, neural correlates or
molecular processes on the other hand.
Do you think it is possible to bridge the gap between psychology
and neuroscience using some kind of sociological/ecological
approach by an "society or ecology of mind", as proposed by
Marvin Minsky and Gregory Bateson, respectively?
Eric has written about "ecologcial psychology" in his blog
"Fixing Psychology" a couple of times (without mentioning Bateson
or FRIAM, though). What do you think, is this a promising approach?
-J.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
