Quote Originally Posted by Specialis Sapientia View Post
Otherwise reductionism is totally limited in its core. It is a direct contradiction to complex systems theory and systems theory. Reductionism states "a complex system is nothing but the sum of its parts", which is obvious disagreeable.
"a complex system is nothing but the sum of its parts"--
Reductionism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*Cough*

Nice that you very objectively sifted out something which went well with your rejection of my point.
The full quote
Reductionism can either mean (a) an approach to understand the nature of complex things by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things or (b) a philosophical position that a complex system is nothing but the sum of its parts, and that an account of it can be reduced to accounts of individual constituents.
Reductionism can be an important key thought for many of today's affairs. Law, the easiest example I can think of,
Avant-garde art of all forms can benefit from taking this outlook.
Philosophy within the topic of reductionism is vast and well-explained,

Simply going along with the idea that physical bodies and abstract bodies are completely independant to eachother- other than the fact that our abstract thoughts are created by matter, I was swinging towards the notion of saying that time only has an effect on perceivable conciousnesses, obviously, but I meant with lenient degree- we don't have any understanding of what fast or slow is when it comes down to it.

Personally, I find that a perspective involving all stages of complexity to be more rewarding.
I know Abra made a good point, and I don't mean to sound nihilistic here but however rewarding it may be, in shit knows how many years time, it wont matter at all what every deep-thinker in the world has experienced, let alone just us here at Dreamviews; within our Universe it wont matter.

Just like it wouldn't to the rock in space.

(I'm not against anything you guys are saying)