Read on Twitter
I wasn’t present at this presentation so I don’t know how this grab was framed by the speaker @MarkLawrence_Oz https://twitter.com/nicolemsenior/status/1298047069949702144">https://twitter.com/nicolemse...
The ref the pic is drawn from is here https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2019.00083/full">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
And the grab of the full figure here
Reading through the original paper I’m not convinced the author has applied/operationalised the principle of reductionist v holistic (or even whether holistic is correctly positioned here) maybe the author meant top-down v bottom-up?
Calling in @ahhite - you may be familiar with this ref bc it’s about AEP - note the diagram and the inference “reductionist can only occur down the microscope end but if you think globally, you automatically have an holistic view?”
The “red flag” here is the “call for national & global guidelines” as a solution to “AEP” when “guidelines” *are* reductionist.
“Holistic systems thinking” is not holistic bc we say it is. It’s demonstrably holistic in the way we frame problems & apply solutions.
“Holistic systems thinking” is not holistic bc we say it is. It’s demonstrably holistic in the way we frame problems & apply solutions.
............
GUIDELINES ARE REDUCTIONIST.
Putting “global” in the name does not make them “holistic”.
...............
What’m I missing?
GUIDELINES ARE REDUCTIONIST.
Putting “global” in the name does not make them “holistic”.
...............
What’m I missing?
