The phrase "are reductionist" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing theories, approaches, or perspectives that simplify complex phenomena into their basic components.
Example: "Many scientific theories are reductionist, focusing solely on individual elements rather than the system as a whole."
Alternatives: "are simplistic" or "are overly simplistic".
Most models that seek to characterise the delivery of diffuse pollutants from land to water are reductionist.
A case in point is Schaffner's suggestion (Schaffner 2006&2012) that we should reconsider the relevance of merely partial reductions or of scientific explanations, broadly construed, that are reductionist in spirit, despite the fact that they do not comply with more traditional standards of full-fledged theory-reductions.
Although many current systems biology approaches are reductionist in the sense discussed above, there are schools in the life sciences that are non-reductionist in the sense that they address higher- level principles rather than lower-level mechanisms (see e.g. Wolkenhauer and Green [2013]).
Critics argue that these are reductionist measures that leave out more than they convey.
He candidly confesses his past atheism as he taught courses "about God". He also illustrates how so much in (organized) religion can turn an inquiring seeker away from the very question of God and, in his many talks, Needleman often refers to toxic ideas, ideas that are reductionist and make it impossible to be open to anything that is transcendent.
Although the contribution of conventional hematopoietic culture systems to the knowledge of human HSC biology is unquestionable, they are reductionist and do not reproduce the complex three-dimensional hematopoietic microenvironment.
And the third claim is that we are reductionists who value arts and humanities less than sciences.
Both of us are reductionists, but our observations challenge reductionism, at least the naive version of it.
Idealists are reductionists whose reductive base is mental.
On the other are reductionists who might also consider themselves as realists.
Therefore, these approaches are reductionists in defining a good biomarker as the most differentially expressed gene or protein when comparing distinct cellular contexts.
