That’s what suggested by a recent post at the philosophy of mind blog Brains. I don’t buy it. The modeling techniques described did not, as far as I know, originate in physics, and a very important part of physics involves getting results fundamentally more precise than can be gotten from any model of human behaviour.* As far as multiple realizability goes, I don’t under stand the pro-reductionism argument here. If social sciences are to be driven by modeling, we have to ask whether different physical systems could meet the specifications of the same model, and that would suggest the behaviour of the model is in some sense independent of physics.

>>>*Is that Yankees are supposed to spell that word? It’s how Firefox’s built-in spellcheck tells me to spell it. Did my browser turn British when I made the switch to Ubuntu? To lazy to check.