Is it possible to hold both a satisfactory definition of emergence,
and an acceptance / appreciation of ineluctable mystery?
IE: is a paradox a possible solution set here?
On Sep 6, 2009, at 4:13 PM, ERIC P. CHARLES wrote:
Hmmm, I have not read the book in question, but... to vaguely
support Russ's position:
Conversations involving emergence do seem to be one of those
contexts in which a sizable subset of the participants seem to be
primarily interested in maintaining an aura of mystery. It often
seems the case that when some purported instance of "emergence" is
explained in a manner that a priori seemed satisfactory, it is
declared either that said explanation is inherently insufficient in
some way or that the instance in question was not actually
"emergence" after all. At any rate, it seems that several instances
of situations involving emergence are very well understood, or at
least understood from many different angles. So, is the quest to
"understand emergence" a quest for a general way of handling such
situations, is it a quest to find a particular kind of explanation
more satisfying than those offered previously, or is it an attempt
to wonder at things we like to wonder at and would be sad if the
wondering stopped? Of course those options are not exhaustive, but
the first two options seem fairly noble, while the last option not
so much (though it does seem enjoyable).
Eric
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 04:59 PM, Russ Abbott <[email protected]>
wrote:
Come on Nick. Later on in the Introduction they write the following.
When we finally understand what emergence truly is, we might see
that many of the examples are only apparent cases of emergence.
Indeed, one of the hotly contested issues is whether there are any
genuine examples of emergence.
Here's how the Introduction finishes.
The study of emergence is still in its infancy and currently is in a
state of considerable flux, so a large number of important questions
still lack clear answers. Surveying those questions is one of the
best ways to comprehend the nature and scope of the contemporary
philosophical and scientific debate about emergence. Grouped
together here are some of the interconnected questions about
emergence that are particularly pressing,
1. How should emergence be defined? ... We should not presume that
only one type of emergence exists and needs definition. Instead,
different kinds of emergence may exist, so different that they fall
under no unified account. ... Given the high level of uncertainty
about how to properly characterize what emergence is, it should be
no surprise that many other fundamental questions remain unanswered.
2. What ontological categories of entities can be emergent:
properties, substances, processes,phenomena, patterns, laws, or
something else? ...
3. What is the scope of actual emergent phenomena? ...
4. Is emergence an objective feature of the world, or is it merely
in the eye of the beholder? ...
5. Should emergence be viewed as static and synchronic, or as
dynamic and diachronic, or are both possible? ...
6. Does emergence imply or require the existence of new levels of
phenomena? ...
7. In what ways are emergent phenomena autonomous from their
emergent bases? ... Another important question about the autonomy of
emergent phenomena is whether that autonomy is merely
epistemological or whether it has ontological consequences. An
extreme version of the merely epistemological interpretation of
emergence holds that emergence is simply a sign of our ignorance.
One final issue about the autonomy of emergent phenomena concerns
whether emergence necessarily involves novel causal powers,
especially powers that produce ‘‘downward causation,’’ in which
emergent phenomena have novel effects on their own emergence base.
One of the questions in this context is what kind of downward
causation is involved, for the coherence of downward causation is
debatable.
Emergence ... is simultaneously palpable and confusing ... New
advances in contemporary philosophy and science ... now are
converging to enable new progress on these questions ...
This book’s chapters illuminate these questions from many
perspectives to help readers
with framing their own answers.
If this isn't an attempt to grapple with an apparently mysterious
phenomenon what do you think it is? Or do you suppose they are
simply compiling a collection of philosophical papers for the sake
of history? If that were the case, I would think they would make
the philosophical landscape of emergence sound a lot more settled.
Or perhaps they simply believe that they can make some money selling
books -- and writing the introduction as if the topic of energence
were so unsettled was just a way to intice people to buy it.
-- Russ
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Nicholas Thompson <[email protected]
> wrote:
"seems" would seem to be the operative word. He is the editor of
the book and he has to represent the range of opinion and SOME
people think its mysterious.
but i have to go buy fish.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
----- Original Message -----
From: Russ Abbott
To: [email protected];The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group
Sent: 9/6/2009 11:57:48 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] emergence
If you make properties rather than entities emergent, what do you
say about entities? What are they? Where do they come from? Put
another way, what is a property a property of?
I think you will find that Bedau and Humphreys find emergence
mysterious. This is the second sentence from the Introduction. "The
topic of emergence is fascinating and controversial in part because
emergence seems to be widespread and yet the very idea of emergence
seems opaque, and perhaps even incoherent." The rest of the
Introduction expands on the mystery of emergence.
-- Russ
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Thompson <[email protected]
> wrote:
Try this: a property of an entity is emergent when it depends on
the arrangment or the order of presentation of the parts of the
entity. (It's properties that are emergent, not entities ... some
properties of a pile of sand are emergent, some aggregate.) Here, I
believe, I am channeling Wimsatt.
The beauty of reading a collection such as Bedau and The Other Guy
is that you experience the whip-lash of moving from point of view to
point of view. Good exercise for the neck.
By the way, Russ (was it?) was a ...leetle... unfair to Bedau. I
dont think Bedau thinks it's a mystery; i think he thinks others
have thought it a mystery. But it's been a few months since I read
it.
Implementation: Consider the expression, "there is more than one
way to skin a cat". Equivalent to: "there are several programs you
can use to implement a cat skinning."
Consciousness: the big source of confusion in emergence discussions
is the attempt to attach emergence to such perennial mysteries as
consciousness. (Actually, I dont think consciousness is a mystery,
but let that go.) The strength of a triangle is an emergent
property of the arrangment of its legs and their attachments.
There are lots of ways bang together boards and still have a weak
construction, which I learned when I put together a grape arbor with
no diagonal members. Worked fine until the grapes grew on it.
Emergent properties are everywhere in the simplest of
constructions. We dont need to talk about soul, or consciouness, or
spirit to have a useful conversation about emergence.
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
----- Original Message -----
From: Victoria Hughes
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: 9/6/2009 10:32:59 AM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] emergence
Consciousness / self-awareness?
Is this thus acceptable as an emergent phenomenon?
If so, how does this permit, or not, the definition of 'the self' as
a unique identity?
Emergence is what happens when components of the "emergent entity"
act in such a way as to bring about the existence and persistence of
that entity.
When "boids" follow their local flying rules, they create
(implement) a flock. It's not mysterious. We know how it works.
That's all emergence is: coordinated or consistent actions among a
number of elements that result in the formation and persistence of
some aggregate entity or phenomenon.
============================================================
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
============================================================
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
Eric Charles
Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601
============================================================
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
============================================================
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
