Hi Steve. Right. But doesn't emergentism purport to be a scientific discipline? >From Wikipedia: "In philosophy, systems theory and science, emergence is the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions. Emergence is central to the theories of integrative levels and of complex systems."
Sounds like good old SOM to me. So, I think to associate it with the MOQ is misleading. And, as I pointed out before, unlike the MOQ it doesn't explain anything. Best, Platt On 17 Nov 2009 at 10:40, Steven Peterson wrote: > Hi Platt, > > > > Emergentism, whether British or Hungarian, suffers from a fatal flaw. It > > is entirely bereft of scientific explanation because it fails to identify > > deterministic causes or "mechanisms" for the phenomenon in question. > > To say that this or that property "emerges" is to say nothing more than > > from A comes B. It is a description, not an explanation. Or, if posited as > > an explanation it amounts to "Oops." > > I agree that "emergence" does not explain evolution with mechanisms or > deterministic causes, but neither does the MOQ. The idea of emergence > is basically anti-reductionism. It says, stop insisting that a > deterministic mechanism on a lower level must explain everything worth > knowing on a higher level. It says advances in physics will never make > biological science obsolete. The MOQ agrees. > > Best, > Steve > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
