Emergence

[changed]

What is everyone's thoughts on strong emergence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts etc. etc. - that the properties which define us arise through interactions ...

examples of emergence -

Colour: Elementary particles do not absorb or emit specific wavelengths of light and thus have no colour; it is only when they are arranged in atoms that they absorb or emit specific wavelengths of light and can thus be said to have a colour.

phase changes: a single atom all on it's own does not undergo phase changes... a single molecule of H20 is neither liquid, solid, or gas - phases are an emergent property that only exist through interactions

the reductionist approach is insufficient... what defines us? we are defined by our properties - but properties are not a product of the smallest building block, properties are a product of interactions - so really, what we are/who we are is a product of our interactions...

property: angry person - you cannot be angry unless you are angry at someone/something, or kind/loving - again a description of interactions.. if who we are is who we are with others, we are emergent beings created through interactions...

when we think of origins and reducing things to the simplest component or to the "grand beginning" to try and find the causation behind it all, what if the ultimate cause did not happen "in the beginning"? there seems to be some spark of "original cause" within each new interaction...

random quotes from the wiki

"Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same -- their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference." (Lewes 1875, p. 412)(Blitz 1992)

"Rules, or laws, have no causal efficacy; they do not in fact “generate” anything. They serve merely to describe regularities and consistent relationships in nature. These patterns may be very illuminating and important, but the underlying causal agencies must be separately specified (though often they are not). But that aside, the game of chess illustrates precisely why any laws or rules of emergence and evolution are insufficient. Even in a chess game, you cannot use the rules to predict “history” — i.e., the course of any given game. Indeed, you cannot even reliably predict the next move in a chess game. Why? Because the “system” involves more than the rules of the game. It also includes the players and their unfolding, moment-by-moment decisions among a very large number of available options at each choice point. The game of chess is inescapably historical, even though it is also constrained and shaped by a set of rules, not to mention the laws of physics. Moreover, and this is a key point, the game of chess is also shaped by teleonomic, cybernetic, feedback-driven influences. It is not simply a self-ordered process; it involves an organized, “purposeful” activity." (Corning 2002)

what role does irreducibility play in determining free will?

also interesting that most of the scriptures are about interactions - love one another, don't lie, don't steal, don't kill, don't be jealous, be charitable, work together - interactions are the birthplace of emergent properties... makes you wonder what new emergent properties we could see if we were able to interact according to the councils of the scriptures...

sorry, random weekend thoughts

love this quote:

"Although strong emergence is logically possible, it is uncomfortably like magic. How does an irreducible but supervenient downward causal power arise, since by definition it cannot be due to the aggregation of the micro-level potentialities? Such causal powers would be quite unlike anything within our scientific ken. This not only indicates how they will discomfort reasonable forms of materialism. Their mysteriousness will only heighten the traditional worry that emergence entails illegitimately getting something from nothing."(Bedau 1997)

downward causal power - magic!

but then perhaps it is not downward causal, or upward causal... perhaps it is the origin of cause - the beginning of the chain of events.

Edited July 10, 2011 by changed

[Honorentheos]

changed,

interesting topic.

I don't think it is a coincidence that many of the eastern philosophical religions view the conditions of separation (and therefore interaction) as something with which we should contend. And ultimately, that the universe will return to a singularity without this separation.

I think your question and observations are at the heart of much reflection on the state of man, and the apparent conditions we find ourselves in.

[changed]

And ultimately, that the universe will return to a singularity without this separation.

(Book of Mormon | 2 Nephi 2:11)

11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first–born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.

the point of heaven is to be "together forever, of one mind and one heart"... yet without separate individual entities, there are no interactions...

when the whole is larger than the sum of it's parts, there is infinite creative potential - infinite creative powers are created through opposites - through distinct unique individuals interacting with one another..

Edited July 10, 2011 by changed

[Garden Girl]

Ouch... now I have a headache... but in a good way. Interesting.

from the beach on a bright Sabbath morning, sun shining, gentle breeze, emerald trees...

GG

[Honorentheos]

(Book of Mormon | 2 Nephi 2:11)

11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first–born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.

Again, it's interesting that within some eastern philosophies this scripture describes precisely why there is suffering in the world. The argument in those veins of thought is that concepts of righteousness also cause wickedness to be. We tend to view it as the bad is necessary to appreciate the good. But I think others feel that the ultimate objective of the sage is to see past this illusion (where concepts of good also cause evil to be) to the higher understanding that separateness is not the true state of everything. Once one sees through this illusion, one can not call the whole both righteous and wicked. Both concepts do not make sense in this context.

Or so it appears.

[CV75]

Trying to absorb what changed and Honorentheos wrote:

Opposition is necessary for all things to exist (2 Nephi 2:11-15). The term “all things” seems to be limited to this creation, or to the things God has brought into the physical stage. So, the requirement for opposition seems to apply only to this second estate, and not necessarily to the pre-mortal, post-mortal or eternal conditions. Opposition obviously existed in the war in heaven, but this opposition was not a requirement, because men (whether as spirits or intelligences) had existed from the beginning.

On the other hand, agency is necessary for existence (D&C 93:30), which applies to all estates or conditions (and so by extension, the “things” created within them). The relationship between agency and opposition, with agency governing opposition, is obvious in how the plan of salvation operates in mortality. But in eternity, where God is and where agency and existence are absolute, agency is not dependent on the presence of opposite choices as evidenced by “continuation of the seeds” having already been chosen over damnation and never looking back. Only those who have become one with God obtain this perfect agency and exist eternally and not in a damned state (verses 36-38, and back to 28 and 29).

So the compound in one is necessary for, or an attribute of, those spirits developing agency in a mortal probation. But it is no longer necessary for those possessing perfect agency.