Yes, but can it prove its own consistency? — Posty McPostface
a system made of "n" particles in which particle "i" has a set of properties Pi={Pi1,..., Pim}, where "m" is number of properties of a particle and Pjk is the property "k" of particle "j". Any measurable property of the system is only a function of {P1,...,PM}. — bahman
There is a hierarchy of levels of properties L0, L1, …, Ln, … of which at least one distinct level is associated with the subject matter of each special science, and Lj cannot be reduced to Li, for any i < j.
The whole can always be expressed in term of its constitute therefore there is no emergence. — bahman
You're going to have to specify - a lot - as to what kind of "whole" you mean, and as well "expressed." For example: do you mean that any text can always be expressed in terms of the letters that constitute it? Music in notes? Sense from mere sounds? Without further qualification and explication, I'm afraid the notions in the OP are too vague to respond to. — tim wood
"Emergence" is a complicated topic (in part because there is no common view of what it is). — SophistiCat
There is a hierarchy of levels of properties L0, L1, …, Ln, … of which at least one distinct level is associated with the subject matter of each special science, and Lj cannot be reduced to Li, for any i < j.
-Paul Humphreys, cited from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/ — Akanthinos
You're going to have to specify - a lot - as to what kind of "whole" you mean, and as well "expressed." — tim wood
For example: do you mean that any text can always be expressed in terms of the letters that constitute it? Music in notes? Sense from mere sounds? — tim wood
You might have said, "I think some wholes may be entirely expressed through their parts, but I cannot think of any. Can anyone?" — tim wood
If you think about the word "expression" you might soon enough come to think that that nothing of any kind whatsoever is "expressable" in terms of its parts. — tim wood
An example of a whole emerging from particles could be continuous medium, such as a fluid, emerging from molecular interactions. But here we have two different ontologies, two different languages, two different sets of properties - one pertaining to the particulate system and the other - to the continuous one. For example, there is no such thing as "pressure" in the particulate system (but one can link pressure to molecular dynamics via a bridge law). — SophistiCat
The word "emergent" simply means "arising unexpectedly". It refers to an observation that contradicts our model of reality. It refers to an observation that is unpredictable in the sense that it cannot be predicted with our model of reality. If your model of reality says that every swan is white then a black swan would be considered emergent because your model cannot predict it. Very simple. Unfortunately, some people are confused and so they want to make everything unnecessarily complicated and that under the guise of profound complexity. — Magnus Anderson
Yes, it is, they do? Or yes I say they do? If the former, please show how. If the latter, please support your claim.For example: do you mean that any text can always be expressed in terms of the letters that constitute it? Music in notes? Sense from mere sounds?
— tim wood
Yes. — bahman
↪bahman The only experience that I have had that is fully emergent is a new idea or epiphany. This would represent growth of the mind. — Rich
Depending on how you define the concept of emergence, you can say that pretty much any event is emergent. This is to emphasize that the concept of emergence must be clearly defined. — Magnus Anderson
Here's an example to work on: "Duck." Work with that.
— tim wood
Which duck? — bahman
The whole can always be expressed in term of its constitute therefore there is no emergence. — bahman
a living human brain having the property of being conscious despite its atoms and molecules not having it, — SpacedOut
The whole can always be expressed in term of its constitute therefore there is no emergence.
To elaborate consider a system made of "n" particles in which particle "i" has a set of properties Pi={Pi1,..., Pim}, where "m" is number of properties of a particle and Pjk is the property "k" of particle "j". Any measurable property of the system is only a function of {P1,...,PM}. Therefore there is no emergence.
but this might not count for you under your ideas of mind you mentioned. — SpacedOut
↪tim wood
You asked: For example: do you mean that any text can always be expressed in terms of the letters that constitute it? Music in notes? Sense from mere sounds?
I answered: Yes. Of course an intellectual agent who read a text or listen to a music create something extra when he read a text or listen to a music. That extra thing is meaning of the text which writer wanted to convey it.
I hope things is clear now. — bahman
See? Here's an example of the kind of problem we're having. I understand perfectly well that usually gas in a container can exert pressure on the walls of the container, the pressure depending in part on temperature. But what you said is that "the pressure is a property of gas." It isn't. I doubt if it's even correct to say that pressure is a property of gas in a container. I don't think it's a property at all. Rather it is something that happens, depending on circumstances.The pressure is a property of gas — bahman
Pardon, but "Duck" has no mind whatsoever. And it's clear that when you say, "in general," in general cannot be what you mean, because it simply isn't true, or a fact, in general. If nothing else, "Duck" makes that clear.In general any system made of bunch of particles in which each has a set of properties has a set of properties which can be explained in term of properties of the particles. That is all.
For what regards duck, duck is more than a set of particles. It has a mind. — bahman
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.