There is no emergence

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

There is no emergence

Post by bahman »

To show this consider a system with many parts each part has a set of properties. Now let’s assume that the system has a specific property. This property should not be reducible in terms of properties of parts if it is an emergent property. There must however be a reason that the system has this property rather than any other property. This means that there is a function that describes the property of the system. The only available variables are however the properties of parts. Therefore the property of the system must be a function of properties of parts. Therefore there is no emergence since the existence of the function implements that the property of the system is reducible to properties of parts.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There is no emergence

Post by bahman »

Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
I was told that Aristotle was wrong on many parts of his physic. I think he was wrong on emergence too. His hylomorphic dualism, in which something like the soul that is emergent is immortal is rather ironic. The dead body apparently is not alive anymore.
Impenitent
Posts: 3032
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Impenitent »

Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
He never ate a donut

-Imp
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: There is no emergence

Post by RCSaunders »

Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
Aristotle also thought women had fewer teeth then men, because he couldn't be bothered to ask Mrs. Aristotle to open her mouth so he could count her teeth.

Do believe just anything because some philosopher said it?
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 4:24 pm
Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
Aristotle also thought women had fewer teeth then men, because he couldn't be bothered to ask Mrs. Aristotle to open her mouth so he could count her teeth.

Do believe just anything because some philosopher said it?
Do you think it's possible for non-Nazi's to discuss what Nazi's said and did, without being called a Nazi?

If so, then it shouldn’t be too difficult to extend that objectivity to the introduction of topical statements by seminal philosophers without projections of belief in those philosophers, or belief in anything else.

Such projections are unnecessary betwixt rational adults.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

bahman wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:06 pm To show this consider a system with many parts each part has a set of properties. Now let’s assume that the system has a specific property. This property should not be reducible in terms of properties of parts if it is an emergent property. There must however be a reason that the system has this property rather than any other property. This means that there is a function that describes the property of the system. The only available variables are however the properties of parts. Therefore the property of the system must be a function of properties of parts. Therefore there is no emergence since the existence of the function implements that the property of the system is reducible to properties of parts.
Some observations leading to where you can take it, if only to the trash bin:

Combinations of elements are not static but constantly in motion towards homeostasis, which would make the energetic movement towards homeostasis, in each unique combination of elements that comprise a form, the emergence observable in all things at all times. In other words, emergence is a quality of form made possible by the proper combination of elements, called the condition, of any form. Because the characteristic aspect of this emergence is perpetual energy, it’s natural to assume that some form of energy must be one of the elements present in combination to produce the emergence. Because we know that life is also a necessary element for the emergence of perpetual energy and motion, perpetual energy being understood in terms of the heart engine, then the assumption is made that life itself is energy. This bears examination, for other possibilities exist, e.g., life could be a catalyst that activates the proper combination of elements into perpetual motion evident in varying degrees in both the inorganic and organic, with this caveat. Like all elements life is non-existent independent of form, which again supports the Buddhist-defined concept of co-arising dependency, which can also be expressed as life and spirit are intertwined.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

Impenitent wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 9:44 pm
Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
He never ate a donut

-Imp
:lol:

It's rumoured he was a bear claw man, thus the quote.

From this is derived the famous right to bear arms, but the trail is sketchy.
Last edited by Walker on Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There is no emergence

Post by bahman »

Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 6:45 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:06 pm To show this consider a system with many parts each part has a set of properties. Now let’s assume that the system has a specific property. This property should not be reducible in terms of properties of parts if it is an emergent property. There must however be a reason that the system has this property rather than any other property. This means that there is a function that describes the property of the system. The only available variables are however the properties of parts. Therefore the property of the system must be a function of properties of parts. Therefore there is no emergence since the existence of the function implements that the property of the system is reducible to properties of parts.
Some observations leading to where you can take it, if only to the trash bin:

Combinations of elements are not static but constantly in motion towards homeostasis, which would make the energetic movement towards homeostasis, in each unique combination of elements that comprise a form, the emergence observable in all things at all times. In other words, emergence is a quality of form made possible by the proper combination of elements, called the condition, of any form. Because the characteristic aspect of this emergence is perpetual energy, it’s natural to assume that some form of energy must be one of the elements present in combination to produce the emergence. Because we know that life is also a necessary element for the emergence of perpetual energy and motion, perpetual energy being understood in terms of the heart engine, then the assumption is made that life itself is energy. This bears examination, for other possibilities exist, e.g., life could be a catalyst that activates the proper combination of elements into perpetual motion evident in varying degrees in both the inorganic and organic, with this caveat. Like all elements life is non-existent independent of form, which again supports the Buddhist-defined concept of co-arising dependency, which can also be expressed as life and spirit are intertwined.
I am talking about the matter here that can be experienced by mind. The matter has specific properties. I am saying that emergence is impossible. You could however have hidden properties that get magnified and become evident when the matter has specific form, like the taste of salt. The reality is that all the properties of matter are intertwined too.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

bahman wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:12 pm I am talking about the matter here that can be experienced by mind. The matter has specific properties. I am saying that emergence is impossible. You could however have hidden properties that get magnified and become evident when the matter has specific form, like the taste of salt. The reality is that all the properties of matter are intertwined too.
Movement can be experienced by mind, through the senses. Movement, which is also change, can only be detected in relationship of two or more things (matter), thus motion (change towards homeostasis) is the emergence, and relationship is a necessary condition for the emergence, along with energy and life and probably some other things, the composition of the element of life being in question.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: There is no emergence

Post by bahman »

Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:18 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:12 pm I am talking about the matter here that can be experienced by mind. The matter has specific properties. I am saying that emergence is impossible. You could however have hidden properties that get magnified and become evident when the matter has specific form, like the taste of salt. The reality is that all the properties of matter are intertwined too.
Movement can be experienced by mind, through the senses. Movement, which is also change, can only be detected in relationship of two or more things (matter), thus motion (change towards homeostasis) is the emergence, and relationship is a necessary condition for the emergence, along with energy and life and probably some other things, the composition of the element of life being in question.
The motion also is a property of the matter. It cannot be experienced unless the matter has a specific condition.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

bahman wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:36 pm
Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:18 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:12 pm I am talking about the matter here that can be experienced by mind. The matter has specific properties. I am saying that emergence is impossible. You could however have hidden properties that get magnified and become evident when the matter has specific form, like the taste of salt. The reality is that all the properties of matter are intertwined too.
Movement can be experienced by mind, through the senses. Movement, which is also change, can only be detected in relationship of two or more things (matter), thus motion (change towards homeostasis) is the emergence, and relationship is a necessary condition for the emergence, along with energy and life and probably some other things, the composition of the element of life being in question.
The motion also is a property of the matter. It cannot be experienced unless the matter has a specific condition.
Matter itself as identified by a separate form is actually a combination of relationships made possible by motion, which makes motion an integral element comprising the existence of form and not merely an observable property.

To put it in perspective, the next Buddha may not be limited to a single form, a single observable-by-mind and separate matter/form complex arrangement of molecules. The next Buddha may be the inevitable emergent property of a unique combination of elements distinguishable from a rock, by energy frequencies emanating from both carbon and silicon configurations, in relationship.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: There is no emergence

Post by RCSaunders »

Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:56 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 4:24 pm
Walker wrote: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:52 pm “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

- Aristotle
Aristotle also thought women had fewer teeth then men, because he couldn't be bothered to ask Mrs. Aristotle to open her mouth so he could count her teeth.

Do believe just anything because some philosopher said it?
Do you think it's possible for non-Nazi's to discuss what Nazi's said and did, without being called a Nazi?

If so, then it shouldn’t be too difficult to extend that objectivity to the introduction of topical statements by seminal philosophers without projections of belief in those philosophers, or belief in anything else.

Such projections are unnecessary betwixt rational adults.
Lighten up, you'll live longer.
Walker
Posts: 7265
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: There is no emergence

Post by Walker »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:28 pm
Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:56 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 4:24 pm
Aristotle also thought women had fewer teeth then men, because he couldn't be bothered to ask Mrs. Aristotle to open her mouth so he could count her teeth.

Do believe just anything because some philosopher said it?
Do you think it's possible for non-Nazi's to discuss what Nazi's said and did, without being called a Nazi?

If so, then it shouldn’t be too difficult to extend that objectivity to the introduction of topical statements by seminal philosophers without projections of belief in those philosophers, or belief in anything else.

Such projections are unnecessary betwixt rational adults.
Lighten up, you'll live longer.
And if you don't think it's possible, then you're a bigot.

Enlighten that with the spotlight pointed at yourself, old timer.
You may find that your sense of humour is rather stunted, that is, undeveloped.

Or if you prefer, share your insights regarding invalidation in a more abstract manner, highlighting principles.

:lol:
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: There is no emergence

Post by RCSaunders »

Walker wrote: Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:41 am
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:28 pm
Walker wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2020 5:56 pm
Do you think it's possible for non-Nazi's to discuss what Nazi's said and did, without being called a Nazi?

If so, then it shouldn’t be too difficult to extend that objectivity to the introduction of topical statements by seminal philosophers without projections of belief in those philosophers, or belief in anything else.

Such projections are unnecessary betwixt rational adults.
Lighten up, you'll live longer.
And if you don't think it's possible, then you're a bigot.

Enlighten that with the spotlight pointed at yourself, old timer.
You may find that your sense of humour is rather stunted, that is, undeveloped.

Or if you prefer, share your insights regarding invalidation in a more abstract manner, highlighting principles.

:lol:
The problem with the concept, "emergence," is not with the idea that raw materials can be used to produce different things. If one chooses to call the assembling of materials such a steel, rubber, and various other substances into a machine, such and automobile, and call the result emergence, because the result of that assembly is a new thing, such as an automobile, I see nothing wrong with that. The problem is when emergence is use to explain things as, "emergent," when no possibly assembly of things can possibly produce the phenomena attributed to it.

Colored pigments can be combined to produce almost any color. Red and yellow pigment can be mixed to produce a variety of different orange shades. Red and blue can be combined to produce different purple shades. One can say that orange emerges from the mixture of red and yellow and is a new color that did not exist as either red or yellow. What one cannot do is mix different colors together to get a sound.

The concept of, "emergence," is only a problem when it is used as an attempt to explain what cannot be produced by things of one kind of attribute (like color) to produce something of a totally different kind of attribute (like sound). One example is the absurd idea that things which have only physical attributes can be combined or configured in some way to produce the attribute life. Everything comprised of physical components can be described entirely in terms of physical attributes, such as size, weight, momentum, temperature, etc. Life has no physical attributes, no size, no weight, no momentum, no temperature, etc. and no configuration of the merely physical can produce or explain it. An organism is a physical entity and all the physical aspects of an organism can be described in terms of physics, chemistry, and biology, but the life attribute of an organism cannot be so described. It is an additional attribute, a perfectly natural one like the physical attributes, but stands on its own, like each physical attribute, none of which emerges from any of the others.
Post Reply