Russ,
this lead's us into the kind of territory that Owen Densmore would like to take
us to.... formalism, mathematical formalism. I hope he responds.
It will require some careful study on my part, so I wont try a response now.
But, in the spirit of duelling definitions, let me just site the philosphical
dictionary's definition of emergence.
emergent property
An irreducible feature (now commonly called supervenient) of a complex whole
that cannot be inferred directly from the features of its simpler parts. Thus,
for example, the familiar taste of salt is an emergent property with respect to
the sodium and chlorine of which it is composed.
http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/e.htm#emrg with a nod to Garth Kemerling
Note the explicit reference to the part/whole relation. In general, the
emergentist tradition has a committment to ontological levels. In fact, it is
meant to be an explanation of the existence of such levels. that, of course,
doesnt cover the emergence of a bean plant from its seed. I guess.
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
Cc: Russell Standish
Sent: 9/27/2009 1:26:51 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Emergence Seminar, III: Wimsatt and Searle
Why is it important to assume "that emergence involves a relationship between
levels, of some sort"?
Wordnet defines "emergence" as "the gradual beginning or coming forth." That
doesn't necessarily imply a relatioship between levels.
Admittedly I haven't read the Wimsett article. Does he defined emergence as a
relationship between levels?
All that notwithstanding, here is an attempt to characterize emergence as a
relationship between levels.
Mathematically a relation is a set of pairs. So if emergence is a
relation(ship) it would be the set of pairs (of levels) that reflect emergence.
For example, one element in that set of pairs might be (the level of) sticks
paired with (the level of) triangles constructed out of sticks. (This second
level is defined deliberately narrowly. Is that a problem?) Then it seems to
make sense that that pair
(level of sticks, level of stick triangles)
is one element of the emergence relation.
With that in mind, here's a possible definition of emergence as a relation.
Emergence (as a relation) is defined to be:
{(A, B) | A and B are levels, where a level is (at least) a set of elements &
the elements in B have properties that the elements in A don't &
the elements in B are composed of elements of A}
Is that a fair partial formalization of emergence as a relation(ship) between
levels?
I'm not absolutely committed to it. I submit it as a draft definition. Does it
work? It seems to work for sticks and stick triangles.
-- Russ A
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Nicholas Thompson
<[email protected]> wrote:
Nick Thompson wrote
> I agree that the emergent property ... "being a copying device" has to be
a
> property of the macro entity. But in this case, the CAUSE of the emergent
> property is also an emergent property, i.e., "being composed of parts
> arranged in a double helix".
>
> Is saying that a wooden construction is strong because its members are
> formed in triangles like saying that a ball rolls because it is round?
>
> You wouldn't be the first Russ to say that I am getting my knickers
> unnecessarily twisted over this, but it does seem .... queer .... to me in
> someway.
>
To which Russ Standish replied:
Um, well, maybe you are getting your knickers in a twist. I don't
really get your point, queer or no :(.
To which Nick Thompson Replies:
NST-->I apologize for using irrelevantly evocative language. I meant
"queer" literally: "odd, unsettling", and by "knickers in a twist" I just
meant that I was "unsettled, confused." Try to read around it.
NST-->However, please could you look at the substance of what I wrote
again? ASSUMING that one believes that emergence involves a relationship
between levels, of some sort, doesn't saying that "a wooden construction
is strong because its members are formed in triangles" fail as an example?
Since "formed in triangles" is at the same level as "strong".
NST-->Or is the concept of level cracking under the weight, here? For
instance, notice that BOTH "strong" and "formed in triangles" are arguably
"interlevel properties", since to talk about "formed in triangles" you have
to talk about the level of components and to talk about "strong" you have
to talk about the relationship between the whole and its context. (To
demonstrate that something is strong, something outside of it has to stress
it.) So "strong because triangles" is actually a relationship between two
interlevel relationships.
NST-->Your comments focus our attention on Bedau's concept of nominal
emergence, which is in this week's reading? Are you reading along with us?
Wimsatt? Searle?
Nick
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
Clark University ([email protected])
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
> [Original Message]
> From: russell standish <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
Coffee Group <[email protected]>
> Date: 9/27/2009 10:44:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Emergence Seminar, III: Wimsatt and Searle
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 01:24:47AM -0600, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> > So, Russ S,
> >
> > when you say,
> >
> > "> I got lost at step 4 here. The obvious syllogism of (1), (2) & (3) is
> > > that an emergent property is not a property of a micro entity. But
> > > this doesn't surprise me, as its actually my definition of emergence."
> >
> > Does that mean that you are comfortable saying that emergence is
actually a
> > relationship between two different properties of the same object.
> >
>
> Not exactly. It is more a relationship between languages. It is the
> presence of a property (the emergent one) expressed in one language
> that is impossible to express in the other language. We would normally
> say the languages are incommensurate, although Glen used a neat term
> for it the other day starting with "lexical" that raised the other
> Russ's eyebrows.
>
> > I agree that the emergent property ... "being a copying device" has to
be a
> > property of the macro entity. But in this case, the CAUSE of the
emergent
> > property is also an emergent property, i.e., "being composed of parts
> > arranged in a double helix".
> >
> > Is saying that a wooden construction is strong because its members are
> > formed in triangles is like saying that a ball rolls because it is
round?
> >
> > You wouldnt be the first Russ to say that I am getting my knickers
> > unnecessarily twisted over this, but it does seem .... queer .... to me
in
> > someway.
> >
>
> Um, well, maybe you are getting your knickers in a twist. I don't
> really get your point, queer or no :(.
>
> > NIck
> > Nicholas S. Thompson
> > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology,
> > Clark University ([email protected])
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: russell standish <[email protected]>
> > > To: <[email protected]>; The Friday Morning Applied
Complexity
> > Coffee Group <[email protected]>
> > > Date: 9/26/2009 8:35:52 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Emergence Seminar, III: Wimsatt and Searle
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 07:50:53PM -0600, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > As you all may remember, I had decided on the basis of my first two
> > > > readings of Wimsatt, that his was the final word on the definition
of
> > > > emergence: a property of a macro-entity is emergent when it depends
on
> > the
> > > > arrangement of the micro entities [in time and/or in space].
> > > > Unfortunately, I read it a third time.
> > > >
> > > > I woke up in the middle of the night realizing what was wrong with
his
> > > > position.
> > > >
> > > > (1) Ineliminably, emergence has to do with the relation between
macro
> > and
> > > > micro entities. (I suppose somebody might challange that statement,
> > but I
> > > > dont think anybody has so far.)
> > > >
> > > > (2) Emergent properties of a macro entity are those that are
dependant
> > on
> > > > the arrangement of the micro entities.
> > > >
> > > > (3) But "An arrangement of X's" cannot be a property of any
microentity
> > > > (duh!).
> > > >
> > > > (4) There fore, whatever (2) IS a definition of, it cannot be a
> > definition
> > > > of emergence OR emergence does not have to do with relations among
> > levels.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Back to the old drawing board.
> > > >
> > > > n
> > > >
> > >
> > > I got lost at step 4 here. The obvious syllogism of (1), (2) & (3) is
> > > that an emergent property is not a property of a micro entity. But
> > > this doesn't surprise me, as its actually my definition of emergence.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> >
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> > > Mathematics
> > > UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [email protected]
> > > Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> > >
> >
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > 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
>
> --
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Mathematics
> UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [email protected]
> Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
============================================================
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
