Emergent Properties

Perhaps this phrase warrants a little more discussion and clarification. I
think there's a lot of good insight here but also a lot of confusion. I
would certainly like to learn more about it from all of you.

On one hand, if emergent properties are properties that are "...more than
simply the sum of the parts..." then the concept is ubiquitous and almost
trivial. Trivial in the sense of no major philosophical consequences. This
definition of emergent can be easily illustrated by considering the hydrogen
atom. The proton and the electron can be studied in great detail as
separate entities but not until they interact with each other and are
studied as a two-body system do you get the beauty of the various energy
states and electron position/momentum distributions. Add more components
and many other properties emerge. Combine enough atoms and you get solid
state behavior such as conductivity, semiconductivity, superconductivity,
and countless other properties that derive only from a collection of atoms.
Virtually every system in the world displays this kind of emergent property.
But I don't see reductionism as meaning a system is merely the sum of its
parts in this sense nor do I see this kind of emergent property as
offsetting reductionism.

On the other hand, a more interesting approach is to break a system down
into the relevant forces governing the interaction of the parts. The forces
of gravity, electro-magnetism, and the weak and strong forces are the
fundamental forces. A myriad of diverse properties emerge upon applying
these forces to a set of elementary particles (or fields, if you prefer).
Reductionism, it seems, would indicate that all properties can be reduced to
a proper application of these forces (which scientists hope to unify some
day into a grand unified theory). Are there properties in this world that
cannot be reduced to these forces? In cosmology, the latest data indicate
an incredible 95% of the universe is based on non-baryonic (dark) matter and
on unknown (dark) energy. It remains to be seen where they come from. The
other major question of emergent properties is life and consciousness. Are
these emergent from the basic forces or is there also a (dark) unknown
(supernatural?) parameter. This appears to be the next big thrust of
reductionism, the reduction of our thoughts, emotions, behavior, religion,
and ultimately our life, our free will, to properties that emerge from the
fundamental forces of nature governing the constituent atoms in our brains.

Several decades ago, I enjoyed reading Donal Mackay's books and his concepts
of hierarchical, complementary levels of meaning and the fallacy of
"nothing-buttery". There's a lot of good insight there but it's not clear
that he's precluded reductionism in the second sense above. Emergent
properties of complex systems may indeed require several complementary
levels of explanation, each of which is complete in its own realm, yet none
of which is a complete explanation of the system. This would not deny the
reductionist view of underlying forces being the sole origin of all the
levels. Mackay also gives examples where human intelligence has imposed
meaning. One of his examples was a sentence written in chalk on a
blackboard. It can be described "completely" chemically and physically at
various levels but must also be explained at the level of meaning of the
alphabet, the vocabulary, and the sentence structure. This is an example
where the meaning is imposed from outside the system and has nothing to do
with the inherent system itself.

Net: I'm not a reductionist but making a clear argument against
reductionism isn't so easy either.

Randy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mervin Bitikofer" <mrb22667@kansas.net>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:38 PM
Subject: Re: Evolutionary Psychology and Free Will

...... I had the privilege of hearing that doctor in person at
> K-State (again -- courtesies of Keith), and the phrase "emergent
> properties" was one of the answers given to reductionist thought. Yet I
> still have only a vague notion of its meaning. A property of a whole may
> "emerge" that is more than simply the sum of the parts. -- or at least I
> can parrot this explanation. .......
>
> --merv
Received on Fri May 5 19:37:06 2006