5 ms·

So-called emergent properties are just categorical abstractions that we've created in our mind to cognitively handle the complexity of the macroscopic world aro

So-called emergent properties are just categorical abstractions that we've created in our mind to cognitively handle the complexity of the macroscopic world around us. These are evolved mental heuristics. There's nothing beyond fundamental physics that's required, in principle, to explain these emergent properties, so in this sense I'm a philosophical reductionist. Emergence is just an illusion created by our brain's inability to deal with the true nature of fundamental reality.

kaba0 6y ago
There is no point in talking about the temperature of a single atom/molecule, but it is an important statistical property of a group of molecules with unique “features”. The sum is more capable than each of it’s constituents. You could argue that a hyper-intelligent entity can explain everything due to temperature by the simple movements of atoms but that is not true, since with temperature, we can reason about a system we know only one property about, while the said entity would have to know every detail about every atom. In other words, we created a new thing that could not have existed alone. (Perhaps it is not the best example, but there are countless others :) )
- hntrader 6y ago
  These emergent properties that you mention (temperature, intelligence) can in principle be described by the individual components (particles) along with the fundamental laws of physics that govern their interactions. The emergent property that we observe is just a cognitive abstraction designed to strip away the complexity and describe the aggregate behaviour of the group of individual components. Our mind was designed to work this way. The most advantageous way to perceive a rock is as a single object with properties pertaining to utility (hardness, potential weapon, etc). This takes the least cognitive load and is the most beneficial way to perceive the world from a fitness perspective. There's nothing epiphenomenal above and beyond the individual components (and the laws governing their interactions) except in our minds. In that specific sense, emergent properties are an invention.
  - kaba0 6y ago
    I wrote an explicit example for a case where your analysis doesn’t seem to be correct, but you didn’t resolve the issue — temperature makes new observations possible that were not possible before and it is not tied to the human reasoning (also, it is only but one example, perhaps not even the best).
    - hntrader 6y ago
      I don't know if the assertion you made is true, ie that an omniscient entity can't explain everything there is to know about temperature by looking at the simple movement of atoms. What's the basis for this? I know you followed that up with a rationale, but I didn't really follow. Just because this abstraction (temperature) allows us to come to conclusions and inferences about state and state changes doesn't mean that there's anything real about the abstraction aside from the cognitive structure in our brains that helps us to process the world around us effectively.

kaba0 6y ago

There is no point in talking about the temperature of a single atom/molecule, but it is an important statistical property of a group of molecules with unique “features”. The sum is more capable than each of it’s constituents. You could argue that a hyper-intelligent entity can explain everything due to temperature by the simple movements of atoms but that is not true, since with temperature, we can reason about a system we know only one property about, while the said entity would have to know every detail about every atom. In other words, we created a new thing that could not have existed alone. (Perhaps it is not the best example, but there are countless others :) )

hntrader 6y ago
These emergent properties that you mention (temperature, intelligence) can in principle be described by the individual components (particles) along with the fundamental laws of physics that govern their interactions. The emergent property that we observe is just a cognitive abstraction designed to strip away the complexity and describe the aggregate behaviour of the group of individual components. Our mind was designed to work this way. The most advantageous way to perceive a rock is as a single object with properties pertaining to utility (hardness, potential weapon, etc). This takes the least cognitive load and is the most beneficial way to perceive the world from a fitness perspective. There's nothing epiphenomenal above and beyond the individual components (and the laws governing their interactions) except in our minds. In that specific sense, emergent properties are an invention.
- kaba0 6y ago
  I wrote an explicit example for a case where your analysis doesn’t seem to be correct, but you didn’t resolve the issue — temperature makes new observations possible that were not possible before and it is not tied to the human reasoning (also, it is only but one example, perhaps not even the best).
  - hntrader 6y ago
    I don't know if the assertion you made is true, ie that an omniscient entity can't explain everything there is to know about temperature by looking at the simple movement of atoms. What's the basis for this? I know you followed that up with a rationale, but I didn't really follow. Just because this abstraction (temperature) allows us to come to conclusions and inferences about state and state changes doesn't mean that there's anything real about the abstraction aside from the cognitive structure in our brains that helps us to process the world around us effectively.