4 ms·
That sounds like semantics. If putting together a bunch of X's in a jar always makes the jar go Y, then is Y an emergent property? Or we need to better unders
by unsupp0rted 1y ago
That sounds like semantics.
If putting together a bunch of X's in a jar always makes the jar go Y, then is Y an emergent property?
Or we need to better understand why a bunch of X's in a jar do that, and then the property isn't emergent anymore, but rather the natural outcome of well-understood X's in a well-understood jar.
- gond 1y agoAh. Not semantics, that is cybernetics and systems theory. As in your example: If a bunch of x in a jar leads to the jar tipping over, it is not emergent. That’s just cause and effect. Problem to start with is that the jar containing x is not even a system in the first place, emergence as a concept is not applicable here. There may be a misunderstanding on your side of the term emergence. Emergence does not equal non-understanding or some spooky-hooky force coming from the unknown. We understand the functions of the elements of a car quite well. The emergent behaviour of a car was intentionally brought about by massive engineering. Reductionism does not lead to an explaining-away of emergence.