No such thing as emergent properties

[Tayla]

No such thing as emergent properties

An example often given of an emergent property is the surface tension of water. But this is merely a consequence of the difference in electrostatic forces in the water molecules at the surface and those underneath. There is no natural law or natural force of nature called "surface tension of water". Emergent properties are merely human categories imposed on physical phenomena.

Ditto for the subjective experience of consciousness. There is no such natural law or natural force of nature called "conscious experience". Whatever it is, it is outside of the material physical universe.

 

[durangodawood]

It does seem that behavior of life is an emergent property of "inert" matter.

I mean, you could never explain the mating rituals of the birds of paradise in terms of the physical properties of carbon and oxygen etc.

 

[pitabread]

Wouldn't arguing about whether emergent properties are a "thing" first require providing a base definition for what they are?

 

[Tanj]

No such thing as emergent properties

You are incorrect. There are numerous examples of complex behaviour arising from simple rule sets. Bee swarming being a great example.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Ditto for the subjective experience of consciousness. There is no such natural law or natural force of nature called "conscious experience". Whatever it is, it is outside of the material physical universe.

The brain is a physical thing in the material universe.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

No such thing as emergent properties

An example often given of an emergent property is the surface tension of water. But this is merely a consequence of the difference in electrostatic forces in the water molecules at the surface and those underneath. There is no natural law or natural force of nature called "surface tension of water". Emergent properties are merely human categories imposed on physical phenomena.

Ditto for the subjective experience of consciousness. There is no such natural law or natural force of nature called "conscious experience". Whatever it is, it is outside of the material physical universe.

Emergent properties are simply the properties of collections of elements that are not present in the individual elements.

Nobody says there has to be a natural law or force of nature for emergent properties, but a characteristic of emergent properties is that they are generally more easily described using high-level abstractions than detailing the activity of their elements. For example, the temperature and pressure of gases are more easily described using the gas laws than the movements of individual atoms or molecules; the flow of water is more easily described using fluid dynamics than calculating the interactions of billions of water molecules.

The evidence indicates that subjective conscious experience is what it is like to be a certain kind of self-referential process running in a physical brain.

 

[Sorn]

The evidence indicates that subjective conscious experience is what it is like to be a certain kind of self-referential process running in a physical brain.

While I accept the concept of emergent properties, like the OP, it can be argued whether something is or is not an emergent property. It could be said that speed is an emergent property of building a motorbike but then again it is also a property of internal combustion, gearing & transmission mechanisms & finally friction coefficients.

Consciousness may or may not be an emergent property, but just like you can describe how the emergent property of speed arises in a motorbike, science will have to one day do the same with consciousness and its not even close yet. In principle it should be possible to build a computer that has consciousness but no one has done it yet.

As a Christian I don't think they will succeed

 

[Strathos]

I think the fact that very complex behaviors can arise from simple systems just shows how clever God was when He created the universe and the laws of physics.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Show me the wetness.

 

[durangodawood]

I think human spiritual life is an emergent property of consciousness.

 

[Sorn]

I think human spiritual life is an emergent property of consciousness.

But what gives rise to consciousness??

 

[durangodawood]

But what gives rise to consciousness??

Consciousness is an emergent property of the biological brain, I think.

 

[Sorn]

It could be said that speed is an emergent property of building a motorbike

Just to add to my earlier post, speed is an emergent property of a motorcycle. While you can buy the separate parts that make up a motorcycle you can not 'buy' speed. It only emerges once you have put the parts together correctly and they do what they were made to do.
However the emergent property that is then evident, ie speed, is also fully explainable by the orchestrated & coordinated interaction of the motorcycle's parts.

In a similar manner 'wetness' is an emergent property of lots of water molecules in one place but also fully explainable by their numbers also.
Having said that though, technically speaking, even 1 water molecule wets the tiny surface area it comes into contact with but it is such a tiny tiny amount that you'd need very sensitive instruments to detect it.

 

[Sorn]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the biological brain, I think.

Yes, but you are basically saying that an emergent property emerges from another emergent property. That may be pushing things a bit.
You are saying that human spiritual life is an emergent property of consciousness which is itself an emergent property of the biological brain.

As per my motorbike example (or water for that matter), the emergent property should still be fully explainable from the components & interactions of the underlying substrate it emerges from. This is far from the case for consciousness (as far as known so far) let alone spirit stuff.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Consciousness may or may not be an emergent property, but just like you can describe how the emergent property of speed arises in a motorbike, science will have to one day do the same with consciousness and its not even close yet. In principle it should be possible to build a computer that has consciousness but no one has done it yet.

If someone does try to build a conscious system, I suspect the problem will be the one Turing identified - how can we tell that a system is conscious - particularly as we have no good definition for it?

I suspect, like many similar abstractions, the temptation will be to redefine or refine its meaning to exclude whatever systems are built. We tend to claim human exclusivity or superiority for skills and abilities right up until computer systems demonstrate their own superiority. Chess used to be the skill that computers would never be able to master, then language translation, then Jeopardy, then poker, then Go, and so-on. Each time human skills are surpassed, people say "Yeah, but it doesn't understand what it's doing", or "Yeah, but that's all it can do..."

It strikes me that if, for example, one can claim that IBM's Watson doesn't 'understand' what it does, someone needs to explain precisely what it would have to do to understand; and then I have little doubt that a system could be built/trained to demonstrate that capability - and that 'understanding' would then be revised to exclude it. The risk will be that we ourselves will eventually be unable to claim 'understanding' under the revised definition

As a Christian I don't think they will succeed

What does being a Christian have to do with it?

 

[durangodawood]

Yes, but you are basically saying that an emergent property emerges from another emergent property. That may be pushing things a bit.
You are saying that human spiritual life is an emergent property of consciousness which is itself an emergent property of the biological brain.

As per my motorbike example (or water for that matter), the emergent property should still be fully explainable from the components & interactions of the underlying substrate it emerges from. This is far from the case for consciousness (as far as known so far) let alone spirit stuff.

I see no problem in principle with an emergent property (or maybe "emergent system" is the better term) arising from a previous one.

In fact it looks like thats what happened: chemical matter > biological systems > self-consciousness > human spiritual consciousness.

....the emergent property should still be fully explainable from the components & interactions of the underlying substrate it emerges from.

Thats exactly backwards. The behaviors of the emergent system are not fully explainable in term of the rules for the systems it emerged from. Thats the very definition of emergent properties.

 

[Ophiolite]

Show me the wetness.

It's right there in the 104 degree angle. Maybe emergent properties are those which are implied rather explicitly expressed.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... technically speaking, even 1 water molecule wets the tiny surface area it comes into contact with but it is such a tiny tiny amount that you'd need very sensitive instruments to detect it.

Wetting is a property of liquids, and a single molecule is not a liquid, so technically no. A single molecule does display the properties that contribute to the wetness of the bulk, but is not wet itself.

 

[Sorn]

Wetting is a property of liquids, and a single molecule is not a liquid, so technically no. A single molecule does display the properties that contribute to the wetness of the bulk, but is not wet itself.

I guess it depends on what 'wetness' means. If it means the visible surface contact of a liquid on a solid then technically a sensitive enough instrument, ie an electron microscope, may well be able to see a single water molecule in contact with a solid surface, ie 'wetting' it.

Imagine if you had a few thousand marbles and they rolled over some surface, their behavior would be very similar to a liquid or water in that they coat the surface and flow over it at the same time. a single marble does that too but on a much smaller scale.

We see wetness in the macro but it can be in the micro too depending on how its defined.

In the same way that we can put our hand into a bowl of water, a large trench digger could put its digging instrument into a large bucket of marbles and move its 'hand' through it like we move through water. In 'some' respects the marbles are wet to it.

 

[Sorn]

The behaviors of the emergent system are not fully explainable in term of the rules for the systems it emerged from. Thats the very definition of emergent properties.

Not so, the definition of emergent properties: the definition of emergent property does not state that the phenomena can not be explained, just that it arise from one or more lesser or substrate parts.

As it is, all emergent properties must have an explanation, many we understand but not all yet. However they can not arise by magic, they must arise in an explainable way or it breaks the rules of physics and the physical world we live in.

So an emergent property arising out of another emergent property, while not out of the question, still needs to be and should be explainable.
Spiritual consciousness may require something that does not arise from anything in the physical world but is instead provided by God.
Until the 1st layer in your theory, consciousness, is explained, it is speculating as to where spiritual consciousness comes from though the bible would suggest its from God.

Speed is an emergent quality of a motorbike but its best displayed when a human is also added to the bike in the form of a rider, or means of control.