Talk:Emergence

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Systems High‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

Philosophy: Epistemology / Science Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Epistemology
	Philosophy of science

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Mid‑importance

	Biology portal Emergence is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 6 sections are present.

Un-notified Litigation by Fourdee against Psychohistorian[edit]

There is a discussion about "un-notified litigation" available at Talk:Emergence/Litigation which was moved because it does not directly relate to the content of the article.

Emergence is not that complicated[edit]

About the mathematical proof of the emergence. can not any closed figure be used as a simpler proof??

I mean, you can make a circle of bend lines, and only when all the lines are put into place the emergence shows.

References[edit]

Removing most of the article[edit]

I got a copy of Corning's paper, which appears to be the main source actually discussing emergence (and not just providing examples which wikipedia editors then draw WP:SYNTH conclusions from as examples of emergence). Corning largely rejects the definition of emergence as self-organization, considers table salt and water to be emergent phenomena by his own definition, and largely argues in the paper that the whole concept is meaningless. And yet, somehow his arguments were carefully cited to draw essentially the opposite conclusions!

As such, I'm removing most of the article. This is a topic that easily begets nonsense, so at a bare minimum we should have a WP:RS claim made for every example of emergence, and ideally an academic one from a specialist, rather than trying to draw our own conclusions or blindly citing any misconceptions in popular media on the topic. - car chasm (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick look at a sampling of your extensive removals and other edits, and I have to say I'm quite impressed. This article has been a hot mess for some time. Perhaps there are aspects of these extremely WP:BOLD edits to quibble over, but I think that on the whole the article is much stronger in this stripped-down form. Might make sense to post at WP:NORN to get a few more editors involved in review however. Generalrelative (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to whether "strong emergence" is a fringe concept or not, I've raised the question at FTN. Generalrelative (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake[edit]

From just a reader

"Constructal law – Romanian-American professor"

Seems wrong. Sorry I have no time/expertise to fix it. 46.253.188.161 (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About strong emergency[edit]

The sentence: "Strong emergence describes the direct causal action of a high-level system on its components" suggests that there is always "downward causation" (probably influenced by Jaegwon Kim's argument about the "overdetermination" of the mental over the physical domain, if you consider the mental as strongly emergent). However, that is not true: you can say that the properties of a strongly emergent phenomenon supervene on the properties of its building blocks (just as the properties of a water molecule supervene on the properties of its building blocks: hydrogen and oxygen atoms). But that is not the same as the other way round: "downward causation", where the water molecule is supposed to change the properties of its building blocks. Moreover, "downward causation" is never a direct reversal of cause and effect, but always via a detour - that is normally called "feedback".

Moreover, the question is whether you can even consider the mental domain as a complex system as a case of strong emergence. I propose to change this.

Ypan1944 (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As always, this will be a matter of checking what the best sources say about the matter, and following what they say as strictly as possible without close paraphrasing. Generalrelative (talk) 17:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]