Tom McLeish - Is Emergence Fundamental?

How critical is emergence in how the world works? Emergence happens when the behavior of composite things is more complex than the additive behaviors of all its constituent parts would suggest. Emergence is operating everywhere. Once you see the results of emergence, it’s obvious. Before, it’s impossible.
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Watch more interviews on emergence in philosophy and systems theory: bit.ly/3Gze3qN
Tom McLeish is Emeritus Professor of Natural Philosophy at the University of York. Elected Fellow of the Royal Society in 2011, he has chaired its Education Committee. He is also a Senior Associate of Pembroke College, Oxford, and a former fellow of Emmanuel College Cambridge.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: closertotruth.com/register/
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[@LuigiSimoncini]

Thank you Robert for interrupting, now we don't know what's happening with fractional quantum Hall states :(

[@roccolobosco5499]

How I wish Robert would have let Tom speak.

[@RMScott]

I love this stuff but mostly I just nod and smile.

[@Sampsonoff]

It makes me feel smart but mostly conceptually over my head 😅

[@JerryMlinarevic]

Imagine a spectrum of, literally, infinitely small and large with infinite cycles; then imagine layers of dynamics dissociated from dynamics that created it. It is the infinite that makes realities possible.

[@MrJPI]

Programming languages !! How could they be explained starting from basic physics? They can be run on logic electronic gates, pneumatic systems, mechanical devices, on paper and pen and even in our brains. So what is the basic (deeper level) physics that explains them being around?

[@Random-gt5gw]

I think George Costanza from "Seinfeld" would be able to: A) Explain things much better then these two characters and, B) Win any argument against either of these theoreticians. Would you agree?

[@scottperry9581]

This interview assumes the viewer is already conversant with the concept of emergence.

[@wisedupearly3998]

Emergence generate reality by altering the probabilities of different events happening on the lower layer. Physics merely specifies what reactions will occur if two chemicals meet. Emergence controls the probability of those chemicals meeting.

[@kallianpublico7517]

You are talking about emergence but are you talking about what emerges? Is form what emerges or something else? Is liquidity and superconductivity the end result of physical shifting caused by "bonds"; or are they properties? Properties not of matter but of something totally predictable if not immediately inferrable. Is there a class structure to the universe? A caste system of form?

[@Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time]

Emergence ~ light photon ∆E=hf energy is continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. Kinetic energy is the energy of what is actually ‘happening’.

[@Dani-it7hz]

I agree with your thoughts. Our Universe arose from Nothing. Nothing that had within it, an infinite field of potential, and time is the point at which potential energy becomes matter. Space, Time and Matter are all created in the same instant and are not fundamental. Each instant is a moment of creation and transformation.

[@sentient3906]

let the man finish his thought Rob

[@borgholable]

strong emergence is bascially god of the gaps but for science

[@johnyharris]

Fixed: Strong emergence is basically god of the gaps but for scientist's who believe in it. It is not by any stretch of the imagination the scientific consensus.

[@aren8798]

Great subject matter!

[@allauddin732]

The one is fundamental everywhere

[@S3RAVA3LM]

CTT, could you interview Deirdre Carabine, concering Negative Theology and here book, 'The Unknown God'.

[@maxpower252]

Yes

[@ailblentyn]

I love the way Robert doesn’t push his interviewees towards a prejudice he wants to be true.

[@HolySeraph777]

Yeah this was wicked belligerent and intellectually shameful. The other guy might be working off a false or maladapted first principle but at least let him dig his dang grave first. This episode was whack.

[@Tore_Lund]

Yes, he is very respectful of his guests but also the subjects he discusses. Video themes are almost always from outside science; like why we are here, consciousness, etc. That makes the videos appeal to all, regardless of if you are here for science or the big questions and he never implies that any kind of worldview is lesser.

[@donespiritu1345]

Robert does have a bias about reality. He wants reality to be reducible to a simple universal phrase that he can wrap his mind around. And to his disappointment I think he's discovering that science is going the opposite way. Quantum physics which Robert is deeply confused about and hates with a deep passions is leading many scientists to the idea of the multiverse. Now, if the multiverse is how reality is then it becomes metaphysically impossible for Robert to wrap his head around physical laws and principles that we will never even see or experience in this universe. So he pushes hard on the reductionist bias because that is the only avenue that would give him hope of a basic universal law.

[@B.S...]

There is real emergence (Realism and Systems theory) and there is qualia. Carbon allotropes are a better example of emergent properties >> the properties of diamond, graphite, graphene, and buckyballs.

[@Flowing23]

:) excellent

[@S3RAVA3LM]

If anybody here is seeking answers, or seeking to Know thy Self, or seeking God, let me know, and I will share with you a few of my favorite teachers here on KZbin.

[@waldwassermann]

This series is called closer to truth but not the actual truth...

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

maybe weak emergence when matter becomes energy, like E = m * c-squared? and maybe strong emergence when energy becomes matter, like m = E / c-squared?

[@longcastle4863]

I think the strongest emergence would be biological life emerging out of the deterministic world of atomic particles -- with increasingly stronger and stronger degrees of consciousness, autonomy and free will being manifest the further one moves up the phylogenetic tree. Allowing such animals, therefore, to no longer be fully one-hundred percent bound or determined by the deterministic world they emerged out of... Even while, of course, being completely dependent on it.

[@wagfinpis]

Is it possible that behavior like the observer effect is the result of some casual emergence that is not currently measurable or something like that?

[@missh1774]

Like the millions of things we aren't told? 😆

[@Sampsonoff]

@@missh1774🙄 your attitude is so childish and simply demonstrates your blind ignorance. It frankly encapsulates so much wrong with the world today. Not only are “they” not holding truth from you, worse you lack the intellectual curiosity to find out. It’s pathetic and shameful The irony of course is you’re making such a childish conspiratorial statement on a channel that interviews the worlds leading experts on scientific discoveries. These are the best of the best and they are here to share the most advanced knowledge we have of the world. Personally I’ve worked in physics labs including with some of the most advanced equipment made to date. We aren’t hiding the truth. Stop listening to anti intellectual conspiracy trash and start taking some courses. Go ask your prof questions. Stop being a victim too lazy to seek truth especially when it’s served to you on a platter

[@missh1774]

@@Sampsonoff why so serious? It was a genuine statement for people directly effected by decades of social experiments. With the global use of cyber tech, the emergence of these findings are probing the answers from present day users. Why not state the obvious with two arms wide open and a healthy dose of negating between curiosity and cultural protocols? I can sense your frustration for the initial first read when it comes to comments like this. I can only suggest maybe looking into philosophical courses such as Vervake's meaning crisis. Thank you for your heartfelt response.

[@fortynine3225]

I know about musician Brian Wilson who talked in the past about how a combination of sounds could result in something completely different than what can be heard in those sounds. Anyway when you say it is more complex than the parts would suggest than you are missing something...with emergence being a placeholder of something you do not understand.

[@Beerbatter1962]

Robert, I completely disagree with the idea that given enough science and enough technology and enough know-how, that a system can be predicted based on its fundamentally reduced constituents. I say this based on what I have learned about what Heisenberg has taught us about the uncertainty principle. And that is that at sufficiently reduced and small enough scales, the universe becomes fuzzy, and you simply cannot predict certain outcomes. For any system, at small enough quantum scales, one could not predict the exact future state because the fundamental constituents would be fuzzy to begin with. Therefore, I claim that everything we see in the universe is strong emergence. Hiesenberg says so.

[@quakers200]

Stuttering is contagious.

[@mikefinn]

If an observer is always required for quantum wave funtion collapse, than is the observer not the most fundamental? Can't all of reality be considered emergent based on observation?

[@quakers200]

I think that the word observer has caused more misunderstanding than just about anything. At the human level we are only aware of quantum activity on a large sale. I think instead of observer. Detector might be a somewhat more accurate statement.

[@mikefinn]

@@quakers200 Yes, I like Detector. Is this the "proof" that reality does not exist? At least it does not fundamentally exist? Though it's more like consciousness is the "Observer" inside the "Detector" (body with sight, hearing, etc.).

[@ajs1998]

Let him speak damn. I don't wanna watch the interviewer try to understand, I just want him to ask good SHORT questions and listen to the answers from the smart people.

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

What is fundamental to the human perspective isn't to the universe. Nothing is as wrong or arrogantly subjective as alleging something is advancing forward as if it's defying entropy. It more human centric than any other idea we have ever had. A temporary equilibrium isn't achieved. Many would claim that automobiles are technically advanced and evolved but someone in 1930s would say it a piece of crap that can't scale the terrain and we have to cater to with pavement and all the babying. Its not nearly as 1930 cars that was universal adaptive and not disposably built.

[@r2c3]

just the idea for a structure as large as the universe, if not any larger, is simply marvelous...

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Lack phich Law Standard

[@r2c3]

@@maxwellsimoes238 phic here and phic there locos smilar...

[@abelincoln8885]

All Systems are Functions ... with set purpose, form, properties, processes, properties and DESIGN which are INFORMATION that every system possesses to exist & to function. Only an intelligence makes, operates, maintains, improves, fine tunes and DESIGNS ... Functions ... because Information is an abstract construct from the Mind of an Intelligence. The Universe & Life ... are Functions .... composed entirely of Functions ... and DESIGNED for a specific purpose & abilities. And the Universe is an ISOLATED Thermodynamic System(function). All thermodynamic Systems ... originated from an Unnatural SURROUNDING System ... which must provide the space, time, laws of NATURE, matter, energy and Intelligence to exist and to function. It is marvelous ... that every function from the quantum to the cosmic level ... was DESIGNED by an Intelligence with abilities & purpose.

[@r2c3]

@@abelincoln8885 that's the question Abe, where is the intelligence coming from... is it emergent or a prerequisite to existence 🤔

[@TheTroofSayer]

3:30 - "Is it possible in principle to be able to disaggregate them in terms of their parts, and to be able to predict that they would be there." Robert's conjecture ties in with my own, of 3 days ago (Ned Block - What's the Essence of Consciousness?). I described an illusion as the association between two concepts to yield a third, novel concept (the illusion), with a new meaning that cannot be "triangulated back" to the original two concepts. If matter is somehow mind-related, then maybe Robert is onto something - the association of one oxygen atom with two hydrogen atoms yields an indeterminable, but somehow meaningful, third kind of entity, the water molecule. I think Fritjof Capra explores such ideas in the Tao of Physics.

[@abelincoln8885]

The causal agent of any so called emergence ... is design by an intelligence. All systems ... are FUNCTIONS ... with set purpose, form, processes, PROPERTIES & design ... which are INFORMATION that every function possesses to exist & to function. The Universe & Life ... are Functions composed entirely of Functions ... with each function having set purpose, form, processes, PROPERTIES & desin. Once you know ... all the INFORMATION ... about a Function you can then make predictions of what is & isn't possible with that function. Oxygen & Hydrogen and Water ... are functions composed entirely of functions ... with INFORMATION ... of what is & isn't possible with each Function. Oxygen & Hydrogen .... were designed .... to form under specific conditions .... Water which was DESIGNED to originate from oxygen & hydrogen. Quantum particles, fields & forces are functions .... designed ... to interact & combine with other functions .... to form a DESIGNED complex function ... and so on and so forth ... all the way up to Cosmic level of DESIGNED functions. Everything is a Function ... DESIGNED ... for a specific purpose by an intelligence.

[@carlodebattaglia6517]

Are we really sure that the dichotomy, the "hierarchy" between fundamental things and non-fundamental things is a correct assumption?

[@longcastle4863]

Excellent question imo

[@jeremymr]

At the subatomic level, physics behaves super weird and spooky. We couldn't exist at that level. These subatomic particles give rise to atoms that gave rise to spinning orbs of elements spinning through space that gave rise to our cells out of which emerge our bodies that enable us to perceive a universe made up mostly of empty space that to us in our everyday lives appears orderly and stable, with time seeming real and baked into everything. The way we experience the universe as something more than the smallest chaotic particles emerged with our consciousness We still don't even know what consciousness is. Maybe consciousness can't exist at much lower levels of reality or much larger ones. Maybe it permeates everything to some extent. Maybe our universe is like an atom in something greater which gives rise to something even weirder and more incomprehensible than consciousness and just as alien and hidden to us as we are to subatomic particles! I love thinking about this stuff. We can never really know The Truth, only get closer to it. Which is a sort of emergent property of many minds all over the world coming together and doing science and philosophy.

[@arthurwieczorek4894]

No, because emergence is a cognitive-epistemic concept. It presupposes something from which an emergence emerges from. It is derivative or secondary. Also, let's not conflate fundamental with important, such that my saying emergence is secondary is construed as meaning not important.

[@donespiritu1345]

What Robert didn't allow to be discussed is that if Tom could give him just ONE example of a circumstance where emergent properties could not be predicted from the properties of the components then that FALSIFIES Roberts claim that ALL emergent properties could predicted as Robert suggested. This was pure philosophical trickery and bad faith on Robert's part.

[@longcastle4863]

It seems to me life emerged out of the deterministic system of quantum particles and that the property of autonomy emerged with it -- meaning living creatures are no longer completely bound or determined by the deterministic system they emerged out of -- with greater autonomy and free will being evident, generally, the further one moves up along the phylogenetic tree.

[@waldwassermann]

Close but no cigar.

[@bryanreed742]

In what way is free will evident?

[@longcastle4863]

@@bryanreed742 In the observed and self reported experience of human beings. I know that's not full proof, but I think we should at least acknowledge the fact, give it some credence and do the research before dismissing it and just saying everything is determined -- end of story. I see our face value grasp of both free will and cause and effect in a similar way as our perceptions of space and time. Philosophers and scientists have done a pretty good job of explaining how space and time are the way our brains perceive and organize reality into a useful format -- but that it is unlikely to be a hundred percent mirror of what is reality is really like out there. So while I see causation and free will similarly as likely only very useful concepts, I do think there is something out there in reality of a similar nature that these two concepts correlate to. Just as our perceptions of space and time likely correlate with whatever's out there as well -- as they've also been obviously been working pretty well for us.

[@nuggyfresh6430]

I found this almost impossible to listen to at times, the stammering was just painful.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

2:00 this is when you roll your eyes. That's much of a belief like a sky daddy -- I mention this merey because materialists make fun of the 'religious', however they never have the courage to call out their own kin. 2:10 please prove your claim of complexity here. The more subtle something is, the more pure, more powerful and simple it is. This is baloney. This isn't about Truth is it?

[@pinchopaxtonsgreatestminds9591]

1 + -1 = 0 means that everything is made from hole/fille physics upwards from zero.

[@omar2886]

Emergence is a "emergent" property of complex systems and not a fundamental principle itself as we concluded ad the last symposium organized by the Royal Emergence Institute in collaboration with the IFT

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Lack phich reality. Rambling gibberish

[@abelincoln8885]

All Systems ... are Functions ... with set purpose, form, processes, PROPERTIES & design ... which are INFORMATION that every system possesses to exist & to function. Only an intelligence ... makes, maintains, improves, operates, tine tunes and DESIGNS ... Functions ... because INFORMATION is an abstract construct from the Mind of an Intelligence. Everything in the Universe ... is a Function .... with a designed purpose & abilities. Water is a designed Function ...that is composed of and derived from ... hydrogen & oxygen which are designed Functions with set purpose form, processes, properties. Quantum particles, fields & forces ... are Functions ... DESIGNED for a purpose & abilities ... to form more complex "designed" Functions like a proton, electron, neutron .. and so on ... and so forth ... and the way up to the Universe which is an Isolated Thermodynamic System (Function). Universal Functions ... is the Hypothesis ... for Sir Issac Newton's Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago .. and any Machine Analogy used to explain "Intelligent Design." Anything that is a FUNCTION ... can only be made by an Intelligence ... and since everything in the Universe is clearly a Function, Mankind will always believe in a god ( supernatural intelligence).

[@omar2886]

@@abelincoln8885 aaaamen Mr president

[@TheUltimateSeeds]

The most compelling case for *"strong"* emergence lies in the question of how mind and consciousness could have emerged from matter. I mean, how can a unique arrangement of inert electrons (in the form of a brain, for example) give rise to something of which none of the constituent properties of electrons can account for? However, such emergence is indeed conceivable if we allow for the possibility that electrons (physical matter) are actually alive (imbued with the essence of life) to begin with.

[@abelincoln8885]

All systems are Functions ... with set purpose, form, processes, properties & DESIGN ... which are INFORMATION that every system possesses to exist & function. Only an intelligence makes Functions ... with information. Only an intelligence extracts Information ... from a Function. Everything from the quantum to the cosmic level ... is a Function ... designed for a purpose. There is no evidence that nature & natural processes can make & operate the simplest function 13.7 or 4 billion years ago ...or ... today .... because all Functions possesses INFORMATION to exist & to function. Information is an abstract construct ... from the MIND of an intelligence.

[@themanofshadows]

True.

[@caricue]

Emergence is just a code word for "reductionism only works in one direction, but we don't know why." The real reason that reductionism only works when reducing is because it is not an organizing principle of nature, rather it is a very useful mental construct that helps us understand nature and develop technology. The whole has properties that the parts do not. How could that be controversial?

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Ridiculus rambling gibberish

[@caricue]

@@maxwellsimoes238 Wow, you must really be committed to reductionism to be that offended. Reductionism is very useful as a mental construct, it just ain't real.

[@waerlogauk]

So you are saying that reduction and emergence are both abstract concepts and are the mirror of each other. Then you say that abstract properties are not real which gets a massive argument started between the philosophers I think it's best to just shut the door on that one and leave the philosophers to it.

[@abelincoln8885]

Wrong. We do know have have known for thousands of years. Man is an intelligence ... with an intellect ... to always deduce from OBSERVATION ... that anything that has clear purpose, function & design .... can only be made by an entity like Man( INTELLIGENCE). We have always known .... that anything that is a FUNCTION .... can only be made by an intelligence( like Man). All Systems ... are functions ... with set purpose, form, processes, PROPERTIES & design ... which are INFORMATION that every system possesses to exist & to function. Only an INTELLIGENCE ... makes, maintains, improves, operates, fine tunes, & DESIGNS Functions for a purpose & abilities .... because INFORMATION is an abstract construct from the MIND of an intelligence. Quantum particles, fields & forces ... are designed Functions ... with purpose & abilities to interact & combine to form a more complex DESIGNED Function like a proton, neutron, electron or photon ... with purpose & abilities to interact & combine to form a more complex DESIGNED function like an atom or element .... and so on ... and so forth ... all the way forming the more complex & designed UNIVERSE which is a Function with purpose & abilities ( Laws of Nature). We have always known ... that the Universe was made by a supernatural intelligence ... because Man did not make every Function including himself. The Universe is an ISOLATED Thermodynamic System(function) with increasing entropy. All thermodynamic Systems ... originate from the SURROUNDING System which must provide the space, time, Laws of Nature, energy, matter and INTELLIGENCE ... to exist & to function. The Surrounding System ... of the Universe with time & NATURAL laws ... must be UNNATURAL, timeless, infinite, with an UNNATURAL intelligence ... otherwise this System would be a thermodynamic system ... that originates from the surrounding System. All paths lead to an UNNATURAL intelligence ... making ... a NATURAL intelligence. Where the hell are the origin theories of the Universe ... based on the Laws of Thermodynamics? It is a fact & truth that all thermodynamic Systems ... originate from the surrounding System which must provide the space, time, laws, matter & energy. There are not theories of the Universe originating from a surrounding Unnatural System ... because Atheists know this is proof of "Intelligent Design" and a creation by some God. Again. We have always known because we have a Intellect ... that anything that is clearly a function with design ... can only be made by a intelligence like Man. This is why most Human Beings will always believe in "the gods."

[@caricue]

@@waerlogauk That's good advice, but you missed one little detail. I did say that reductionism is an abstract concept, but I didn't give emergence that much respect. Emergence is a slight-of-hand to protect an unhealthy belief in reductionism as the most important organizing principle in nature. Saying the magic words, "I don't know" is my preferred approach when I find that my ideas are wrong.

[@stepanstulov9871]

Interrupting the guest way too much in this one

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Question is guys shows his emergence NEVER figure out phich reality . He emergente are only abstraction of reality keep out fundamental law of phisch. In other words guys abstract reality are only ridiculus baseless evidence.

[@nodnarbnaelc6819]

Why did he invite this guy on his show to interrupt and talk over him for ten minutes?

[@mohdnorzaihar2632]

everything is connected (i guess !!? peace be upon us all

[@maxwellsimoes238]

What are you really saying? Try again

[@abelincoln8885]

Unless you are an infidel, right?

[@ififif31]

Ridiculous question. Emergence follows from something else more fundamental and therefore can't be fundamental by definition.

[@gert8439]

Yeah. I think he's suggesting emergent/reducible configurations of matter can have irreducible CAUSAL properties? But I might have misunderstood,

[@ronhudson3730]

Next time me, try really hard to make your point without the disparaging tone?

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Show up though logic sentence. Lack evidence phich . Try again

[@ZXReaperZX]

You need to go back up one level. It would have made more sense to say inevitable rather than fundamental, but that's just semantics. If you actually watch the video, it's self-evident that there is a real conversation to be had, so how is it a stupid question?

[@abelincoln8885]

The answer was No. The evidence shows there are CAUSAL emergent agents like an INTELLIGENCE. Universal Functions ... is the hypothesis for Sir Issac Newton's Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago ... and any Machine Analogy used to explain "INTELLIGENCE design." Newton was saying 300 years ago .. that everything is a Function with purpose & design ...and the Universe & Life ... are Functions composed entirely of Functions ....and that only an Intelligence makes Functions with purpose & design. All Systems ... are Functions ... with purpose, form, processes, PROPERTIES and an overall DESIGN. Water is a Function composed of Functions ... that include Oxygen & Hydrogen which are Functions composed of functions. An Atom is a Function composed of Functions that include neutrons, protons & elections ... which are functions composed of Functions. Quantum particles, fields & forces ... are functions ... are are believed to be the the fundamental building blocks of the Universe. But they all have a DESIGNED purpose & abilities to interact with other functions or combine to form a new complex DESIGNED Function. Again. The Answer to any emergence ... is intelligent design ( causal emergent agent).

[@HWJJSCHUMACHER]

"YOU HAVE NO IDEA" ::: AN IT DID NOT GET BETTER IF YOU MAKE HUNDRETS OF VIDEOS PER DAY !!! (SO STOP THIS)

[@guitarpick335]

Just knowing that water (H2O) “emerges” from two Hydrogen and one Oxygen atom should be enough to teach any child that the universe was “created” to support life. It’s that simple really.

[@tonyatkinson2210]

Why does the existence of water point to the universe being created to support life . Bug eyed alien : “ the fact that ammonia exists points to the fact that the universe was created to support life .“

[@guitarpick335]

@@tonyatkinson2210 That's a good one. But, the “alien” child should have the same epiphany with nitrogen and hydrogen (NH3) instead, as their “life blood” chemical. I was of course referring to carbon-based life in my example, but I like your open mind to the diversity of life that might be out there.

[@yusufmoalim9506]

Robert I have been watching Your episodes for a while. and I think you are trying to prove or disprove God through scientific experiments. You cannot prove the existence of God by doing so because the natural laws do no implement toward God. However, the symmetric principle works well when it comes to the existence of God.