Philosophy Now Forum

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:40 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

Chlorine. Any "Chloride," is a salt.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:52 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:40 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

Chlorine. Any "Chloride," is a salt.

Chlorine is another gas unrelated to this discussion. Chloride is not salt.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:58 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:52 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:40 pm
Chlorine. Any "Chloride," is a salt.

Chlorine is another gas unrelated to this discussion. Chloride is not salt.

I was only trying to help, but since you insist on displaying your ignorance to the whole world:

Chlorine is one of the halides. Others are flourine, bromine, iodine, and astatide.

Chlorine and flourine are gases, bromine is a liquid, and idodine is a solid. The symbols for these elements are: Cl (chlorine) F (flourine), Br (bromine), and I (iodine).

All halides form salts with some other elements like: sodium chloride (NaCl), potassium chloride (KCl), potassium iodide (KI), copper chloride (CuCl), silver chloride (AgCl), hydrogen chloride (HCl). and hydrogen bromide (HBr).

There is no such element as, "chloride." Chloride means a compound of which one element is chlorine. Sodium chloride, potassium chloride , potassium iodide, copper chloride, and silver chloride are all salts.

I think you need a beginner course in chemistry.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:44 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

Despite the above gripes, I think I understand what you are getting at.

I have been thinking about emergence in a human centred way lately. Emergence as I see it, is simply our mind picking out reliable characteristics within consciousness. As such, those characteristics are human centred, reliably and predictably change, and there is always a lower level composition, and higher level characteristic which “emerges”.

The lower level is always considered more “fundamental” or in another word, real, than the higher level. The reality is, all “levels” are occurring in a mind, looking for consistencies in a changing experiential field.

We imagine the lower levels like building blocks which the higher levels are “made of”. That is of course simplified, as building blocks have no articulations, where as when lower level parts combine, they do so in ways which are both constrained, and free. That is, they have articulations, and as such, those articulations are constrained by the other parts being combined. Because of this, the combined whole possesses some kind of structure and possibly a changing nature. It might even be self sustaining, like a standing wave.

When emergent properties become self sustaining, when there is a kind of feedback going on, we see this as special. This is the beginning of autonomy. We see this in living organisms, even the most basic, which can sustain themselves. DNA is also self replicating, and as such, a special kind of structure.

So emergence alone is not special. We also like a kind of complexity which leads to a self sustaining structure. We sometimes call that life, when it gains the ability to direct itself, to keep itself from perishing and maintain self propagation and self maintenance.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:37 am

Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:44 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:08 pm They say that emergence of consciousness is like the emergence of salt from Chloride and Sodium. They however forget to answer how salt emerges from Chloride and Sodium. In another word, how salt could possibly have a property that parts don't have. So the problem of emergence is not understood well. The second problem is due to the fact that Chloride and Sodium are not irreducible parts therefore they should not consider them in the problem of emergence.

Despite the above gripes, I think I understand what you are getting at.

I have been thinking about emergence in a human centred way lately. Emergence as I see it, is simply our mind picking out reliable characteristics within consciousness. As such, those characteristics are human centred, reliably and predictably change, and there is always a lower level composition, and higher level characteristic which “emerges”.

The lower level is always considered more “fundamental” or in another word, real, than the higher level. The reality is, all “levels” are occurring in a mind, looking for consistencies in a changing experiential field.

We imagine the lower levels like building blocks which the higher levels are “made of”. That is of course simplified, as building blocks have no articulations, where as when lower level parts combine, they do so in ways which are both constrained, and free. That is, they have articulations, and as such, those articulations are constrained by the other parts being combined. Because of this, the combined whole possesses some kind of structure and possibly a changing nature. It might even be self sustaining, like a standing wave.

When emergent properties become self sustaining, when there is a kind of feedback going on, we see this as special. This is the beginning of autonomy. We see this in living organisms, even the most basic, which can sustain themselves. DNA is also self replicating, and as such, a special kind of structure.

So emergence alone is not special. We also like a kind of complexity which leads to a self sustaining structure. We sometimes call that life, when it gains the ability to direct itself, to keep itself from perishing and maintain self propagation and self maintenance.

No. The whole could have properties that are functions of properties of parts. The structure of the whole for example can be explained in terms of the position of parts.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:32 am

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:37 am

Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:44 pm
Despite the above gripes, I think I understand what you are getting at.

I have been thinking about emergence in a human centred way lately. Emergence as I see it, is simply our mind picking out reliable characteristics within consciousness. As such, those characteristics are human centred, reliably and predictably change, and there is always a lower level composition, and higher level characteristic which “emerges”.

The lower level is always considered more “fundamental” or in another word, real, than the higher level. The reality is, all “levels” are occurring in a mind, looking for consistencies in a changing experiential field.

We imagine the lower levels like building blocks which the higher levels are “made of”. That is of course simplified, as building blocks have no articulations, where as when lower level parts combine, they do so in ways which are both constrained, and free. That is, they have articulations, and as such, those articulations are constrained by the other parts being combined. Because of this, the combined whole possesses some kind of structure and possibly a changing nature. It might even be self sustaining, like a standing wave.

When emergent properties become self sustaining, when there is a kind of feedback going on, we see this as special. This is the beginning of autonomy. We see this in living organisms, even the most basic, which can sustain themselves. DNA is also self replicating, and as such, a special kind of structure.

So emergence alone is not special. We also like a kind of complexity which leads to a self sustaining structure. We sometimes call that life, when it gains the ability to direct itself, to keep itself from perishing and maintain self propagation and self maintenance.

No. The whole could have properties that are functions of properties of parts. The structure of the whole for example can be explained in terms of the position of parts.

Okay.

The biggest problem i see with using the concept of emergence to describe consciousness is, can we deconstruct consciousness into its component parts, if there are any? What are the properties of consciousness? When we attempt to describe consciousness in terms of parts, it seems a little to slippery to break down.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:30 am

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:58 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:52 pm
Chlorine is another gas unrelated to this discussion. Chloride is not salt.

I was only trying to help, but since you insist on displaying your ignorance to the whole world:

Chlorine is one of the halides. Others are flourine, bromine, iodine, and astatide.

Chlorine and flourine are gases, bromine is a liquid, and idodine is a solid. The symbols for these elements are: Cl (chlorine) F (flourine), Br (bromine), and I (iodine).

All halides form salts with some other elements like: sodium chloride (NaCl), potassium chloride (KCl), potassium iodide (KI), copper chloride (CuCl), silver chloride (AgCl), hydrogen chloride (HCl). and hydrogen bromide (HBr).

There is no such element as, "chloride." Chloride means a compound of which one element is chlorine. Sodium chloride, potassium chloride , potassium iodide, copper chloride, and silver chloride are all salts.

I think you need a beginner course in chemistry.

I see. Thanks for the correction. I had courses in chemistry but I forget all these details. By the way, what is your opinion about the subject of this thread?

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:32 am

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:37 am

Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:44 pm
Despite the above gripes, I think I understand what you are getting at.

I have been thinking about emergence in a human centred way lately. Emergence as I see it, is simply our mind picking out reliable characteristics within consciousness. As such, those characteristics are human centred, reliably and predictably change, and there is always a lower level composition, and higher level characteristic which “emerges”.

The lower level is always considered more “fundamental” or in another word, real, than the higher level. The reality is, all “levels” are occurring in a mind, looking for consistencies in a changing experiential field.

We imagine the lower levels like building blocks which the higher levels are “made of”. That is of course simplified, as building blocks have no articulations, where as when lower level parts combine, they do so in ways which are both constrained, and free. That is, they have articulations, and as such, those articulations are constrained by the other parts being combined. Because of this, the combined whole possesses some kind of structure and possibly a changing nature. It might even be self sustaining, like a standing wave.

When emergent properties become self sustaining, when there is a kind of feedback going on, we see this as special. This is the beginning of autonomy. We see this in living organisms, even the most basic, which can sustain themselves. DNA is also self replicating, and as such, a special kind of structure.

So emergence alone is not special. We also like a kind of complexity which leads to a self sustaining structure. We sometimes call that life, when it gains the ability to direct itself, to keep itself from perishing and maintain self propagation and self maintenance.

No. The whole could have properties that are functions of properties of parts. The structure of the whole for example can be explained in terms of the position of parts.

Okay.

The biggest problem i see with using the concept of emergence to describe consciousness is, can we deconstruct consciousness into its component parts, if there are any?

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 11:32 am What are the properties of consciousness?

Dimebag wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:44 pm When we attempt to describe consciousness in terms of parts, it seems a little to slippery to break down.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:37 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:30 am

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 12:58 am
I was only trying to help, but since you insist on displaying your ignorance to the whole world:

Chlorine is one of the halides. Others are flourine, bromine, iodine, and astatide.

Chlorine and flourine are gases, bromine is a liquid, and idodine is a solid. The symbols for these elements are: Cl (chlorine) F (flourine), Br (bromine), and I (iodine).

All halides form salts with some other elements like: sodium chloride (NaCl), potassium chloride (KCl), potassium iodide (KI), copper chloride (CuCl), silver chloride (AgCl), hydrogen chloride (HCl). and hydrogen bromide (HBr).

There is no such element as, "chloride." Chloride means a compound of which one element is chlorine. Sodium chloride, potassium chloride , potassium iodide, copper chloride, and silver chloride are all salts.

I think you need a beginner course in chemistry.

I see. Thanks for the correction. I had courses in chemistry but I forget all these details. By the way, what is your opinion about the subject of this thread?

Not much. The philosophical "idea" of emergence is a useless concept invented to cover up the fact that the natural properties of life and consciousness cannot be explained in terms of physical properties alone.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 3:02 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:37 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:30 am
I see. Thanks for the correction. I had courses in chemistry but I forget all these details. By the way, what is your opinion about the subject of this thread?

Not much. The philosophical "idea" of emergence is a useless concept invented to cover up the fact that the natural properties of life and consciousness cannot be explained in terms of physical properties alone.

So you think that consciousness can be explained in terms of the physical properties of matter? Do you think that parts of matter are conscious? I mean parts of matter have to be conscious otherwise where you can get consciousness from?

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 3:19 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 3:02 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 2:37 pm
Not much. The philosophical "idea" of emergence is a useless concept invented to cover up the fact that the natural properties of life and consciousness cannot be explained in terms of physical properties alone.

So you think that consciousness can be explained in terms of the physical properties of matter? Do you think that parts of matter are conscious? I mean parts of matter have to be conscious otherwise where you can get consciousness from?

Take a deep breath and read what I wrote again. I said life and consciousness, "cannot be explained in terms of physical properties."

See my response to you here.

You don't, "get," consciousness from anywhere, just as you don't get any physical properties from something else. Life and consciousness are natural attributes, just like all the physical attributes, but only some physical entities have those attributes. Those that have the life attribute in addition to the other natural physical attributes are organisms. Those organisms that have the consciousness attribute in addition to life and the physical attributes are the, "higher animals." There is nothing mystical or mysterious about it.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Sep 11, 2021 3:31 pm What makes an organism an organism if it is not the very specific arrangement of elementary particles? Change the arrangement and the organism is not alive anymore.