This is not the subarea of consciousness research I am most expert in, and I am not a very good philosopher, but I have long had the suspicion that “emergent” doesn’t really mean anything precise at all, but is just a term used by scientists who want to (possibly sensibly) avoid thinking about metaphysics. I mean, I’m sure you can find philosophers using it, but if I see a philosopher say it, I don’t feel like I immediately know what they mean, whereas I do (at least roughly) with “physicalism” “dualism” “panpsychism” “elminativism”.
but is just a term used by scientists who want to (possibly sensibly) avoid thinking about metaphysics
It’s certainly that, but I don’t think it’s just that. I’ve seen at least one instance (though I can’t remember where) of someone explicitly not-rejecting the possibility of natural laws that switch on, so to speak, above a certain scale.
Yeah, I know it is sometimes used by philosophers with specific precise meanings, it’s just I’ve never been sure that there is a standard precise(ish) meaning.
This is not the subarea of consciousness research I am most expert in, and I am not a very good philosopher, but I have long had the suspicion that “emergent” doesn’t really mean anything precise at all, but is just a term used by scientists who want to (possibly sensibly) avoid thinking about metaphysics. I mean, I’m sure you can find philosophers using it, but if I see a philosopher say it, I don’t feel like I immediately know what they mean, whereas I do (at least roughly) with “physicalism” “dualism” “panpsychism” “elminativism”.
It’s certainly that, but I don’t think it’s just that. I’ve seen at least one instance (though I can’t remember where) of someone explicitly not-rejecting the possibility of natural laws that switch on, so to speak, above a certain scale.
Yeah, I know it is sometimes used by philosophers with specific precise meanings, it’s just I’ve never been sure that there is a standard precise(ish) meaning.