Advertisement

Topoi

pp 1–14 | Cite as

Emergent Powers

  • Michele Paolini Paoletti
Article
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

I shall introduce at the beginning of the paper a characterization of strong ontological emergence. According to it, roughly, something strongly emerges from some other thing(s) iff the former depends in some respect on the latter and it some independent of it in some other respect. Afterwards, I shall present my own formulation of strong emergence, which is based on the distinction between the mere possession and the activation of a causal power. Causal powers are the entities to be primarily taken as emergent. Emergent causal powers depend for their possession on their emergence bases, but they are also independent of the latter (and on further relevantly similar entities) for their activation. This claim will be defended within some more general assumptions about the metaphysics of powers. Finally, I shall compare the power-based formulation of emergence with other formulations. I shall try to demonstrate that the power-based formulation is (all other things being equal) metaphysically less controversial than the other formulations. For the power-based formulation (unlike the other formulations) does not need to defend the additional thesis that the emergents can depend in some relevant respect on their bases and be independent of the latter in some other relevant respect. Indeed, the distinction between the mere possession and the activation of a power (and the possibility of having the former without the latter) is inscribed in the nature of powers themselves.

Keywords

Powers Emergence Causation 

Notes

Funding

Funding was provided by Durham Emergence Project (Grant No. ID0EONAE321).

References

  1. Barnes E (2012) Emergence and fundamentality. Mind 121(484):873–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baysan U, Wilson J (2018) Must strong emergence collapse? Philosophica 91:49–104Google Scholar
  3. Bedau MA (1997) Weak emergence. Noûs 31:375–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bird A (2007) Nature’s metaphysics. Laws and properties. Clarendon, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chalmers DJ (2006) Strong and weak emergence. In: Clayton P, Davies P (eds) The re-emergence of emergence. The emergentist hypothesis from science to religion. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 244–254Google Scholar
  6. Choi S (2008) Dispositional properties and counterfactual conditionals. Mind 117(468):795–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choi S, Fara M (2012) Dispositions. In: Zalta EN (ed) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy OnlineGoogle Scholar
  8. Heil J (2003) From an ontological point of view. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Humphreys P (1997) How properties emerge. Philos Sci 64(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Humphreys P (2016) Emergence. In: Humphreys P (ed) The Oxford handbook of philosophy of science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 759–778Google Scholar
  11. Kim J (1999) Making sense of emergence. Philos Stud 95(1–2):3–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lewis DK (1997) Finkish dispositions. Philos Q 47(187):143–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lowe EJ (2010) On the individuation of powers. In: Marmodoro A (ed) The metaphysics of powers. Their grounding and their manifestation. Routledge, New York, pp 9–26Google Scholar
  14. Marmodoro A (2017) Aristotelian powers at work: reciprocity without symmetry in causation. In: Jacobs JD (ed) Causal powers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 57–76Google Scholar
  15. Martin CB (2008) The mind in nature. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. McKitrick J (2003) A case for extrinsic dispositions. Australas J Philos 81(2):155–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McKitrick J (2010) Manifestations as effects. In: Marmodoro A (ed) The metaphysics of powers. Their grounding and their manifestation. Routledge, New York, pp 73–83Google Scholar
  18. Molnar G (2003) Powers. A study in metaphysics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Mumford SD, Anjum RL (2011) Getting causes from powers. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Connor T, Wong HY (2006) The metaphysics of emergence. Noûs 39(4):658–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Paolini Paoletti M (2016a) Who’s afraid of non-existent manifestations?. In: Calemi FF (ed) Metaphysics and scientific realism: essays in honour of david malet armstrong. De Gruyter, Berlin, pp 193–206Google Scholar
  22. Paolini Paoletti M (2016b) How powers emerge from relations. Axiomathes 26(2):187–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paolini Paoletti M (2016c) How I (freely) raised my arm. Downward, structural, substance causation. Mind Matter 14(2):203–228Google Scholar
  24. Paolini Paoletti M (2017) The quest for emergence. Philosophia, MunichGoogle Scholar
  25. Paolini Paoletti M (2018) Formulating emergence. Ratio 31(S1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shoemaker S (2007) Physical realization. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van Cleve J (1990) Mind-dust or magic? Panpsychism versus emergence. Philos Perspect 4:215–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. van Gulick R (2001) Reduction, emergence and other recent options on the mind/body problem. A philosophic overview. J Conscious Stud 8(9–10):1–34Google Scholar
  29. Vetter B (2013) Multi-track dispositions. Philos Q 63(251):330–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vetter B (2015) Potentiality. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Williams NE (2011) Putting powers on multi-track. Philosophia 39(3):581–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilson JM (2015) Metaphysical emergence: weak and strong. In: Bigaj T, Wüthrich C (eds) Metaphysics in contemporary physics. Brill, Boston, pp 345–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human StudiesUniversità degli Studi di Macerata (Italy)MacerataItaly

Personalised recommendations