7.2 Emergent Phenomena: Difference between revisions
More actions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
After discussing more concrete forms of causation, we now introduce a type of causation whose outcome is not measured on an individual level, nor on a statistical level (e.g. averaging over individuals). In emergent phenomena, the outcome cannot be found by measuring any number of individuals, but is purely a property of the entire system. We tie this concept of causation to society by recognizing that many sociological phenomena may be of this type. | After discussing more concrete forms of causation, we now introduce a type of causation whose outcome is not measured on an individual level, nor on a statistical level (e.g. averaging over individuals). In emergent phenomena, the outcome cannot be found by measuring any number of individuals, but is purely a property of the entire system. We tie this concept of causation to society by recognizing that many sociological phenomena may be of this type. | ||
<!-- Expandable section relating this lesson to | <!-- Expandable section relating this lesson to other lessons. --> | ||
{{Expand|Relation to Earlier Lessons | {{Expand|Relation to Other Lessons| | ||
'''Earlier Lessons''' | |||
{{ContextLesson|1.2 Shared Reality and Modeling}} | {{ContextLesson|1.2 Shared Reality and Modeling}} | ||
{{ContextRelation|The idea of emergent phenomena calls back to the "raft vs. pyramid" descriptions of science. From a reductionist viewpoint, all our understanding breaks down when we end up being wrong on a smaller scale. However, scientists may work on problems at different scales of explanation and still have meaningful results. Harkening back to the raft viewpoint, the areas where these explanations overlap should be consistent. If the explanation at any scale turns out to be wrong, it does not automatically invalidate the other scales.}} | {{ContextRelation|The idea of emergent phenomena calls back to the "raft vs. pyramid" descriptions of science. From a reductionist viewpoint, all our understanding breaks down when we end up being wrong on a smaller scale. However, scientists may work on problems at different scales of explanation and still have meaningful results. Harkening back to the raft viewpoint, the areas where these explanations overlap should be consistent. If the explanation at any scale turns out to be wrong, it does not automatically invalidate the other scales.}} | ||
| Line 20: | Line 21: | ||
{{ContextRelation|Singular causation is individual intervention leading to an individual result. General causation is the same intervention on many individuals leading to results on these individuals that can be seen only statistically. Neither cover the case where the result is purely a property of the whole system, rather than any number of individuals.}} | {{ContextRelation|Singular causation is individual intervention leading to an individual result. General causation is the same intervention on many individuals leading to results on these individuals that can be seen only statistically. Neither cover the case where the result is purely a property of the whole system, rather than any number of individuals.}} | ||
{{ContextRelation|When something goes wrong in society, we may blame a particular leader or policy. This is can be helpful in determining how to intervene for future prevention. However, one shouldn't overlook the possibility that the cause is emergent, and therefore the blame may be misplaced.}} | {{ContextRelation|When something goes wrong in society, we may blame a particular leader or policy. This is can be helpful in determining how to intervene for future prevention. However, one shouldn't overlook the possibility that the cause is emergent, and therefore the blame may be misplaced.}} | ||
}} | {{Line}} | ||
'''Later Lessons''' | |||
{{ContextLesson|8.1 Orders of Understanding}} | {{ContextLesson|8.1 Orders of Understanding}} | ||
{{ContextRelation|When deciding what simple objects and rules to include in a model of an emergent phenomenon, it is helpful to separate the first-order causes from the higher-order ones. For example, in modelling the persistent traffic jams on highways as an emergent phenomenon, we do not include honking.}} | {{ContextRelation|When deciding what simple objects and rules to include in a model of an emergent phenomenon, it is helpful to separate the first-order causes from the higher-order ones. For example, in modelling the persistent traffic jams on highways as an emergent phenomenon, we do not include honking.}} | ||
Revision as of 16:26, 30 August 2023

From ants to galaxies, studies of complex physical systems have revealed that surprising phenomena can often arise on the whole when a large number of components interact according to very simple rules. In the context of causation, we encourage students to consider emergence, rather than purposeful orchestration, as a possible causal explanation of certain societal phenomena, such as sudden market crashes and the virality of misinformation on social media.
The Lesson in Context
After discussing more concrete forms of causation, we now introduce a type of causation whose outcome is not measured on an individual level, nor on a statistical level (e.g. averaging over individuals). In emergent phenomena, the outcome cannot be found by measuring any number of individuals, but is purely a property of the entire system. We tie this concept of causation to society by recognizing that many sociological phenomena may be of this type.
Takeaways
After this lesson, students should
- Understand that simple things governed by simple rules can, in aggregate, result in surprisingly complex behaviors, which can be studied in and of themselves.
- Be aware of when complex behaviors in some physical and sociological systems may be the consequence of relatively simple rules on the constituents, and therefore not fully explicable by either reductionism or deliberate agents.
- Be aware of humans' tendency to over-perceive agency in external phenomena in general (e.g. anthropomorphizing), making us prone to mistaking emergent phenomena as intentional.
- Understand that there is value at larger and intermediate scales of explanation despite the fact that larger scales may be reducible to smaller ones.
Scale of Explanation
Emergent Phenomenon
Phase Transition
Scientific Reductionism
Social media
- When people are highly connected to each other in social networks with simple rules of interaction (likes, friending, retweeting, etc.), unintended emergent phenomena, such as widespread misinformation, are likely to arise.
Water
- Water is wet, but water molecules are not. The property of "wetness" must emerge from the relatively simple rules that govern the interactions between water molecules.
Conway's Game of Life
- A classic demonstration of cellular automata, in which simple local rules result in complex patterns arising on a larger scale.
Shelling Model of Segregation
- A model wherein large scale racial segregation can emerge even when individual people have no explicit desire to segregate. When the agents are fine being in the minority as long as at least some fraction of people that live around them are of the same group, even this mild preference can lead to segregation.
Consciousness
- Consciousness as a result of local interactions between neurons.
YouTube is promoting late night talk show hosts over smaller individual creators. It must mean that the YouTube executives are deliberately stifling small content creators.
An arrogant physicist would say that all your thoughts and emotions are nothing more than complex interactions between subatomic particles.
"Let's say chess is the rules of the universe. After two thousand years, we finally figured out how the pawns move. And then I suppose one day we'll have the God equation and that'll tell us how the whole chess board moves and then we'll become grand masters." -Michio Kaku
Additional Content
You must be logged in to see this content.