Emergence is widely used yet deeply misunderstood term

When I began writing a book on emergence around 2004 (Drapal, 2009) and later focused my blog on the same topic, I could not have anticipated that a discovery about the emergence of time from entanglement would arise from quantum mechanics research. Recent theories speculate that time emerges as an involuntary consequence of quantum entanglement. At the time, I had no specific intention to explore entanglement, but as my research evolved, the concept naturally emerged from my posts. Rather than resisting, I let it develop organically.

A similar process occurred with the emergence of God in my writings—it simply happened. However, when I encountered the study Time from Quantum Entanglement: An Experimental Illustration (Moreva et al., 2014), I found a crucial connection between entanglement, time, and the philosophical framework of homonism, which I will explore later.

This study suggests that God, emergence, time, and entanglement are deeply interconnected. While time exists objectively, for individual observers inside the universe, it only emerges through their interactions. Conversely, for hypothetical external observers, time does not emerge—it simply is. This perspective aligns with a deistic interpretation: universality (God) perceives time universally, whereas for humans, time emerges through our interactions. While Moreva et al. did not intend their experiment to support such a philosophical interpretation, it remains a valid perspective within a broader ontological framework.

This view also aligns with Stephen Jay Gould’s concept of Non-Overlapping Magisteria (Gould, 1997), which proposes that scientific and theological inquiries operate in distinct but equally valid domains.

The Emergence of Time and Physics

The emergence of time, as suggested by quantum entanglement, does not contradict Lee Smolin’s work on reintroducing time into physics and philosophy. Smolin strongly refutes the notion that time is an illusion, arguing instead that time is fundamental to physical reality. The idea that time emerges for internal observers but remains universal for external observers is entirely consistent with his conclusions on entropy.

The second law of thermodynamics applies strictly to closed systems, meaning that the arrow of time operates only within these systems. While we acknowledge that closed systems are an approximation rather than a fundamental reality, this illusion remains useful for both physicists and practical applications in daily life.

The Moreva et al. experiment not only advances physics but also presents a significant challenge for philosophy. It pushes toward an integrated scientific framework where physics and philosophy are no longer seen as separate disciplines but as complementary perspectives on the same underlying reality. This reinforces the long-standing philosophical position that physics is a subset of philosophy, evolving through discoveries about nature.

Emergence in Economics and Complexity Science

The concept of emergence is not limited to physics and philosophy—it extends to economics and complexity science. F. A. Hayek’s The Fatal Conceit (Hayek, 1988) is often cited as a critique of socialism, but it is, more fundamentally, an exploration of emergence in economic systems.

Hayek argues that linear logic fails to capture the complexity of human economic behavior. This insight is particularly striking given that the concept of emergence is almost absent from mainstream economic discourse. In The Fatal Conceit, Hayek provides an explanation of emergence that is arguably clearer and more applicable than even Stuart Kauffman’s seminal work The Origins of Order (Kauffman, 1993).

Defining Emergence

Emergence is a natural consequence of a complex system’s internal dynamics.

Despite its importance, emergence remains controversial. One of the most persistent criticisms is the claim that emergence is invoked only when scientists lack a clear causal explanation for a phenomenon. According to this view, emergence is a placeholder for ignorance rather than a genuine scientific concept. Reductionists argue that all phenomena should be explainable through linear, causal logic and that the need for emergence will disappear as measurement techniques improve.

Challenges to Reductionism

The most well-known challenge to reductionism comes from the phenomenon of consciousness. Consciousness arises from neural activity, which involves neurons, electrical impulses, and chemical interactions that can be observed and measured. Yet, consciousness itself emerges from these processes without a direct, one-to-one causal link.

Reductionists insist that consciousness must be reducible to its physical substrate. They believe that everything in existence can be traced back to a singular cause—ultimately, the Big Bang. In this view, the role of science is simply to reconstruct the causal chain leading back to the universe’s origin.

However, several scientific and philosophical domains contradict this view:

•Phenotypes and Genotypes: A phenotype emerges from a genotype, but it is not reducible to it in principle.

•Color Perception: Atoms have no intrinsic color. Color emerges only through interaction with an observer.

•Complexity in Physics: Stuart Kauffman, Robert Ulanowicz, and other physicists have demonstrated that even physical reality cannot be entirely reduced to a set of fundamental laws.

Emergence and the Evolutionary Process

It would be a mistake to assume that emergence is driven by a supernatural force. Emergence is not caused by an external deity or transcendent power—it results from the internal material dynamics of complex systems.

This self-organizing capacity often appears mysterious because there is no apparent linear link between the new and the old. Yet, just as there is no direct causal link between Shakespeare’s Hamlet and all preceding written texts, there is no simple reduction of consciousness to brain activity.

Another remarkable feature of emergence is its bidirectional relationship with evolution.

•Natural selection drives emergence.

•Emergent properties, in turn, reshape evolutionary pathways.

For instance, consciousness emerged through evolution, but once present, it began influencing evolution itself. While its influence remains bounded, it is not a passive byproduct of material conditions. Thus, it is equally valid to say:

•Matter causes thought.

•Thought causes matter.

Emergence as a Universal Principle

Emergence is a fundamental principle not only for life and evolution but for all physical reality. Recognizing this forces us to abandon simplistic, linear models and accept the dual, intertwined nature of reality.

This shift in perspective requires reevaluating Plato, who is often misrepresented in popular science. Instead of being dismissed, Plato should be recognized as an early advocate for the integration of science and philosophy—one who acknowledged the inherent duality of reality.

Global vs. Particular Perspectives on Time

This discussion naturally leads to the relationship between global and local perspectives. Robert Laurence Kuhn (Kuhn, 2015) argues that while time evolves from a particular perspective, it remains static from a global perspective.

This insight not only reconciles the long-standing debate over whether time is fundamental or emergent but also has implications for intersubjectivity—the way individuals construct reality based on subjective experience.

Much like Kant’s concept of ding an sich (the thing-in-itself), time exists as an objective reality, but our perception of it is inherently localized and constrained.

The Risks of Universalism

While a global perspective may seem desirable, human existence is inherently particular. John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice (Rawls, 1971) presents a noble and idealized vision of fairness. However, as Thomas Sowell argues in The Quest for Cosmic Justice (Sowell, 2001), universalism is not only unattainable but often dangerous. It frequently results in elitist hegemony, where a small group dictates universal truths to the masses.

Universalism, whether explicit or disguised, is always totalitarian.

 

References:

Drapal, A. (2009). Kako Stvari Vznikajo: Od Mema Do Provanse: Od Kaosa Do Reda: Iz Ušes in Prek Možganov V Tvoja Usta. Valenovak.

Gould, S. J. (1997). Nonoverlapping Magisteria. http://www.blc.arizona.edu/courses/schaffer/449/Gould%20Nonoverlapping%20Magisteria.htm

Hayek, F. A. (1988). The Fatal Conceit. Audible Studios. https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Fatal-Conceit-Audiobook/B0097DOHOG

Lawrence Kuhn, R. (2015, July 6). The Illusion of Time: What’s Real? Space.Com. https://www.space.com/29859-the-illusion-of-time.html

Moreva, E., Brida, G., Gramegna, M., Giovannetti, V., Maccone, L., & Genovese, M. (2014). Time from quantum entanglement: An experimental illustration. Physical Review A, 89(5), 052122. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.052122

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition (2nd edition). Belknap Press.

Sowell, T. (2001). The Quest for Cosmic Justice. Blackstone Audio.