Maybe we should read Mill, the chapter on the composition of causes is only 5 pages:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/27942/27942-h/27942-h.html#toc53 -- rec -- On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Nicholas Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: > The seminar met this afternoon, now eight in number. > > I would like to think that I were the sort of person who could summarize > what we accomplished, but alas, I am not, so let me share what was > accomplished for me. I hope others in the group will correct me, > particularly any who are not in Santa FE but who have joined us in our > reading from afar. > > McLaughlin asserts that B.E. was a possible scientific position in the 19 > century but came to an end because quantum mechanics, quantum chemistry, > etc., demonstrated that there were no configurational forces. When we > explain the properties of H20 on the basis of the properties of the > molecules, electrons etc. that make it up we need invoke no new FORCES that > arise from the configuration of the particles. Elementary Newtonian forces > are all we need. But I ended up wondering if all of this was fair to the > Emergentists. After all, Mill spoke not of the composition of forces but of > the composition of causes. Presumably all forces are in some sense causes, > but nobody has yet asserted that all causes are forces. Returning to my > example of the triangle made of hinges and one-by-two's, to explain the > strength of the triangle (by comparison with the relative weakness of the > parallelogram), we need not appeal to any special forces,&n bsp; no > "triangular stubbornness" or "elan triangulaire". On the other hand, if you > would make a structure with hinges and one-by-twos that is strong, you > better get at least one triangle into it. In that sense, the triangular > configuration of the wood pieces is a necessary condition of the structural > rigidity (and perhaps a sufficient one as well?) and hence a CAUSE of the > rigidity., in any sense that I understand cause. In short, McLaughlin does > not deny the existence of configurational CAUSES and such causes are all > that is needed for a robust emergentism. > > Again, I long for comments from others who have read this article. > > Nick > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology, > Clark University (nthomp...@clarku.edu) > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
