[lbo-talk] Kenneally, some notes and background

SA s11131978 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 13 14:56:11 PDT 2009


Miles Jackson wrote:


> SA wrote:
>> Miles Jackson wrote:
>>
>>
>> It's possible to formulate a definition of "independent effect" so
>> that genes have no "independent effect" on eye color. But to do that,
>> your definition of "independent effect" has to be such that nothing
>> ever has an independent effect on anything else.
>
> No, I'm not saying that things cannot have an independent effect on
> other things. I'm trying to highlight a category error, as Ryle used
> to say. One element that contributes to the emergent property of an
> entity cannot have an independent effect on that entity.

I think this is a misuse of the concept of an emergent property. Genes are not "one element" that "contributes" to determining the color of a child's eyes at birth. They're the *only* element that determines eye color. Eye color is not an emergent property determined through the interaction of genes and many other underlying factors. It's determined solely by genes. Of course, a particular individual's genotype - like everything else that is not the Uncaused Cause - is itself the result of a chain of historical causation going back to the beginning of the universe. But that does not make it an emergent property, otherwise everything would be an emergent property.

SA



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list