Free will Argument against Divine Providence

[bennyboy]

... You show me that emergent property, mind, which you say arises out of brains.

Emergence is a very complex subject.

Subatomic particles, for example, are not directly observable but they emerge into visible and measurable structures at macroscopic level

Emergence in the brain is not directly observable (mind, as you call it, conscience or yourself if you will) but what mind emerges from, is ... crazy isn't it ?

Anyways, we have a lot (and I mean A LOT) as humans to learn about emergence, especially the strong one, it is very elusive (even mysterious) phenomenon but certainly not a miracle.

I personaly believe that strong emergence is one of the fundamental properties of matter, we already know that weak one is, my hope is that chaos theory will pave the way in sorting this puzzle out sooner or later

I totally agree, and I'm guessing genkaus and everyone else here will agree on this as well. Supervenience and emergence are among the most important philosophical issues of the day.

My current take on it is that it's position-ambiguous. By that, I mean if you see the universe as a whole, and any division of it as just a conceptual imposition, then there's no way to have a system being "more than the sum of its parts," so to speak, since they were related from the start. But if you look at some regions of the universe as unique objects, as we normally do, then you can say, "There was no brain, now there's a brain, and that brain has caused the emergence of a mind," and from this perspective, it looks as though that emergent property is a bonus-- somehow, there is more to the universe than there was when all that carbon, hydrogen and oxygen was stuck in the ground, the water, and the air.

Too sleepy for paradox. Must watch Friends reruns until normality returns. . .