In the mid 1980s this author wrote an article entitled The Demise of Formalism. It was about Mathematics and the work of contributors like Gödel and Turing, who had proved that Hilbert’s conception of the nature of Mathematics was incorrect, and it was neither complete nor coherent, or even entirely consistent, as he had asserted. But that was then!
The content at that time only addressed the discipline of Mathematics and nothing beyond that. After a further 25 years since then many new ideas have been developed, which take the area involved well beyond Mathematics alone, and well into Philosophy in general. The most obvious extensions were, as you might imagine, in the ideas involved in Formal Logic, and, of course, then into all disciplines which use Formal Logic as their “banker technique”. Even further it had become more and more clear that the techniques involved had very limited areas of application, and in particular excluded all disciplines which involved significant Qualitative Change, and most especially in those interludes in development which were covered by the revolutionary Events termed Emergences. To be able to tackle THE most essential areas of Reality just had to involve these crucial Events, for otherwise they would only be addressing entities and relations embedded in totally stable periods. Science would then be limited to the study of what was possible within Stability. Ideas such as the Origin of Life on Earth as well as its subsequent Evolution would be left out of the areas for study, and it soon became clear that the development of Planet Earth itself, not to mention the Cosmos, were also evolving systems and had to have their Emergences too.
Now these Events are remarkable interludes involved concentrated avalanches of Change, and each one, on completion produces its own entirely New Level, containing entirely new entities, properties, relations and indeed processes. To make matters worse, it had also become clear that the methods universally used in the Sciences up to now were totally inadequate to such cataclysms of Change within Emergences. Indeed, the nature of any Emergence could NOT be derived from knowledge of prior conditions, no matter how full they were. Nothing could be predicted from before the crucial Event that would pertain after the Event!
Now though these features seemed to make this an impossible area to study, such Emergences had been identified as such in the past, and the touchstone and template for such Revolutions had to be the First Appearance of Life on Earth. In addition, once recognised and described, these Events seemed to be cropping up everywhere, from interludes within the development of the Cosmos, to the emergence of Human Consciousness in Man.
By October 2007, the research of this author had reached the stage where another, much wider Demise of Formalism was necessary, and this is it! But what is included here was by no means the last word in this area, which by October 2009 had resulted in the publication (in SHAPE on-line Journal) of The Theory of Emergences. This paper can be seen as the immediate precursor to that Theory, and as such, several important differences will be evident between the two.
1.Miller’s Experiment is about the situation prior to the Emergence, which we term The Origin of Life on Earth, and is NOT part of the actual transformation. For that revolutionary Event would necessarily require the demolition of that prior Stability to allow that transforming Event to occur.
2.The Emergence itself was also no easy incremental transformation either, but a true Revolution, which established a wholly New Level of Reality, with its own, never before in existence, system of entities, properties, relations and processes, which together constitute Life.
3.Indeed, it is always impossible to predict the nature of such a New Level from situations within the prior Level. They are NOT a consequence of those at all, but indeed other invisible and previously effectively suppressed factors that only appear – free and unfettered, in the Emergence itself.
4.How can we interpret such an Event while it is happening? Normally this is impossible, and at best wholly indirect and almost certain to be mistaken, for most crucial processes are of very short duration and leave no trace whatsoever.
5.We can only discern necessary precursor processes within the prior Level, and never Causes. The actual causal processes only appear within the cataclysm itself. .