Whatdoyouthinkofthe

emergentistheuristic
?

Ratherthanfocusingon
determinism
,whichpresentsinvariousdegreesinrealityandnotin
theallornothing/eitherormanner,whichcharacterizessomeapproachestocompatibilism,
libertarianismanddeterminism

perhapsthere'ssomemeritinconsidering,instead,whetherornotthosesameexperimental
findingssupport
reductionism
?

Tobeclear,I'mtalkingabouttopdowncausation,whichwouldn'tnecessarilyviolatephysical
causalclosure.

Wouldyouagreethat,whiletherearemanycontinuitiesbetweenhumansandourphylogenetic
ancestors,symboliclanguagerepresentsaqualitativediscontinuityintermsoftrulynovel
semiotic
capacities?

Nottobecoy,onepracticalupshotwouldbethat,beyondErnstMayr'sconceptionofour
teleonomic
functions,whicharemerely
purposive,
humansenjoy
teleologic
capacities,which
areclearly
purposeful
.

Asexplanatoryheuristicsgo,thiswouldallsuggestthat,whenoneemploysconceptslike
causalorcontracausal,wemustdifferentiatebetweenthoseefficientcausesmodeledbyour
scientificdescriptionsandthoseputativeformaland/orfinalcausessuggestedbyour
philosophicalinterpretations,whetherimplicitlyorexplicitly.Whateverthecase,neitherphysical
lawsnortheoreticbiologyenjoyexplanatoryadequacyfortheemergenceoflife,consciousness
or
anthroposemiotic
realities.

Animalsexhibitquiteabitofbehavioralversatilityviaahardwired,
abductiveinstinct
,
teleonomically,whichhumansshare.Humansalsoexhibit,however,aratheropenended,
abductiveinferential
capacity,teleologically,an
emergenttelos,
whichimpartsremarkable
executiveandrobustlyvolitionalcapacities,agentialattributesthataccountforourunequivocal
moralresponsibility,albeitinvaryingdegreesofex/culpability,forwedorecognizeirrationaland
nonrationalcompulsions,evencertainde/formativeinferentialcompulsions.

Thisnotsomeoveridealizedformanddegreeofvolitionneedstobesquaredwithany
putativedivineattributesbythephilosophicaltheologian.

Thisimplicatesarelevantdistinctionbetweenscientificandphilosophicdiscourse.One
takeawayaffirmsthatnoneofour
interpretiveheuristics
closetheselongstanding
explanatorygaps
,instead,pointingdifferentwaysforward.Anotherwouldbethatourresearch
programscouldbeseriouslyimpoverishedifanygiveninterpretiveheuristicignored,suchas
througharroganceorpretense,anygivengaps,e.g.claimingatitlelike
consciousness
explained
.


So,wemustnotconsiderourunavoidable
methodologicalstipulations
tobeindisputable
metaphysicalnecessities
,whentheyaremerelyontologically
suggestive
not
decisive.
That's
whyappealstopastscientificexplanationscanbeusedtojustifyongoinginquirybutnotto
issueepistemicpromissorynotesinlieuofsupplementarymetaphysicalinterpretations.

Ifinditusefultoemploya
semioticheuristic
inadditiontoan
emergentiststance
,asjustone
moreparadigm.

Fromasemioticperspective,wecandifferentiatesigns,distinguishingthe
nonarbitrary
(icons
andindices)fromthe
arbitrary
(symbols).Wecanfurtherdifferentiatearbitrarysigns,
distinguishingtheinnatefromthelearned.Finally,learnedsymbols(arbitrarypairingsof
referantstosignals)maybeintergenerationallycontinuousordiscontinuous.

Iconicandindexicalsignsaccountformostanimalcommunications,eveninthehigherapes.
Alarmcallsinsomespecies(monkeys)mightverywellemployinnatearbitrarysymbols,while
recognitionofindividualsbysignaturewhistles(dolphins)wouldbeaccomplishedbylearned
arbitrarypairings(chimpexperimentssuggesttheycanbetaughtarbitrarypairingsbutwith
muchdifficulty).

Further,wemustdistinguishbetween
syntactical
patterningand
semantical
interpretation,the
formeremployingagrammarinvolvingonlyonelineardimension(e.g.timeorspace),thelatter
communicatingtwoormore(e.g.directionplusdistance),
compositionally
.Honeybeesemploy
suchasemanticcompositionalcommunication,althoughit'sinnate,iconicnaturediffersfrom
ourlearned,symbolichumancommunication.

Humancommunicationemploysnotjusticonicandindexicalsigns,butsymbols,whichare
learned,intergenerationallycontinuousandsemanticallycompositional,aswellassyntactically
patterned.

Animalcommunicationscanthusdifferqualitativelyinthesensethatsomemaybe1)iconic,
indexicaland/orsymbolic2)non/arbitrarilypairingreferantsandsigns3)innateorlearned4)
inter/generationallydis/continuous5)syntacticaland/orsemanticalandsomeadd6)iterative
and/orrecursive.Ofcourse,oncewedefinethesequalitativedifferences,wecanintroduce
quantitativedegreestoeachqualitativecategorytofurtherdistinguishcommunicationmodes.

It'snotdifficultformetoimagineanyorevenallofthesemodespresentingthroughoutthe
animalkingdominvaryingdegrees,quantitatively.Atthesametime,theabovelistedattributes

differentiatecommunicationmodesqualitatively.Suchqualitativedistinctionsinmodesas
non/arbitray,syntactic/semantic,iconic/symbolic,innate/learneddon'tamounttocontentious
claims?Additionally,secondorderqualitativedistinctionsfurtherderivefromvarious
combinationsofthesemodes,allowingustofurtherdistinguishvariouschimps,monkeys,
dolphinsandbirdcommunicationsinbothkindanddegree,muchlesshumanlanguage.

Thisphenomenologicaltaxonomydoesnotexplainlanguageorigins,althoughitdifferentiates
communicationmodes,phylogenetically.Inexploringtheoriginsofhumansymboliclanguage,
questionsbeg.

Ononehand,totheextentit'snotfunctionallydistinct(insofarasitscomponentmodespresent
elsewhereintheanimalkingdom),thenwhy,ontheotherhand,wouldsuchcopioussymbol
usage(insuchadistinctcombinationofmodes)besoveryunique,trulysettingourspecies
apartasHomosymbolicus?

Inpart,Isuspecttheanswerliesintheputativefactthatthesharpnessofthephylogenetic
thresholdresultedfrommereological,wholepart,topdownrelationships,holisticallyspeaking,
ratherthanmerefunctionalormodaldistinctions.Thosetopdowncausationscouldbe
coevolutionary,Baldwinianevolutionorsomeotherselectionmechanisms.Inotherwords,the
difficultyincrossingthesymbolicthresholdwouldnotbedescribedinphysicalorbiological
termsbutmoresoasasociobiologicreality.

Thetakeawayforthisthreadwouldbethat,whileremainingadequatelydetermined,Homo
sapiensisradically,freeenoughforallmoral,practicalandtheologicpurposesnotwithstanding
thatcontracausalconceptionsseemratherincoherent.
Science,ascurrentlyonoffer,
doesn'ttrafficinpurechanceornecessity,onlyprobabilities,whichdon'tnecessarily
pointtoeitherabsolute
in/determinables,
epistemically,or
in/determined
realities,
ontically.

Emergentism,asIapproachit,remainsmetaphysicallyagnostic,whetherregardingepistemicor
onticreductionism.So,no,it'snotnecessarilyantireductionist.Furthermore,Ieschewapriori
invocationsof
supervenience
,whichreliesondistinctionslikeweakvsstrongemergence,the
latterremainingquestionbegging,theformer,arathertrivialdistinction.

Explanatoryadequacywithinoneofthesehierarchicallevelsorthenextdoesn'ttranslateinto
anabsenceofotherwellknownexplanatorygaps:quantuminterpretation,cosmogony,
a/biogenesis,philosophyofmind,languageorigins.

There'sahugephilosophicdifferencebetweenamethodologicalstipulationandametaphysical

conclusion,theformer,indispensable,thelatter,evenwhennotwhollyindefensible,clearly
contentious.Onebestnotquestionthenaturalistresearchmethodology,butthat'snotthesame
thingascommittingtophysicalism,whetherreductiveornonreductive.

ThequalitativedifferencesIsuggestedpreviouslyintroducethenotionof
adequate
determinism
overagainstanyideaofa
strictdeterminism
,whichremainsnaughtbutaformal
abstraction,givenscience'smethodologies,which
apriori
remainprobabilistic,and
aposteriori,

remainstatistical.Anadequatelydeterminedhumanwillcausallydetermineshumanactions
guidednotonlybyprosocialsensibilitiesandabductiveinstincts,whichemploynonarbitrary
iconsandindices,butalsobyabductiveinferences,whichemployarbitrarysymbols,including
symbolicselfreference.

Thehumanphylogeneticheritageofaradicallysocialorientationcoupledwiththisrobust
symbolicselfreferentialitygivesrisetoanovelexperiencecalledmorality.Whileintrinsically
valuingbothsentientandsapientbeings,thisjustifiesahierarchicalvaluing,whereinbeings
possessingbothmoralagencyandpatiencyenjoyanaxiologicalprimacyoverthosewith
patiencyalone,defendingtheanthropocentrichumanismpresupposedbypragmatism.Allother
considerationsofin/determinismnotwithstanding,pragmatismprovisionallystipulatestothefree
humanwillandmoralhumanagencyeverybitasmuchasitmethodologicallypresupposes
naturalism,settingasidesillyantinomiesarisingfromoverwroughtandabsolutistformal
conceptions.

Classically,inlinguistics,comparisonsfocusondesignfeatures.Simplyput,ananimalsystem
differsonlyquantitativelyifalldesignfeaturespresent,differingonlyindegree,butqualitatively,
iftheanimalsystemdidnotpossesseachandeveryfeature.

Ithinkwhat'satstakeinvolvesoptimizingourheuristicdevicestowardadvancingtheoreticends
andnotgroundingournormativeapproaches,whetherpracticallyormorally.Peirceandother
pragmatistsandsemioticrealistswouldagreethatourcommonsense,commonsensibilities,
commonlawandothertraditionsbestguideusinourvitalandpracticalconcerns,whilethe
normativescienceswillbestimproveourtheoreticventures.

Forexample,humanexceptionalismfindsitssupportmoresoinan
informal,cumulative
caselike,pragmaticapproach
,whichpresupposes,notunreasonably,thathumansdifferfrom
otheranimals,evenasscientistsandphilosophersquarrelregardinghow.Isa2%differencein
DNAquantitativeorqualitative,inwhatways?Getskindasillyafterawhile.

Onemusttakeintoconsideration,suchasfromtheexamplesIprovidedregardingchimps,
monkeys,dolphinsandbees,whetherornotsuch"design"featuresaremerely
analogous
or
homologous
.Ifanalogous,wearewitnessingconvergentevolution.Toclaimthatthese
featuresoccurthroughouttheanimalkingdom,whichIhavestipulatedforargument'ssake
althoughit'scontentious,doesnotimplicatequantitativedifferencesascommonancestrywould
beanothernecessarycondition.


I'mnotsayingit'sunreasonabletoimaginesomehigherapeutilizingeachofthesemodes,only
thatyourpositioniswayoutinfrontoftheevidence.Whichmodeshoneybees,dolphinsand
certainmonkeyshaveused,analogouslyandconvergentlytohumancommunication,arenot
dispositiveofyourcasebut,instead,implicatequalitativedifferencesincommunication.

humannature,animalcommunication,semiotic,symboliclanguage,syntacticalpattern,
semanticalinterpretation,compositionalsigns,teleonomic,convergentevolution,adequate
determinism,strictdeterminism,indeterminable,indetermined,probabilist,plausibilist,
supervenience,anthroposemiotic,purposiveteleonomic,purposefultelos,abductiveinstinct,
abductiveinference,emergenttelos,determinism,reductionism,freewill