Marxist Theory on the Nature of Emergent Transitions
But, the Principle of Plurality (and along with it the idea of Reductionism), assume Causality to be both universally applicable and transparently evident. And, in addition, any produced Levels are transformed into merely situations of complexity-and-convenience, rather than marking where wholly creative, multi-factor and revolutionary conversions have taken place!
For, in alternatively doing the latter, it would have totally prohibited any strictly straight-forward, and always fully-revealable, sequence of causes, as being the means by which they came to fruition.
This tenet is absolutely critical!
For, such a transition, termed an Emergence, can never be directly or fully predicted from its immediate precursors, because it then will have been a never-occurred-before transition: it will have produced the wholly new.
And as I was able to establish some time ago, within complex systems of multiple, purely-chemical reactions, in my Theory of Truly Natural Selection, an extension of something similar to Darwin's ideas, but concerning non-living processes, something of what happens in these Emergences could, at least partially, have been revealed. For, in that work, something of the holist concept of mutually-affecting processes, was clearly illustrated, including the significance of both competing and co-operating processes, in the ultimate achievements of balances-with-dominances, also delivering persisting Stabilities, and even explaining the possibility of flips between exactly opposite outcomes.
So, even in such simplified cases, some idea of both the resilience of achieved Stabilities, and the true vastness of their possible crises and dissolutions, plus even the consequent re-establishment of new Stabilities - upon entirely different and wholly new bases.
A mix of pluralist eternal entities cannot really compare with a mutually-affecting mix of holist entities in the vastness of its possibilities!
Clearly, none of this is ever possible within a Pluralist conception of Reality, for from that logical viewpoint, all things are fixed and totally independent of one another. Indeed, such mixes can only ever be seen as complex aggregations of fixed entities or even immutable Laws, and hence, natural creative innovation becomes a mere complexity of pre-existing forms.
Only the Holist Stance can deliver real Emergences!
And, a successful Emergence will always deliver a wholly new, previously-unpredictable Level.
And, without a true philosophically holist grounding, such as from The Buddha's or Hegel's damning critique of Pluralist Formal Logic, the necessary approach to "Complexity" will be very different indeed.
For, without it, the rich and turbulent trajectory of an actual Emergence will never even be imagined.
Let me relate a series of findings from my Theory of Emergences, which will give some idea of what is involved.
Stability & Emergence
- Reality always involves multiple factors.
- These factors act simultaneously, but in different directions.
- Chaos seems likely, but instead Turbulence is produced.
- Usually, this finally settles into a balance of opposites.
- And, also, displays a resultant overall dominant stable effect.
- We can call this state Stability, and it can persist for a very long time.
- But, though it can appear permanent, it never is!
- At some point, the involved factors will change in some way.
- The effect will be to cause a Crisis in the Stability.
- Usually it will be resolved by a re-establishment of balance.
- But, a series of such Crises can follow, with a final Collapse.
- The stability is finally totally dissociated, heading for Chaos.
- It descends first to a Nadir of Dissolution.
- But then, as initially, it begins to form relations into systems.
- These generally fail, one after the other, until one persists.
- And further such systems are achieved, and a new balance.
- The cycle is complete a new and different stability now exists.
This level-change is a complex process, and appears incomprehensible without a holist approach to Reality. And, as described above, it is the most general description - extracted from such occurrences at many vastly different Levels of reality - where they will appear extremely different in detail, while oft-conforming to the above-described trajectory.
For example, the first analysed versions were extracted from Michelet's History of the French Revolution, by Karl Marx. Here the contending forces acting were people representing the warring Classes of that prior State-in-Revolution!
So, its embodiment at all possible Levels, down to the Sub-Atomic, as well as up to Social Revolutions, will, of course, reveal enormous differences in Content, while displaying a similar overall trajectory!
It has been applied to Capitalist Economics in Marx's Das Kapital, and to Social Revolution in the Russian Revolution, but its application generally to the vital area of Science has yet to be undertaken comprehensively, as Marx himself had always intended.
And, this undertaking is not a mere further task for Marxists, it is absolutely crucial!
As a physicist, myself, I can see that not only does Science really need Dialectical Materialism, but Marxism crucially needs that extension to Science.
With 60 years in Revolutionary Politics, always also seeking the wherewithal to defeat the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory in physics, I never received what I required to attempt it.
It simply wasn't there!
But, it is now.
The revolution starts here...
Do you want to participate?
Do you want to participate?