Abstract
Abstract It is argued that supervenience is an inadequate device for representing relations between different levels of phenomena and that emergence is a better vehicle for interlevel relations. Various interpretations of supervenience relations are examined and they are found to be excessively thin compared to explainable emergence relations. A question is raised about the differences between `vertical’ and `horizontal’ determination relations. Some possible examples of emergence are given and six criteria are provided that emergent phenomena seem to satisfy. Using examples drawn from macroscopic physics, it is suggested that such emergent features may well be quite common in the physical realm.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
