The World of SPLectrum
Home > Positioning > Subjects > Emergence > The overviews
The Overviews of Emergence
A field’s overviews show how it maps itself — what it treats as its centre, its history, and its edges. The emergence literature is vast; its overview genre is small enough to survey on one page. This page describes each overview’s frame and coverage; the types themselves are catalogued on the types page.
The four general references
The Stanford Encyclopedia entry, “Emergent Properties” (maintained by Timothy O’Connor) is the analytic reference. Its organising frame is compatibility with physicalism: after the historical introduction (Mill and the British Emergentists), the entry analyses emergence as dependence-plus-autonomy, then divides the accounts into weak (physicalism-compatible — Bedau’s incompressibility among them) and strong (closure-violating), closing with the contested phenomena — consciousness, cases from physics, and scientific pluralism — with quantum chemistry and emergent spacetime among its open questions. Its open questions are the field’s: whether weak emergence is more than epistemic, whether strong emergence is coherent, and what the chemistry interface shows.
The Internet Encyclopedia entry, “Emergence,” is the historical arc: British Emergentism (Mill, Alexander, Morgan, Broad), the later emergentism that revived the vocabulary, and the standing objections. It works with the strong/weak and synchronic/diachronic sortings, addresses the divide between scientific usage (weak, complexity-flavoured) and philosophical usage (strong, mind-directed), and notes the quantum-mechanics reversal — the theory that undid classical emergentism returning, in later hands, as a candidate site of genuine emergence.
Bedau and Humphreys’ anthology, Emergence: Contemporary Readings in Philosophy and Science (MIT, 2008), is the field’s collection: twenty-four canonical papers across philosophy, physics, and artificial intelligence — Hempel and Oppenheim, Nagel, Searle, Anderson’s “More is Different,” Simon, Schelling, Dennett, Wolfram — held together by an editorial introduction organised around the tension between the sparse view (emergence as rare and exceptional) and the radical view (emergence as commonplace). Its reviewers noted one gap: the social-simulation and agent-based literature is absent.
Humphreys’ handbook chapter, “Emergence” (Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Science, 2016), is the methodological survey. Its opening verdicts frame the genre: a unified theory or concise definition of emergence “is not a feasible project at the current time,” and — unlike causation — the field has no agreed core set of examples against which accounts can be tested; assembling one, Humphreys suggests, would be a useful project. He sorts the senses into ontological, epistemological, inferential, and conceptual emergence, diagnoses the literature as two camps with a widening gap — one open to emergence within the sciences, one driven by metaphysics of mind, whose narrowing of the question he calls crippling — and dismantles the assumed opposition between emergence and reduction in both directions.
The Routledge Handbook of Emergence (Gibb, Hendry and Lancaster, eds., 2019) is the genre’s most cross-disciplinary collection: philosophers alongside physicists and chemists — its editors spanning metaphysics, philosophy of chemistry, and physics — with chapters running from the British tradition through the sciences’ cases.
The monograph surveys
Clayton and Davies (eds.), The Re-Emergence of Emergence (Oxford, 2006) marked the revival: scientists and philosophers surveying emergence from physics to consciousness, with the theological adjacency its title signals. Gillett’s Reduction and Emergence in Science and Philosophy (Cambridge, 2016) is the systematic metaphysics-side treatment, building a framework for both notions across the sciences. Humphreys’ Emergence: A Philosophical Account (Oxford, 2016) is the monograph companion to his chapter, developing the diachronic and transformational accounts. Wilson’s Metaphysical Emergence (Oxford, 2021) functions as a survey through its central claim — that weak and strong metaphysical emergence, powers-defined, exhaust the coherent options — and reads the field’s accounts as versions of its two schemas.
The register-specific surveys
Palacios’ Emergence and Reduction in Physics (Cambridge Elements, 2022) surveys the physics debate — phase transitions and limits included. Sawyer’s Social Emergence (Cambridge, 2005) is the social sciences’ survey, mapping the philosophical taxonomy onto sociology’s own history from Durkheim forward. Taylor’s “An Explication of Emergence” (Philosophical Studies, 2015) is the article-length analytic explication. The quantitative wing has its own recent survey — “Emergence and Causality in Complex Systems” (Entropy, 2024) — covering causal emergence and its measures. The engineering taxonomies (Fromm; De Wolf and Holvoet) are surveys in miniature and appear as rows on the types page.
The shape of the genre
The general overviews are mostly philosophy’s — organised by physicalism, by the British lineage, or by the analytic disputes — with the sciences appearing as cases at their edges; the Routledge Handbook is the nearest the genre comes to crossing the disciplines, while the science registers otherwise survey themselves register by register: physics, sociology, and the quantitative wing each on its own. Humphreys’ two-camps diagnosis, made from inside the genre, describes the division — one camp open to emergence within the sciences, one driven by the metaphysics of mind — and calls the second camp’s narrowing of the question crippling to an understanding of emergence in general.
See also: Emergence (the subject landing) · The types of emergence · The principals