In chapter three, Clayton continues his argument that emergence is about transitions between areas of scientific study. Specifically he addresses evolution as an emergent process that “produces a variety of distinct levels of phenonmenon…”. Through a carefully exampled argument which includes: computer simulations, evidence of neural networks and ant colonies, Clayton challenges the 2nd law of thermodynamics which states that all organization moves toward increasing chaos and entropy. His question is “how is order produced in a system’s evolution when it is not present in the initial conditions?” Before the 2nd law has its final say – what is going on in the life of the organism?
As previously, he refutes that the physics based explanation of behavior determined by the parts is sufficient to explain creation’s organizations. He reports the way in which biology, for too long, has tried to adhere to the laws of physics while ignoring emergent realities.
Here Clayton’s returns to the idea of purposiveness without purpose. He suggests that there may be a theory of emergence in which a “series of middle instances between the chemical level and the conscious level. Primitive organisms do not conscioulsy carry out purposes in the way an intentional agent does. Yet the parts of an organism (or organ, cell or ecosystem) work together for its survival.” (97) Eventually consciousness is acheived.
Clayton reminds us that there is no clear division between mind and body. “Mind as we know it in humans has important precursors in creatures’ perception of environment and ‘other’ as ‘other’.
Most accessible to me in this chapter was Clayton’s explanation of ant colonies by citing the work of Ant researcher Deborah Gordon. Her research as found that individual ants give rise to complex and adapative colonies that have distinct personalities from other colonies (some are more aggressive while others more passive). So that even the explanation that Ant colonies are merely an aggreggate of individual ants does not sufficiently explain the organizational personalities. She also finds that the life cycle of a colony emerges over about 10 years time even though individual members only live a year.
I think this example of emergence has interesting implications for our study of congregational life, our attention to individual members and organizational dynamics. As pastors involved in congregational change, we often focus on the pieces and parts when considering the organizational development of the church. Clayton suggests that development also happens at the macro level. Leadership may have an opportunity to be observers of the micro occasions within a congregation as puzzle pieces that can be thought and prayed over. In thought and prayer, micro occasions can be experimentally arranged as a hypothetical big picture. Shared carefully, these hypothetical scenarios can be shared with congregational members who might receive and respond to the scenario. In light of an even hypothetical situation, individual behaviors can be affected. In this very simple scenario, one can imagine a micro (individual members) participating toward the macro situation and then be affected by it in turn. This may be the way that individual respond to the divine lure and manifest a unique expression of the Body of Christ.
A more suscinct way to say this is that observant leadership may be able to facilitate participation in the downard causation. This has been attempted through efforts like vision statements in local congregations. The problem with vision statements is that they are often more arbitrary than they are specific to the congregational aggregate. The specifics of a congregation cannot predict the larger congregational life, however, they may be the starting place to discern emergence. For every congregation is surely as unique as each ant colony.
Leslie's Theology 