{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013360739979445015, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.203821656050955, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Emergence and the Failure of Reduction

This chapter explores the different ways in which the reductive method of explanation might fail, and asks what such failures might tell us about the world. In particular, the chapter investigates possible situations in which one or more of the assumptions identified in previous chapters fails. It is argued that the failure of one of these assumptions will give rise to something that is recognizable in the traditional notion of ‘ontological’ or ‘strong’ emergence. This understanding is then used to defend the conceptual possibility of such ontological emergence against the influential arguments of Jaegwon Kim. It is further argued that the failure of a different assumption gives rise to a relatively unrecognized form of ontological emergence related to the way that causal influences combine. Thus, an understanding of the reductive method gives us a way to grasp the notoriously slippery metaphysical concept of emergence.