Head to head
Chalmers’s Panpsychism vs Emergence
Chalmers’s Panpsychism and Emergence (Principle of Consciousness), compared field by field from their entries in the Atlas.
At a glance
- Chalmers’s Panpsychism belongs to the Panpsychism family in Kuhn's Landscape of Consciousness, Emergence to Materialism.
- Chalmers’s Panpsychism treats consciousness as fundamental; Emergence treats it as emergent.
- They give the same kind of answer on AI consciousness and meaning and purpose.
- On life after death, Chalmers’s Panpsychism says “Uncertain” and Emergence says “Conditional”.
- On mind uploading, Chalmers’s Panpsychism says “Uncertain” and Emergence says “Conditional”.
Add more theories to this comparisonCompare other theories
The claim
In brief
Chalmers’s PanpsychismDavid Chalmers argues that consciousness may be a fundamental feature of physical reality, carried by the intrinsic properties of its most basic entities. He treats panpsychism, and its cousin panprotopsychism, as a synthesis of materialism and dualism, and holds that it would become the most promising answer to the mind-body problem if someone solves the combination problem.
EmergenceEmergence is the philosophical claim that qualitatively new properties, such as consciousness or psychological states, arise from underlying physical properties governed entirely by physical laws. It is distinguished primarily into weak emergence, which is reducible in principle, and strong emergence, which is fundamentally non-reducible and may necessitate new physical laws.
What consciousness is
Chalmers’s PanpsychismChalmers identifies consciousness with the intrinsic properties of fundamental physical entities, the categorical bases of the dispositions that physics describes. Physics tells us what basic entities do; on this view, phenomenal or protophenomenal properties are what they are.
EmergenceConsciousness is identified as a qualitatively novel property or psychological state arising from physical properties. This concept defines the relationship between mind and matter based on reducibility or non-reducibility to fundamental physics.
Big questions
Can AI be conscious?Both agree
Chalmers’s PanpsychismConditionalSince every physical system has phenomenal or protophenomenal properties at its base, an AI is built from the same ingredients as a brain. Whether it forms a unified conscious subject depends on how the unsolved combination problem is answered.
EmergenceConditionalIf consciousness is weakly emergent, AI consciousness is certain given sufficient complexity. If strongly emergent, AI consciousness is still possible if non-physical properties emerge from non-biological physical complexity, depending on the meta-psychophysical laws involved.
Chalmers’s PanpsychismUncertainThe fundamental properties outlast any body, but nothing in the view says whether the particular combined subject survives once the brain's structure breaks down.
EmergenceConditionalWeak emergence, being close to Materialism, precludes survival. Strong emergence, particularly in the form of Emergent Dualism, could theoretically generate a nonphysical substance (mind/soul) dependent on, but not strictly identical to, the physical brain, allowing for potential independent existence after death, although this is speculative.
Chalmers’s PanpsychismUncertainAn upload would be made of the same fundamental properties, but whether it reconstitutes the same subject turns on the unsolved combination problem.
EmergenceConditionalIf consciousness is weakly emergent, duplicating the physical states would duplicate the mental states (likely). If strongly emergent, the non-reducible properties and possible downward causation would need to be perfectly captured and recreated in the new medium, posing significant, perhaps insurmountable, technical and conceptual challenges.
Does it give life meaning?Both agree
Chalmers’s PanpsychismUncertainPlacing experience in the basic fabric of nature gives it a cosmic footing, but Chalmers draws no conclusions about meaning or purpose.
EmergenceUncertainEmergence, especially strong emergence combined with concepts like top-down causation, offers a framework where higher-level properties like consciousness and its associated values could possess genuine causal power, potentially supporting cosmic purpose or meaning, depending on the resulting ontology.
Nature of mind
Ontology
Chalmers’s PanpsychismPanpsychism (Russellian monism)
EmergenceHighly variable/Contested. Weak Emergence supports reductive Physicalism. Strong Emergence often implies Non-Reductive Physicalism or a need to expand the conception of nature, potentially requiring new fundamental laws (Naturalistic Dualism or Property Dualism).
Mind and body
Chalmers’s PanpsychismMind and matter are two sides of one fundamental stuff that has both physical and phenomenal properties. Chalmers places this ‘monism’ in the sixth of his six classes of views, the nonreductive ones that expand or reconceive physical ontology.
EmergenceEmergentist. The mind arises from the body (complex physical systems). The nature of the relationship depends on the type of emergence: Weak suggests reduction in principle; Strong suggests non-reducibility even in principle, often involving downward causation.
Fundamental or emergent
Chalmers’s PanpsychismPrimitive
EmergenceEmergent
Qualia
Chalmers’s PanpsychismQualia are real and irreducible. In the panpsychist version they exist in simple form at the fundamental level; in the panprotopsychist version, basic entities have protophenomenal properties that are not themselves experiences but can ground them.
EmergenceQualia are the novel, qualitatively new properties (e.g., sensory qualities) that arise from the physical system. Strong emergence views consciousness (and thus qualia) as the clearest case of a strongly emergent phenomenon, fundamentally irreducible to underlying physical facts.
How it works
Mechanism
Chalmers’s PanpsychismChalmers reasons dialectically. Materialism (thesis) meets dualism (antithesis) and yields panpsychism; panprotopsychism challenges it and yields Russellian monism; the combination problem then challenges Russellian monism, with no settled resolution yet.
EmergenceThe principle is the claim that novel, qualitatively distinct properties arise at higher levels of complexity, which is often contrasted with the reductive assumptions of mainstream science.
Where it is
Chalmers’s PanpsychismThroughout physical reality, at the level of its most basic entities.
EmergenceTypically localized in complex biological systems (e.g., brains), although strong emergence proponents may argue that AI consciousness is possible if sufficient physical complexity is achieved, regardless of substrate.
What it does
Chalmers’s PanpsychismBecause phenomenal or protophenomenal properties are the categorical bases of physical dispositions, consciousness sits at the base of physical causation itself.
EmergenceVaries. Weak emergence aligns with standard physical causation. Strong emergence often posits top-down causation, where emergent higher hierarchical levels exert causal force on lower levels, giving the emergent property causal powers.
Evidence and criticism
Testability
Chalmers’s PanpsychismConceptually testable
EmergenceSpeculative and philosophically contentious. Weak emergence is scientifically aligned in principle. Strong emergence is difficult to test empirically because it posits phenomena are non-deducible from fundamental science.
Tests so far
Chalmers’s PanpsychismNot stated
EmergenceNot stated
Criticisms
Chalmers’s PanpsychismThe combination problem is the central difficulty, and Chalmers concedes it is unsolved. He also calls panpsychism initially counterintuitive, holding that the sense of oddity fades on reflection.
EmergenceIt is criticized by reductive physicalists (like Eliminative Materialists) as having little explanatory value, being superfluous, or acting as a 'restatement of a miracle' that fails to explain *how* unconscious complexity yields consciousness. Strong emergence specifically challenges the causal closure of the physical world.
Sources
Key sources
Chalmers’s Panpsychism
- Chalmers’s Panpsychism, David Chalmers (Landscape of Consciousness entry)
Emergence
- The Re-emergence of Emergence: the Emergentist Hypothesis from Science to Religion, P. Clayton and P. Davies (2008)
- Strong and weak emergence, D. Chalmers (2008)
- Why reductionism does not work, G.F.R. Ellis (2019)