Emergentism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergentism

Emergentism is the belief in emergence, particularly as it involves consciousness and the philosophy of mind. A property of a system is said to be emergent if it is a new outcome of some other properties of the system and their interaction, while it is itself different from them. Within the philosophy of science, emergentism is analyzed both as it contrasts with and parallels reductionism. This philosophical theory suggests that higher-level properties and phenomena arise from the interactions and organization of lower-level entities yet are not reducible to these simpler components. It emphasizes the idea that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Historically, emergentism has significantly influenced various scientific and philosophical ideas, highlighting the complexity and interconnectedness of natural systems.

The formation of complex symmetrical and fractal patterns in snowflakes exemplifies emergence in a physical system.

Historical Background

Early Concepts of Emergence

The concept of emergence can be traced back to ancient philosophical traditions. Aristotle, in particular, suggested that the whole could possess properties that its individual parts did not, laying an early foundation for emergentist thought. This idea persisted through the ages, influencing various schools of thought.

The term "emergence" was formally introduced in the 19th century by the philosopher George Henry Lewes. He distinguished between "resultant" and "emergent" properties, where resultant properties could be predicted from the properties of the parts, whereas emergent properties could not. This distinction was crucial in differentiating emergent phenomena from simple aggregative effects.

Development in the 20th Century

In the early 20th century, emergentism gained further traction through the works of British emergentists like C.D. Broad and Samuel Alexander. C.D. Broad, in his 1925 book The Mind and Its Place in Nature, argued that mental states were emergent properties of brain processes. Samuel Alexander, in his work Space, Time, and Deity, suggested that emergent qualities like consciousness and life could not be fully explained by the underlying physical processes alone.

These philosophers were reacting against the reductionist view that all phenomena could be fully explained by their constituent parts. They argued that emergent properties such as consciousness have their own causal powers and cannot be reduced to or predicted from their base components. This period also saw the influence of Gestalt psychology, which emphasized that psychological phenomena cannot be understood solely by analyzing their component parts, further supporting emergentist ideas.

Mid to Late 20th Century Advances

During the mid-20th century, emergentism was somewhat overshadowed by the rise of behaviorism and later the cognitive sciences, which often leaned towards more reductionist explanations. However, the concept of emergence found renewed interest towards the late 20th century with the advent of complex systems theory and non-linear dynamics.

In this period, scientists and philosophers began to explore how complex behaviors and properties could arise from relatively simple interactions in systems as diverse as ant colonies, economic markets, and neural networks. This interdisciplinary approach highlighted the ubiquity and importance of emergent phenomena across different domains, from physics to biology to social sciences.

Contemporary Developments

In recent years, emergentism has continued to evolve, integrating insights from various scientific fields. For example, in physics, the study of phenomena such as superconductivity and the behavior of complex quantum systems has provided empirical examples of emergent properties. In biology, the study of complex biological networks and the dynamics of ecosystems has further illustrated how emergent properties play a crucial role in natural systems.

The resurgence of interest in artificial intelligence and machine learning has also contributed to contemporary discussions on emergentism. Researchers in these fields are particularly interested in how intelligent behavior and consciousness might emerge from artificial systems, providing new perspectives and challenges for emergentist theories.

Forms

Emergentism can be compatible with physicalism, the theory that the universe is composed exclusively of physical entities, and in particular with the evidence relating changes in the brain with changes in mental functioning.

Some varieties of emergentism are not specifically concerned with the mind–body problem but constitute a theory of the nature of the universe comparable to pantheism. They suggest a hierarchical or layered view of the whole of nature, with the layers arranged in terms of increasing complexity with each requiring its own special science.

Core Principles of Emergentism

Emergentism is underpinned by several core principles that define its theoretical framework and distinguish it from other philosophical doctrines such as reductionism and holism.

Definition and Nature of Emergence

Emergence refers to the arising of novel and coherent structures, patterns, and properties during the process of self-organization in complex systems. These emergent properties are not predictable from the properties of the individual components alone. Emergent properties are seen as a result of the interactions and relationships between the components of a system, which produce new behaviors and characteristics that are not present in the isolated parts. This concept is crucial in understanding why certain phenomena cannot be fully explained by analyzing their parts independently.

Types of Emergence

Emergentism distinguishes between two main types of emergence: weak and strong.

• Weak Emergence: This type of emergence involves properties that can in principle be derived from the interactions of lower-level entities but are not immediately obvious. These properties are emergent in the sense that they are the result of complex interactions but do not involve fundamentally new properties. For instance, the behavior of a computer program can be understood by examining its code, but the complexity of the program's behavior may not be immediately apparent from the code alone.
• Strong Emergence: This type of emergence involves properties that are fundamentally new and cannot be predicted or explained by the behavior of the lower-level components. Strong emergent properties are seen as novel qualities that arise from the complex interactions within a system. An example often cited in discussions of strong emergence is consciousness, which some argue cannot be fully explained by the physical processes of the brain alone.

Key Characteristics

Emergent properties are characterized by several key features that distinguish them from simple aggregative properties:

• Irreducibility: Emergent properties cannot be reduced to or fully explained by their constituent parts. This means that understanding the individual components of a system is not sufficient to understand the emergent properties that arise from their interactions. For example, the wetness of water is an emergent property that cannot be understood solely by examining individual water molecules.
• Novel Properties: Emergent systems exhibit new properties that are not present in their individual components. These properties arise from the complex interactions and relationships between the parts of the system. The novelty of emergent properties is a key aspect that distinguishes them from the properties of the individual parts.
• Non-linearity: The relationship between the parts of a system and its emergent properties is often non-linear, meaning that small changes in the components or their interactions can lead to large and unexpected changes in the emergent properties. This non-linearity is a hallmark of complex systems and is a crucial aspect of emergent phenomena.
• Context-dependence: Emergent properties are often context-dependent, meaning that they arise from the specific organization and interactions within a system. Changes in the context or organization of the system can lead to changes in the emergent properties. This context-dependence highlights the importance of considering the system as a whole when studying emergent phenomena.

Theoretical Foundations

The theoretical foundations of emergentism are deeply intertwined with various philosophical theories and debates, particularly those concerning the nature of reality, the relationship between parts and wholes, and the nature of causality. Emergentism contrasts sharply with reductionism, which attempts to explain complex phenomena entirely in terms of their simpler components, and holism, which emphasizes the whole without necessarily addressing the emergence of properties.

Relationship to Other Philosophical Theories

Emergentism stands in contrast to reductionism, which holds that all phenomena can be fully explained by their constituent parts. Reductionists argue that understanding the basic building blocks of a system provides a complete understanding of the system itself. However, emergentists contend that this approach overlooks the novel properties that arise from complex interactions within a system. For example, while the properties of water can be traced back to hydrogen and oxygen atoms, the wetness of water cannot be fully explained by examining these atoms in isolation.

Holism, on the other hand, emphasizes the significance of the whole system, suggesting that the properties of the whole are more important than the properties of the parts. Emergentism agrees with holism to some extent but differs in that it specifically focuses on how new properties emerge from the interactions within the system. Holism often overlooks the dynamic processes that lead to the emergence of new properties, which are central to emergentism.

Relationship to vitalism

Main article: Vitalism

Emmeche et al. (1998) state that "there is a very important difference between the vitalists and the emergentists: the vitalist's creative forces were relevant only in organic substances, not in inorganic matter. Emergence hence is creation of new properties regardless of the substance involved." "The assumption of an extra-physical vitalis (vital force, entelechy, élan vital, etc.), as formulated in most forms (old or new) of vitalism, is usually without any genuine explanatory power. It has served altogether too often as an intellectual tranquilizer or verbal sedative—stifling scientific inquiry rather than encouraging it to proceed in new directions."

Ontological vs. Epistemological Emergentism

Emergentism can be divided into ontological and epistemological categories, each addressing different aspects of emergent properties.

• Ontological Emergentism: This perspective asserts that emergent properties genuinely exist in the world. Ontological emergentists argue that emergent properties are real and have causal powers. For example, the consciousness that arises from neural processes in the brain is seen as a real, causally efficacious property that cannot be reduced to or predicted from the underlying physical processes alone.
• Epistemological Emergentism: This perspective suggests that emergent properties arise due to our limitations in knowledge and understanding. According to epistemological emergentists, what we perceive as emergent properties are actually the result of complex interactions that we do not yet fully understand. Therefore, these properties are not fundamentally new but appear so because of our current epistemic limitations.

Causality in Emergentism

A crucial aspect of emergentism is its treatment of causality, particularly the concept of downward causation. Downward causation refers to the influence that higher-level properties can exert on the behavior of lower-level entities within a system. This idea challenges the traditional view that causation only works from the bottom up, from simpler to more complex levels.

• Downward Causation: Emergentists argue that emergent properties can have causal effects on the components of the system from which they arise. For instance, social structures and norms can influence individual behavior, even though these structures and norms themselves emerge from the interactions between individuals. This two-way causal relationship is a key feature of emergent systems.
• Two-way Causality: In emergent systems, causality is not unidirectional. While lower-level interactions give rise to emergent properties, these emergent properties can, in turn, affect the behavior and interactions at the lower level. This bidirectional causality highlights the complexity and interdependence of emergent systems, making them resistant to reductionist explanations.

Scientific Perspectives

Emergentism finds its scientific support and application across various disciplines, illustrating how complex behaviors and properties arise from simpler interactions. These scientific perspectives demonstrate the practical significance of emergentist theories.

Emergence in Physics

In physics, emergence is observed in phenomena where macroscopic properties arise from the interactions of microscopic components. A classic example is superconductivity, where the collective behavior of electrons in certain materials leads to the phenomenon of zero electrical resistance. This emergent property cannot be fully explained by the properties of individual electrons alone, but rather by their interactions within the lattice structure of the material.

Another significant example is quantum entanglement, where particles become interconnected in such a way that the state of one particle instantly influences the state of another, regardless of the distance between them. This non-local property emerges from the quantum interactions and cannot be predicted merely by understanding the individual particles separately. Such emergent properties challenge classical notions of locality and causality, showcasing the profound implications of emergentism in modern physics.

In thermodynamics, emergent behaviors are observed in non-equilibrium systems where patterns and structures spontaneously form. For instance, Bénard cells — a phenomenon where heated fluid forms hexagonal convection cells — arise from thermal gradients and fluid dynamics. This self-organization is an emergent property of the system, highlighting how macro-level order can emerge from micro-level interactions.

Emergence in Biology

Emergent phenomena are prevalent in biology, particularly in the study of life and evolutionary processes. One of the most fundamental examples is the emergence of life from non-living chemical compounds. This process, often studied through the lens of abiogenesis, involves complex chemical reactions that lead to self-replicating molecules and eventually living organisms. The properties of life — such as metabolism, growth, and reproduction — emerge from these molecular interactions and cannot be fully understood by examining individual molecules in isolation.

In evolutionary biology, the diversity of life forms arises from genetic mutations, natural selection, and environmental interactions. Complex traits such as the eye or the brain emerge over time through evolutionary processes. These traits exhibit novel properties that are not predictable from the genetic components alone but result from the dynamic interplay between genes and the environment.

Systems biology further illustrates emergent properties in biological networks. For example, metabolic networks where enzymes and substrates interact exhibit emergent behaviors like robustness and adaptability. These properties are crucial for the survival of organisms in changing environments and arise from the complex interconnections within the network.

Emergence in Cognitive Science

In cognitive science, emergentism plays a crucial role in understanding consciousness and cognitive processes. Consciousness is often cited as a paradigmatic example of an emergent property. While neural processes in the brain involve electrochemical interactions among neurons, the subjective experience of consciousness arises from these processes in a way that is not directly reducible to them. This emergence of conscious experience from neural substrates is a central topic in the philosophy of mind and cognitive science.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning provide contemporary examples of emergent behavior in artificial systems. Complex algorithms and neural networks can learn, adapt, and exhibit intelligent behavior that is not explicitly programmed. For instance, deep learning models can recognize patterns and make decisions based on vast amounts of data, demonstrating emergent intelligence from simpler computational rules. This emergent behavior in AI systems reflects the principles of emergentism, where higher-level functions arise from the interaction of lower-level components.

Emergentism and Language

Emergentism and language are intricately connected through the concept that linguistic properties and structures arise from simpler interactions among cognitive, communicative and social processes. This perspective provides a dynamic view of language development, structure, and evolution, emphasizing the role of interaction and adaptation over innate or static principles. This connection can be explored from several angles:

Linguistic Emergence

• Language Development: Emergentism posits that language structures and rules emerge from the interaction of simpler neural and cognitive processes rather than being innate or pre-programmed. This idea contrasts with Noam Chomsky's theory of Universal Grammar, which suggests that the ability to acquire language is hard-wired into the brain. Emergentists argue that language arises from general cognitive capabilities such as pattern recognition and memory interacting with environmental input.
• Syntax and Grammar: Syntax and grammatical rules are seen as emergent properties resulting from the usage patterns of speakers within a language community. As individuals communicate, certain patterns become regularized and form the basis of syntactic rules. These rules are not explicitly taught but emerge naturally from the communicative practices of the community.
• Connectionist Models: In computational linguistics, connectionist or neural network models provide a framework for understanding how language properties can emerge from simpler processes. These models simulate how neural connections in the brain can give rise to complex behaviors like language comprehension and production through learning and interaction. For instance, a neural network might learn to generate grammatically correct sentences by being exposed to large datasets of language, demonstrating emergent properties from the training data.
• Language Evolution: From a sociolinguistic perspective, the evolution of language itself can be viewed through an emergentist lens. Languages change and develop new properties over time as speakers interact, adapt, and innovate. These changes are emergent phenomena resulting from social interaction, cultural exchange, and cognitive adaptation.

Pragmatics and Semantics

• Pragmatics and Semantics: Emergentism also applies to the way meaning (semantics) and context (pragmatics) are derived in language. Meaning is not fixed but emerges from the use of words in specific contexts. Pragmatic rules such as implicatures and speech acts arise from the conventions and expectations of communication within a community. These rules are not pre-determined but develop dynamically as speakers interact.
• Child Language Development: In the context of language acquisition, emergentism suggests that children learn language through interaction with their environment and the gradual build-up of linguistic structures. Children are exposed to language data and through cognitive processes such as pattern recognition and hypothesis testing develop an understanding of linguistic rules. This process is emergent because it arises from the interaction of the child's cognitive capabilities with the linguistic input they receive.

Literary Emergentism

Literary emergentism is a trend in literary theory. It arises as a reaction against traditional interpretive approaches – hermeneutics, structuralism, semiotics, etc., accusing them of analytical reductionism and lack of hierarchy. Literary emergentism claims to describe the emergence of a text as contemplative logic consisting of seven degrees, similar to the epistemological doctrine of Rudolf Steiner in his Philosophy of Freedom.  There are also references to Terrence Deacon, author of the theory of Incomplete nature, according to whom the emergent perspective is metaphysical, whereas the human consciousness emerges as an incessant creation of something from nothing.  According to Dimitar Kalev, in all modern literary-theoretical discourses, there is an epistemological "gap" present between the sensory-imagery phenomena of reading and their proto-phenomena from the text.  Therefore, in any attempt at literary reconstructions, certain "destruction" is reached, which, from an epistemological point of view, is a designation of the existing transcendence as some "interruption" of the divine "top-down". The emergentist approach does not interpret the text but rather reconstructs its becoming, identifying itself with the contemplative logic of the writer, claiming that it possesses a being of ideal objectivity and universal accessibility.

Criticisms and Debates

Emergentism, like any philosophical theory, has been subject to various criticisms and debates. These discussions revolve around the validity of emergent properties, the explanatory power of emergentism, and its implications for other areas of philosophy and science.

Main Criticisms

• Lack of Empirical Evidence: One of the primary criticisms of emergentism is the perceived lack of empirical evidence supporting the existence of emergent properties. Critics argue that many so-called emergent properties can eventually be explained by more detailed examination of lower-level processes. For instance, while consciousness is often cited as an emergent property, some scientists believe that advances in neuroscience may eventually explain it in purely physical terms.
• Conceptual Ambiguity: The term "emergence" is sometimes criticized for being vague and inconsistently defined. Critics argue that without a clear and precise definition, the concept of emergence can be too flexible, leading to its overuse or misuse in various contexts. This ambiguity can make it difficult to distinguish genuine emergent properties from those that are merely complex.
• Reductionist Arguments: Reductionists argue that all phenomena, including those considered emergent, can ultimately be explained by their constituent parts and the laws governing them. They contend that emergentism often underestimates the explanatory power of reductionist approaches and overestimates the novelty of emergent properties. According to reductionists, what appears to be emergent might simply be the result of incomplete understanding of the underlying processes.

Responses to Criticisms

• Philosophical Counterarguments: Proponents of emergentism argue that emergent properties are necessary to explain the complexity of certain phenomena. They maintain that some properties cannot be reduced to or predicted from their constituent parts, emphasizing the importance of considering the system as a whole. For example, the wetness of water or the behavior of a market cannot be fully understood by analyzing individual molecules or transactions alone.
• Scientific Evidence Supporting Emergence: Emergentists point to various examples in physics, biology, and cognitive science where emergent properties provide the best explanations for observed phenomena. In physics, phenomena such as superconductivity and quantum entanglement are often cited as cases where emergent properties are crucial for understanding the behavior of systems. In biology, the emergence of life from non-living matter and the complex behavior of ecosystems are seen as evidence supporting emergentist views.
• Clarifying Definitions and Criteria: In response to the criticism of conceptual ambiguity, some philosophers and scientists have worked on providing clearer definitions and criteria for emergence. They aim to distinguish between weak and strong emergence more precisely and to specify the conditions under which properties can be considered genuinely emergent. This effort helps to reduce the flexibility and potential misuse of the concept.

These criticisms and debates highlight the dynamic and evolving nature of emergentism, reflecting its impact and relevance across various fields of inquiry. By addressing these challenges, proponents of emergentism continue to refine and strengthen their theoretical framework.

Applications of Emergentism

Emergentism finds applications across various scientific and philosophical domains, illustrating how complex behaviors and properties can arise from simpler interactions. These applications underscore the practical relevance of emergentist theories and their impact on understanding complex systems.

In Science

• Complex Systems: Emergentism provides a framework for understanding complex systems in various scientific fields. In physics, emergent properties such as superconductivity arise from the collective behavior of electrons, which cannot be fully explained by examining individual electrons alone. This collective behavior demonstrates how new properties emerge from the interactions within the system, offering insights into phenomena that are otherwise difficult to explain through reductionist approaches.
• Network Theory: Network theory applies emergentist principles to study how interactions within networks lead to emergent properties. In biology, for example, metabolic networks exhibit robustness and adaptability as emergent behaviors arising from the interactions of enzymes and substrates. These properties are crucial for the survival of organisms in changing environments and provide a deeper understanding of biological resilience and adaptation.
• Quantum Mechanics: In quantum mechanics, phenomena such as quantum entanglement and superposition illustrate emergent properties that challenge classical notions of causality and locality. These properties emerge from the complex interactions of quantum particles, providing a richer understanding of the fundamental nature of matter and energy. Emergentist approaches in quantum mechanics help bridge the gap between microscopic and macroscopic descriptions of physical systems.

In Philosophy

• Philosophy of Mind: Emergentism plays a significant role in the philosophy of mind, particularly in discussions about consciousness and mental states. It offers an alternative to reductionist views by suggesting that mental properties emerge from neural processes but possess their own causal powers. This perspective helps address the mind-body problem by proposing that consciousness is an emergent property that cannot be fully explained by physical processes alone, thus enriching our understanding of the nature of mind and cognition.
• Ethics and Morality: Emergentist theories are applied in ethics to explain how moral values and ethical principles can emerge from social and cultural interactions. According to emergentism, ethical norms and values are not pre-existing entities but arise from the complex interactions and agreements within a society. This view helps to understand the dynamic and evolving nature of morality, providing a framework for addressing ethical issues in a rapidly changing world.
• Epistemology: In epistemology, emergentism is used to explore how knowledge and understanding arise from simpler cognitive processes. Emergentist theories suggest that our ability to form concepts, reason, and understand complex phenomena results from the interactions of more basic cognitive functions. This approach provides insights into the nature of knowledge and the processes underlying learning and comprehension.

Interdisciplinary Applications

• Artificial Intelligence: In artificial intelligence (AI), emergentist principles are used to develop systems that exhibit intelligent behavior through the interaction of simpler algorithms. Machine learning models, such as neural networks, demonstrate how complex behaviors can emerge from the training and adaptation processes. These models learn to recognize patterns and make decisions based on large datasets, reflecting the principles of emergentism in their design and functionality.
• Sociology and Economics: Emergentism is applied in sociology and economics to understand how complex social behaviors and economic trends arise from individual actions and interactions. In sociology, emergentist theories help explain how social norms, institutions, and collective behaviors develop from the interactions of individuals within a society. In economics, emergent properties such as market trends and economic cycles are seen as the result of numerous individual decisions and actions, providing a comprehensive framework for analyzing economic phenomena.
• Linguistics: Emergentist approaches in linguistics study how language structures and rules emerge from the interactions and usage patterns of speakers. Syntax, grammar, and meaning are seen as emergent properties resulting from social interactions and cognitive processes. This perspective provides a dynamic understanding of language development and evolution, highlighting the role of interaction and adaptation in linguistic phenomena.

These applications of emergentism illustrate its broad relevance and utility in explaining and understanding complex systems across various domains, highlighting the interdisciplinary impact of emergentist theories.

Notable Philosophers and Scientists in Emergentism

Emergentism has been significantly shaped and debated by numerous philosophers and scientists over the years. Here are notable figures who have contributed to the development and discourse of emergentism, providing a rich tapestry of ideas and empirical evidence that support the theory's application across various domains:

• Aristotle

Contribution: One of the earliest thinkers to suggest that the whole could possess properties that its individual parts did not. This idea laid the foundational groundwork for emergentist thought by emphasizing that certain phenomena cannot be fully explained by their individual components alone. Major Work: Metaphysics

• George Henry Lewes

Contribution: Formally introduced the term "emergence" in the 19th century. He distinguished between "resultant" and "emergent" properties where emergent properties could not be predicted from the properties of the parts, a critical distinction in emergentist theory. Major Work: Problems of Life and Mind

• John Stuart Mill

Contribution: Early proponent of emergentism in social and political contexts. Mill's work emphasized the importance of understanding social phenomena as more than the sum of individual actions, highlighting the emergent properties in societal systems. Major Work: A System of Logic

• C. D. Broad

Contribution: In his 1925 book The Mind and Its Place in Nature, Broad argued that mental states were emergent properties of brain processes. He developed a comprehensive philosophical framework for emergentism, advocating for the irreducibility of higher-level properties. Major Work: The Mind and Its Place in Nature

• Samuel Alexander

Contribution: In his work Space, Time, and Deity, Alexander suggested that emergent qualities like consciousness and life could not be fully explained by underlying physical processes alone, emphasizing the novelty and unpredictability of emergent properties. Major Work: Space, Time, and Deity

• Jaegwon Kim

Contribution: A prominent critic and commentator on emergentism. Kim extensively analyzed the limits and scope of emergent properties, particularly in the context of mental causation and the philosophy of mind, questioning the coherence and causal efficacy of emergent properties. Major Work: Mind in a Physical World

• Michael Polanyi

Contribution: Advanced the idea that emergent properties are irreducible and possess their own causal powers. Polanyi's work in chemistry and philosophy of science provided empirical and theoretical support for emergentist concepts, especially in complex systems and hierarchical structures. Major Work: Personal Knowledge

• Philip W. Anderson

Contribution: Nobel laureate in physics, Anderson's work on condensed matter physics and the theory of superconductivity provided significant empirical examples of emergent phenomena. His famous essay "More is Different" argued for the necessity of emergentist explanations in physics. Major Work: More is Different

• Stuart Kauffman

Contribution: A theoretical biologist whose work in complex systems and self-organization highlighted the role of emergence in biological evolution and the origin of life. Kauffman emphasized the unpredictability and novelty of emergent biological properties. Major Work: The Origins of Order

• Roger Sperry

Contribution: Neuropsychologist and Nobel laureate, Sperry's split-brain research contributed to the understanding of consciousness as an emergent property of brain processes. He argued that emergent mental properties have causal efficacy, influencing the lower-level neural processes. Major Work: Science and Moral Priority

• Terrence Deacon

Contribution: Anthropologist and neuroscientist, Deacon's work on the evolution of language and human cognition explored how emergent properties arise from neural and social interactions. His book Incomplete Nature delves into the emergentist explanation of life and mind. Major Work: Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Matter

• Steven Johnson

Contribution: An author and theorist whose popular science books, such as Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software, have brought the concept of emergentism to a broader audience. Johnson illustrates how complex systems in nature and society exhibit emergent properties. Major Work: Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software

Future research

Emergentism offers a valuable framework for understanding complex systems and phenomena that cannot be fully explained by their constituent parts. Its interdisciplinary nature and broad applicability make it a significant area of study in both philosophy and science. Future research will continue to explore the implications and potential of emergent properties, contributing to our understanding of the natural world.

God in Abrahamic religions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Abrahamic_religions

Monotheism—the belief that there is only one deity—is the focus of the Abrahamic religions, which like-mindedly conceive God as the all-powerful and all-knowing deity from whom Abraham received a divine revelation, according to their respective narratives. The most prominent Abrahamic religions are Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. They, alongside Samaritanism, Druzism, the Baháʼí Faith, and Rastafari, all share a common core foundation in the form of worshipping Abraham's God, who is identified as Yahweh in Hebrew and called Allah in Arabic. Likewise, the Abrahamic religions share similar features distinguishing them from other categories of religions:

• all of their theological traditions are, to some extent, influenced by the depiction of the God of Israel in the Hebrew Bible;
• all of them trace their roots to Abraham as a common genealogical and spiritual patriarch.

In the Abrahamic tradition, God is one, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and the creator of the universe. God is typically referred to with masculine grammatical articles and pronouns only, and is further held to have the properties of holiness, justice, omnibenevolence, and omnipresence. Adherents of the Abrahamic religions believe that God is also transcendent, meaning that he is outside of both space and time and therefore not subject to anything within his creation, but at the same time a personal God: intimately involved, listening to individual prayer, and reacting to the actions of his creatures.

With regard to Christianity, religion scholars have differed on whether Mormonism belongs with mainstream Christian tradition as a whole (i.e., Nicene Christianity), with some asserting that it amounts to a distinct Abrahamic religion in itself due to noteworthy theological differences. Rastafari, the heterogenous movement that originated in Jamaica in the 1930s, is variously classified by religion scholars as either an international socio-religious movement, a distinct Abrahamic religion, or simply a new religious movement.

Judaism

Main article: God in Judaism

Further information: Elohim, Shema Yisrael, and Tetragrammaton

The Mesha Stele bears the earliest known reference (840 BCE) to the Israelite god Yahweh.

Judaism, the oldest Abrahamic religion, is based on a strict, exclusive monotheism, finding its origins in the sole veneration of Yahweh, the predecessor to the Abrahamic conception of God. The names of God used most often in the Hebrew Bible are the Tetragrammaton (Hebrew: יהוה, romanized: YHWH) and Elohim. Jews traditionally do not pronounce it, and instead refer to God as HaShem, literally "the Name". In prayer, the Tetragrammaton is substituted with the pronunciation Adonai, meaning "My Lord". This is referred to primarily in the Torah: "Hear O Israel: the LORD is our God, the LORD is One" (Deuteronomy 6:4).

God is conceived as unique and perfect, free from all faults, deficiencies, and defects, and further held to be omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and completely infinite in all of his attributes, who has no partner or equal, being the sole creator of everything in existence. In Judaism, God is never portrayed in any image. The idea of God as a duality or trinity is heretical in Judaism—it's considered akin to polytheism. The Torah specifically forbade ascribing partners to share his singular sovereignty, as he is considered to be the absolute one without a second, indivisible, and incomparable being, who is similar to nothing and nothing is comparable to him. Thus, God is unlike anything in or of the world as to be beyond all forms of human thought and expression.

God in Judaism is conceived as anthropomorphic, unique, benevolent, eternal, the creator of the universe, and the ultimate source of morality. Thus, the term God corresponds to an actual ontological reality, and is not merely a projection of the human psyche. Traditional interpretations of Judaism generally emphasize that God is personal yet also transcendent and able to intervene in the world, while some modern interpretations of Judaism emphasize that God is an impersonal force or ideal rather than a supernatural being concerned with the universe.

Christianity

Main articles: God in Christianity and Attributes of God in Christianity

Further information: Diversity in early Christian theology, Great Apostasy, Nontrinitarianism, Son of God (Christianity), and Trinity

Christianity originated in 1st-century Judea from a sect of apocalyptic Jewish Christians within the realm of Second Temple Judaism, and thus shares most of its beliefs about God, including his omnipotence, omniscience, his role as creator of all things, his personality, immanence, transcendence and ultimate unity, with the innovation that Jesus of Nazareth is considered to be, in one way or another, the fulfillment of the ancient biblical prophecies about the Jewish Messiah, the completion of the Law of the prophets of Israel, the Son of God, and/or the incarnation of God himself as a human being.

Most Christian denominations believe Jesus to be the incarnated Son of God, which is the main theological divergence with respect to the exclusive monotheism of the other Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Samaritanism, the Baháʼí Faith, and Islam. Although personal salvation is implicitly stated in Judaism, personal salvation by grace and a recurring emphasis in orthodox theological beliefs is particularly emphasized in Christianity, often contrasting this with a perceived over-emphasis in law observance as stated in Jewish law, where it is contended that a belief in an intermediary between man and God or in the multiplicity of persons in the Godhead is against the Noahide laws, and thus not monotheistic.

In mainstream Christianity, theology and beliefs about God are enshrined in the doctrine of monotheistic Trinitarianism, which holds that the three persons of the trinity are distinct but all of the same indivisible essence, meaning that the Father is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and the Son is God, yet there is one God as there is one indivisible essence. These mainstream Christian doctrines were largely formulated at the Council of Nicaea and are enshrined in the Nicene Creed. The Trinitarian view emphasizes that God has a will, and that God the Son has two natures, divine and human, though these are never in conflict but joined in the hypostatic union.

Mormonism

Main article: God in Mormonism

Further information: Beliefs and practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

In his 1838 personal history, Joseph Smith wrote that he had seen two personages in the spring of 1820. In 1843, Smith stated that these personages, God the Father and Jesus Christ, had separate, tangible bodies.

In the belief system held by the Christian churches that adhere to the Latter Day Saint movement and most Mormon denominations, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), the term God refers to Elohim (God the Father), whereas Godhead means a council of three distinct gods: Elohim (the Eternal Father), Jehovah (God the Son, Jesus Christ), and the Holy Ghost, in a Non-trinitarian conception of the Godhead. The Father and Son have perfected, material bodies, while the Holy Ghost is a spirit and does not have a body. This differs significantly from mainstream Christian Trinitarianism; in Mormonism, the three persons are considered to be physically separate beings, or personages, but united in will and purpose. As such, the term Godhead differs from how it is used in mainstream Christianity. This description of God represents the orthodoxy of the LDS Church, established early in the 19th century.

Unitarianism

A small minority of Christians, largely coming under the heading of Unitarianism, hold Non-trinitarian conceptions of God.

Islam

Main articles: Allah and God in Islam

In Islam, God (Allah) (Arabic: ٱلل‍َّٰه, romanized: Allāh, IPA: [ɑɫˈɫɑː(h)] ^ⓘ, lit. "the God") is the supreme being, all-powerful and all-knowing creator, sustainer, ordainer, and judge of the universe. Islam puts a heavy emphasis on the conceptualization of God as strictly singular (tawhid). He is considered to be unique (wahid) and inherently one (ahad), all-merciful and omnipotent. According to the Quran, there are 99 Names of God (al-asma al-husna, lit. meaning: "The best names") each of which evoke a distinct characteristic of God. All these names refer to Allah, considered to be the supreme and all-comprehensive divine Arabic name. Among the 99 names of God, the most famous and most frequent of these names are "the Entirely Merciful" (al-Rahman) and "the Especially Merciful" (al-Rahim).

Islam rejects the doctrine of the Incarnation and the notion of a personal God as anthropomorphic, because it is seen as demeaning to the transcendence of God. The Quran prescribes the fundamental transcendental criterion in the following verses: "The Lord of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, so serve Him and be patient in His service. Do you know any one equal to Him?" (19:65); "(He is) the Creator of the heavens and the earth: there is nothing whatever like unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things)" (42:11); "And there is none comparable unto Him" (112:4). Therefore, Islam strictly rejects all forms of anthropomorphism and anthropopathism of the concept of God, and thus categorically rejects the Christian concept of the Trinity or division of persons in the Godhead.

Muslims believe that Allah is the same God worshipped by the members of the Abrahamic religions that preceded Islam, i.e. Judaism and Christianity (29:46). Creation and ordering of the universe is seen as an act of prime mercy for which all creatures sing his glories and bear witness to his unity and lordship. According to the Quran: "No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision. He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things" (6:103). Similarly to Jews, Muslims explicitly reject the divinity of Jesus and don't believe in him as the incarnated God or Son of God, but instead consider him a human prophet and the promised Messiah sent by God, although the Islamic tradition itself is not unanimous on the question of Jesus' death and afterlife.

Baháʼí Faith

Main article: God in the Baháʼí Faith

Further information: Baháʼí cosmology and Baháʼí teachings

The writings of the Baháʼí Faith describe a monotheistic, personal, inaccessible, omniscient, omnipresent, imperishable, and almighty God who is the creator of all things in the universe. The existence of God and the universe is thought to be eternal, without a beginning or end.

Though transcendent and inaccessible directly, God is nevertheless seen as conscious of the creation, with a will and purpose that is expressed through messengers recognized in the Baháʼí Faith as the Manifestations of God (all the Jewish prophets, Zoroaster, Krishna, Gautama Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Báb, and ultimately Baháʼu'lláh). The purpose of the creation is for the created to have the capacity to know and love its creator, through such methods as prayer, reflection, and being of service to humankind. God communicates his will and purpose to humanity through his intermediaries, the prophets and messengers who have founded various world religions from the beginning of humankind up to the present day, and will continue to do so in the future.

The Manifestations of God reflect divine attributes, which are creations of God made for the purpose of spiritual enlightenment, onto the physical plane of existence. In the Baháʼí view, all physical beings reflect at least one of these attributes, and the human soul can potentially reflect all of them. The Baháʼí conception of God rejects all pantheistic, anthropomorphic, and incarnationist beliefs about God.

Throne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throne

A drawing of a throne, on a dais under a baldachin

A throne is the seat of state of a potentate or dignitary, especially the seat occupied by a sovereign (or viceroy) on state occasions; or the seat occupied by a pope or bishop on ceremonial occasions. "Throne" in an abstract sense can also refer to the monarchy itself, an instance of metonymy, and is also used in many expressions such as "the power behind the throne".

A throne is a symbol of divine and secular rule and the establishment of a throne as a defining sign of the claim to power and authority. It can be with a high backrest and feature heraldic animals or other decorations as adornment and as a sign of power and strength. A throne can be placed underneath a canopy or baldachin. The throne can stand on steps or a dais and is thus always elevated. The expression "ascend (mount) the throne" takes its meaning from the steps leading up to the dais or platform, on which the throne is placed, being formerly comprised in the word's significance. Coats of arms or insignia can feature on throne or canopy and represent the dynasty. Even in the physical absence of the ruler an empty throne can symbolise the everlasting presence of the monarchical authority.

When used in a political or governmental sense, a throne typically exists in a civilization, nation, tribe, or other politically designated group that is organized or governed under a monarchical system. Throughout much of human history societies have been governed under monarchical systems, in the beginning as autocratic systems and later evolved in most cases as constitutional monarchies within liberal democratic systems, resulting in a wide variety of thrones that have been used by given heads of state. These have ranged from stools in places such as in Africa to ornate chairs and bench-like designs in Europe and Asia, respectively. Often, but not always, a throne is tied to a philosophical or religious ideology held by the nation or people in question, which serves a dual role in unifying the people under the reigning monarch and connecting the monarch upon the throne to his or her predecessors, who sat upon the throne previously. Accordingly, many thrones are typically held to have been constructed or fabricated out of rare or hard to find materials that may be valuable or important to the land in question. Depending on the size of the throne in question it may be large and ornately designed as an emplaced instrument of a nation's power, or it may be a symbolic chair with little or no precious materials incorporated into the design.

When used in a religious sense, throne can refer to one of two distinct uses. The first use derives from the practice in churches of having a bishop or higher-ranking religious official (archbishop, pope, etc.) sit on a special chair which in church referred to by written sources as a "throne", or “cathedra” (Latin for 'chair') and is intended to allow such high-ranking religious officials a place to sit in their place of worship. The other use for throne refers to a belief among many of the world's monotheistic and polytheistic religions that the deity or deities that they worship are seated on a throne. Such beliefs go back to ancient times, and can be seen in surviving artwork and texts which discuss the idea of ancient gods (such as the Twelve Olympians) seated on thrones. In the major Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the Throne of Yahweh is attested to in religious scriptures and teachings, although the origin, nature, and idea of the Throne of Yahweh in these religions differs according to the given religious ideology practiced.

In the west, a throne is most identified as the seat upon which a person holding the title King, Queen, Emperor, or Empress sits in a nation using a monarchy political system, although there are a few exceptions, notably with regards to religious officials such as the pope and bishops of various sects of the Christian faith. Changing geo-political tides have resulted in the collapse of several dictatorial and autocratic governments, which in turn have left a number of throne chairs empty. Many of these thrones—such as China's Dragon Throne—survive today as historic examples of nation's previous government.

Antiquity

Fanciful depiction of Solomon on his throne

Thrones were found throughout the canon of ancient furniture. The depiction of monarchs and deities as seated on chairs is a common topos in the iconography of the Ancient Near East.

The word throne itself is from Greek θρόνος (thronos), "seat, chair", in origin a derivation from the PIE root *dher- "to support" (also in dharma "post, sacrificial pole"). Early Greek Διὸς θρόνους (Dios thronous) was a term for the "support of the heavens", i.e. the axis mundi, which term when Zeus became an anthropomorphic god was imagined as the "seat of Zeus". In Ancient Greek, a "thronos" was a specific but ordinary type of chair with a footstool, a high status object but not necessarily with any connotations of power. The Achaeans (according to Homer) were known to place additional, empty thrones in the royal palaces and temples so that the gods could be seated when they wished to be. The most famous of these thrones was the throne of Apollo in Amyclae.

The Romans also had two types of thrones—one for the emperor and one for the goddess Roma whose statues were seated upon thrones, which became centers of worship.

Persia

Stone relief depicting Xerxes the Great seated on a throne

In Persia, the traditional name of the throne is the Takht-e Padeshah. From the Achaemenid era to the last Iranian dynasty Pahlavi, the throne was used for sitting shahs.

Hebrew Bible

The word "throne" in English translations of the Bible renders Hebrew כסא kissē'. The pharaoh of the Exodus is described as sitting on a throne (Exodus 11:5, 12:29), but mostly the term refers to the throne of the kingdom of Israel, often called the "throne of David" or "throne of Solomon". The literal throne of Solomon is described in 1 Kings 10:18–20: "Moreover the king made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with the best gold.. The throne had six steps, and the top of the throne was round behind: and there were stays on either side on the place of the seat, and two lions stood beside the stays. And twelve lions stood there on the one side and on the other upon the six steps: there was not the like made in any kingdom." In the Book of Esther (5:3), the same word refers to the throne of the king of Persia.

The God of Israel himself is frequently described as sitting on a throne, referred to outside of the Bible as the Throne of God, in the Psalms, and in a vision Isaiah (6:1), and notably in Isaiah 66:1, YHWH says of himself "The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool" (this verse is alluded to by Matthew 5:34-35).

Christian

Main article: Cathedra

Biblical

Vision of John of Patmos from the Book of Revelation (4:4)—four seraphim surround the throne of Christ, twenty-four elders sit on thrones to either side (Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry)

In the Old Testament, Book of Kings I explicits the throne of Solomon: "Then the king made a great throne covered with ivory and overlaid with fine gold. The throne had six steps, and its back had a rounded top. On both sides of the seat were armrests, with a lion standing beside each of them. Twelve lions stood on the six steps, one at either end of each step" in Chapter 10 18-20.

In the New Testament, the angel Gabriel also refers to this throne in the Gospel of Luke (1:32–33): "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end."

Jesus promised his apostles that they would sit upon "twelve thrones", judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28). John's Revelation states: "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away" (Revelation 20:11).

The Apostle Paul speaks of "thrones" in Colossians 1:16. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, in his work De Coelesti Hierarchia (VI.7), interprets this as referring to one of the ranks of angels (corresponding to the Hebrew Arelim or Ophanim). This concept was expanded upon by Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica (I.108), wherein the thrones are concerned with carrying out divine justice.

In Medieval times the "Throne of Solomon" was associated with the Virgin Mary, who was depicted as the throne upon which Jesus sat. The ivory in the biblical description of the Throne of Solomon was interpreted as representing purity, the gold representing divinity, and the six steps of the throne stood for the six virtues. Psalm 45:9 was also interpreted as referring to the Virgin Mary, with the entire Psalm describing a royal throne room.

Ecclesiastical

Throne of the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople in the Phanar, Istanbul. On the dais the Gospel is enthroned on a curule chair, in front of it, lower down is the patriarch's throne.

From ancient times, bishops of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican and other churches where episcopal offices exist, have been formally seated on a throne, called a cathedra (Greek: κάθεδρα, seat). Traditionally located in the sanctuary, the cathedra symbolizes the bishop's authority to teach the faith (hence the expression "ex cathedra") and to govern his flock.

Ex cathedra refers to the explicative authority, notably the extremely rarely used procedure required for a papal declaration to be 'infallible' under Roman Catholic canon law. In several languages the word deriving from cathedra is commonly used for an academic teaching mandate, the professorial chair.

From the presence of this cathedra (throne), which can be as elaborate and precious as fits a secular prince (even if the prelate is not a prince of the church in the secular sense), a bishop's primary church is called a cathedral. In the Roman Catholic Church, a basilica—from the Greek basilikos 'royal'—now refers to the presence there of a papal canopy (ombrellino), part of his regalia, and applies mainly to many cathedrals and Catholic churches of similar importance or splendor. In Roman Antiquity a basilica was secular public hall. Thus, the term basilica may also refer to a church designed after the manner of the ancient Roman basilica. Many of the churches built by the emperor Constantine the Great and Justinian are of the basilica style.

Some other prelates besides bishops are permitted the use of thrones, such as abbots and abbesses. These are often simpler than the thrones used by bishops and there may be restrictions on the style and ornamentation used on them, according to the regulations and traditions of the particular denomination.

As a mark of distinction, Roman Catholic bishops and higher prelates have a right to a canopy above their thrones at certain ecclesiastical functions. It is sometimes granted by special privilege to prelates inferior to bishops, but always with limitations as to the days on which it may be used and the character of its ornamentation. The liturgical color of the canopy should correspond with that of the other vestments. When ruling monarchs attend services, they are also allowed to be seated on a throne that is covered by a canopy, but their seats must be outside the sanctuary.

In the Greek Orthodox Church, the bishop's throne will often combine features of the monastic choir stall (kathisma) with appurtenances inherited from the Byzantine court, such as a pair of lions seated at the foot of the throne.

The term "throne" is often used in reference to patriarchs to designate their ecclesiastical authority; for instance, "the Ecumenical Throne" refers to the authority of the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople.

Western bishops may also use a faldstool to fulfill the liturgical purpose of the cathedra when not in their own cathedral.

Papal

Drawing of the Cathedra Sancti Petri, in St. Peter's Basilica, Rome

In the Roman Catholic Church, the pope is an elected monarch, both under canon law as supreme head of the church, and under international law as the head of state—styled "sovereign pontiff"—of the Vatican City State (the sovereign state within the city of Rome established by the 1929 Lateran Treaty). Until 1870, the pope was the elected monarch of the Papal States, which for centuries constituted one of the largest political powers on the divided Italian peninsula. To this day, the Holy See maintains officially recognised diplomatic status, and papal nuncios and legates are deputed on diplomatic missions throughout the world.

The pope's throne (Cathedra Romana) is located in the apse of the Archbasilica of St. John Lateran, his cathedral as Bishop of Rome.

In the apse of Saint Peter's Basilica, above the "Altar of the Chair" lies the Cathedra Petri, a throne believed to have been used by St Peter himself and other earlier popes; this relic is enclosed in a gilt bronze casting and forms part of a huge monument designed by Gian Lorenzo Bernini.

Unlike at his cathedral (Archbasilica of St. John Lateran), there is no permanent cathedra for the pope in St Peter's Basilica, so a removable throne is placed in the basilica for the pope's use whenever he presides over a liturgical ceremony. Prior to the liturgical reforms that occurred in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, a huge removable canopied throne was placed above an equally removable dais in the choir side of the "Altar of the Confession" (the high altar above the tomb of St Peter and beneath the monumental bronze baldachin); this throne stood between the apse and the Altar of the Confession.

This practice has fallen out of use with the 1960s and 1970s reform of Papal liturgy and, whenever the pope celebrates Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, a simpler portable throne is now placed on platform in front of the Altar of the Confession. Whenever Pope Benedict XVI celebrated the Liturgy of the Hours at St Peter's, a more elaborate removable throne was placed on a dais to the side of the Altar of the Chair. When the pope celebrates Mass on the basilica steps facing St. Peter's Square, portable thrones are also used.

In the past, the pope was also carried on occasions in a portable throne, called the sedia gestatoria. Originally, the sedia was used as part of the elaborate procession surrounding papal ceremonies that was believed to be the most direct heir of pharaonic splendor, and included a pair of flabella (fans made from ostrich feathers) to either side. Pope John Paul I at first abandoned the use of these implements, but later in his brief reign began to use the sedia so that he could be seen more easily by the crowds. The use of the sedia was abandoned by Pope John Paul II in favor of the so-called "popemobile" when outside. Near the end of his pontificate, Pope John Paul II had a specially constructed throne on wheels that could be used inside.

Prior to 1978, at the papal conclave, each cardinal was seated on a throne in the Sistine Chapel during the balloting. Each throne had a canopy over it. After a successful election, once the new pope accepted election and decided by what name he would be known, the cardinals would all lower their canopies, leaving only the canopy over the newly elected pope. This was the new pope's first throne. This tradition was dramatically portrayed in the 1968 film The Shoes of the Fisherman.

Medieval and early modern periods

Throne of Charlemagne at Aachen Cathedral

In European feudal countries, monarchs often were seated on thrones, based in all likelihood on the Roman magisterial chair. These thrones were originally quite simple, especially when compared to their Asian counterparts. One of the grandest and most important was the Throne of Ivan "the Terrible". Dating from the mid-16th century, it is shaped as a high-backed chair with arm rests, and adorned with ivory and walrus bone plaques intricately carved with mythological, heraldic and life scenes. The plaques carved with scenes from the biblical account of King David's life are of particular relevance, as David was seen as the ideal for Christian monarchs. In practice, any chair the monarch occupied in a formal setting served as a "throne", though there were often special chairs used only for this kept in places the monarch often went to. Thrones began to be made in pairs, for the king and queen, which remained common in later periods. Sometimes they are identical, or the queen's throne may be slightly less grand.

The throne of the Byzantine Empire (Magnaura) included elaborate automatons of singing birds. In the 'regency' (nominally an Ottoman province, de facto an independent realm) of the bey of Tunis, the throne was called kursi.

Although medieval examples tended to be retained in the early modern period, having acquired the aura of tradition, when new thrones were made they either continued medieval styles or were just very grand and elaborate versions of contemporary chairs or armchairs.

South Asia

Painting of the (later) Peacock Throne in the Diwan-i-Khas of the Red Fort, around 1850

In the Indian subcontinent, the traditional Sanskrit name for the throne was siṃhāsana (lit., seat of a lion). In the Mughal times the throne was called Shāhī takht ([ˈʃaːhiː ˈtəxt]). The term gadi or gaddi (Hindustani pronunciation: [ˈɡəd̪ːi], also called rājgaddī) referred to a seat with a cushion used as a throne by Indian princes. That term was usually used for the throne of a Hindu princely state's ruler, while among Muslim princes or Nawabs, save exceptions such as the Travancore State royal family, the term musnad ([ˈməsnəd]), also spelt as musnud, was more common, even though both seats were similar.

The Throne of Jahangir was built by Mughal emperor Jahangir in 1602 and is located at the Diwan-i-Khas (hall of private audience) at the Agra Fort.

The Peacock Throne was the seat of the Mughal emperors of India. It was commissioned in the early 17th century by Emperor Shah Jahan and was located in the Red Fort of Delhi. The original throne was subsequently captured and taken as a war trophy in 1739 by the Persian king Nadir Shah and has been lost ever since. A replacement throne based on the original was commissioned afterwards and existed until the Indian Rebellion of 1857.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh's throne was made by the goldsmith Hafez Muhammad Multani about 1820 to 1830. Made of wood and resin core, covered with sheets of repoussé, chased and engraved gold.

The Golden Throne or Chinnada Simhasana or Ratna Simahasana in Kannada is the royal seat of the rulers of the Kingdom of Mysore. The Golden Throne is kept at Mysore Palace.

Southeast Asia

Painting of the Burmese royal throne in the shape of a palin

See also: Palin (throne)

In Burma, the traditional name for a throne is palin, from the Pali term pallaṅka, which means "couch" or "sofa." The Burmese palin in pre-colonial times was used to seat the sovereign and his main consort, and is today used to seat religious leaders such as sayadaws, and images of the Buddha. Royal thrones are called yazapalin (ရာဇပလ္လင်), while thrones seating images or statues of the Buddha are called gaw pallin (ဂေါ့ပလ္လင်) or samakhan (စမ္မခဏ်), from the Pali term sammakhaṇḍa.

East Asia

The Takamikura throne kept in the Kyoto Imperial Palace is used for accession ceremonies. The metonym "Chrysanthemum Throne" is also used.

The Dragon Throne is the term used to identify the throne of the emperor of China. As the dragon was the emblem of divine imperial power, the throne of the emperor, who was considered a living god, was known as the Dragon Throne. The term can refer to very specific seating, as in the special seating in various structures in the Forbidden City of Beijing or in the palaces of the Old Summer Palace. In an abstract sense, the "Dragon Throne" also refers rhetorically to the head of state and to the monarchy itself. The Daoguang Emperor is said to have referred to his throne as "the divine utensil."

The throne of the emperors of Vietnam are often referred to as ngai vàng ("golden throne") or ngôi báu (大寳/寶座) literally "great precious" (seat/position). The throne is always adorned with the pattern and motif of the Vietnamese dragon, which is the exclusive and privileged symbol of the Vietnamese emperors. The last existing imperial throne in Vietnam is the throne of the Nguyễn emperors placed in the Hall of Supreme Harmony at the Imperial City of Huế. It is designated as a national treasure of Vietnam. In Vietnamese folk religion, the gods, deities and ancestral spirits are believed to seat figuratively on thrones at places of worship. Therefore, on Vietnamese altars, there are various types of liturgical "throne" often decorated with red paint and golden gilding.

The Phoenix Throne (御座/어좌 eojwa) is the term used to identify the throne of the king of Korea. In an abstract sense, the Phoenix Throne also refers rhetorically to the head of state of the Joseon dynasty (1392–1897) and the Empire of Korea (1897–1910). The throne is located at Gyeongbok Palace in Seoul.

The Chrysanthemum Throne (皇位, kōi, lit. "Imperial position/rank") is the term used to identify the throne of the emperor of Japan. The term also can refer to very specific seating, such as the takamikura (高御座) throne in the Shishin-den at Kyoto Imperial Palace.

The throne of the Ryukyu Kingdom is located in Shuri Castle, Naha.

Modern period

Throne-like chair of the Lord Mayor of London in London's Guildhall

During the Russian Empire, the throne in St. George's Hall (the "Greater Throne Room") in the Winter Palace was regarded as the throne of Russia. It sits atop a seven-stepped dais with a proscenium arch above and the symbol of the imperial family behind (the two-headed eagle). Peter I's Room (the "Smaller Throne Room") is modest in comparison to the former. The throne was made for Empress Anna Ivanovna in London. There is also a throne in the Grand Throne Room of the Peterhof Palace.

In some countries with a monarchy, thrones are still used and have important symbolic and ceremonial meaning. Among the most famous thrones still in usage are St Edward's Chair, on which the British monarch is crowned, and the thrones used by monarchs during the state opening of parliaments in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia, and Japan (see above) among others.

Some republics use distinctive throne-like chairs in some state ceremonial. The president of Ireland sits on a former viceregal throne during his or her inauguration ceremony, while lords mayor and lords provost of many British and Irish cities often preside over local councils from throne-like chairs.

Owing to its symbolic nature, a toilet is often jokingly referred to as "a throne" (namely, the "porcelain throne").

List

The Silver Throne of Sweden, inside Stockholm Palace

The Ivory Throne of Tsar Ivan IV of Russia.

The Dragon Throne of the emperor of China in the Forbidden City in Beijing.

Africa

• Golden Throne of pharaoh Tutankhamun
• Golden Stool of the Ashanti Empire
• Throne of David of the Emperors of Ethiopia
• Chieftaincy Stools of Nigeria

Asia

• Dragon Throne of the Emperors of China
• Golden Throne of the Emperors of Vietnam
• Chrysanthemum Throne of the Emperors of Japan (ja:高御座)
• Phoenix Throne of the Kings of Korea
• The Throne of Solomon
• Lion Throne of the Dalai Lama of Tibet
• Lion Throne of Sikkim
• Lion Throne of Konbaung of Burma, (Myanmar)
• Lotus Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Bumblebee Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Hamsa Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Deer Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Elephant Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Conch Throne of Konbaung of Burma
• Stone throne of King Kasyapa from Sri Lanka from the 5th century citadel of Sigiri
• Stone throne of King Nissankamalla from Sri Lanka from the 12th century Polonnaruwa kingdom
• Kandian Throne of the Kingdom of Kandy and the Dominion of Ceylon
• Peacock Throne of the Mughal Emperors of India
• Sun Throne of Persia/Iran
• Marble Throne and Sun Throne of the Persian Shahs
• Peacock Throne of Korea
• Peacock Throne at Montchobo, then at Ava, ancient capitals of Burma
• Saridhaleys "ivory throne" and the Sighsana "lion throne" of the Maldives sultanate
• Sandalwood throne at Bikaner Fort
• Maharaja Ranjit Singh's throne
• Shivaji's Golden Throne (Suvarna Sinhasan)
• Tupou Throne of the Kingdom of Tonga (Polynesian island country)
• Golden Throne in Mysore India

Europe

• Throne of Apollo in Amyclae
• The British monarch (and queen consort if applicable) is enthroned in a Throne Chair at their coronation. (Note: St. Edward's Chair in Westminster Abbey is not generally considered to be a throne.)
• Chairing of the Bard in Wales is an ancient ceremonial procedure which dates back to at least 1176, in which the winning poet is chaired Y Prifardd (The Chief Bard) at the National Eisteddfod
• Chair of St Augustine in Canterbury Cathedral, where Archbishops of Canterbury are inaugurated
• Throne of Charlemagne in the cathedral at Aachen, Germany
• Imperial Throne of the medieval German kings and emperors in Goslar, Germany.
• Throne of the King of Aragon, Valencia, Majorca, Sardinia, Corsica and Sicilia and Count of Barcelona Martin I the Elder
• Ivory Throne of Ivan the Terrible
• papal Chair of Saint Peter and sedia gestatoria
• Throne Chair of Denmark, made of narwhal tusks.
  By Wilhelm Bendz (1830)
• Silver Throne in Stockholm Palace, Sweden, on which Swedish monarchs were crowned
• Queen Lovisa Ulrikas throne at Stockholm Palace, Sweden

North America

The thrones for the Canadian monarch (back left) and his or her royal consort (back right) in the Senate of Canada; these may also be occupied by the sovereign's representative, the governor general, and his or her viceregal consort at the State Opening of Parliament (the speaker's chair is at centre)

• Thrones of Canada for the Canadian monarch and his or her royal consort or the governor general, representing the monarch, and his or her viceregal consort.