That makes more sense. Thanks for the response! I’m not sure if can agree with your conclusions. It may be that I’m still missing context you’re working within. My best guess is you’re assuming some axioms that I am not. That doesn’t necessarily mean I think you’re incorrect. We might just be operating with different frameworks.

I agree that strong emergence and weak emergence seem different by your definitions. I’m not convinced strong emergence is a thing. Is there a compelling argument that the perception of strong emergence is actually a more complex weak emergence that the observers have not fully understood?

Something something Occam’s Razor / god of the gaps something. I find these sorts of discussions quite compelling. Thanks again for engaging. :)

I don’t see how either sentence follows. Rephrasing your comment and supplementing it with context to explain your reasoning may better communicate your point.