more shifty envelopes

Still working on pushing envelopes (and "pushing towards the unobvious," as usual) re:

epistemology, emergence, and shift in wineskins..

I was glad to recently find this, in an article on panentheism:

Emergence:
Describes the process involved in supervenience. Emergence occurs when a new property arises out of a combination of elements. The traditional example is that water emerges out of the combination of oxygen and hydrogen atoms in certain proportions. There are a variety of types of emergence that have been identified. In part-whole emergence, the whole is more than the total of all the parts (Corning 2002). Strong emergence understands evolution to produce new and ontologically distinct levels characterized by their own laws or regularities and causal forces. Weak emergence holds that the new level follows the fundamental causal processes of physics (Clayton 2004, 9). Strong emergence is also known as ontological emergence and weak as epistemological emergence.
link

The research on panentheism was a follow-up on noting that Falk (p. 198) portrays Einstein's Godview as being "roughly" pantheism, when actually the rough connection be might more helpfully be coined "panentheism," (depends on how much personal God one reads between the lines in Einstein..I am guessing more than most see)....drives me nuts when folks confuse the latter with the former. (Check out the proposed term "poly-panentheist" (:...)

Wondering if our current epistemological shift is in sync with

• missiological shift,
• old>new wineskin shift and
• pan to panentheistic shift..

Guess it will pan out in the end...