What do you mean by "emergent process"?
I mean exactly that: a process that is constantly emerging rather than one with an outcome that is predetermined.
Dude, I was being facetious...
This may come as a surprise to you, but typed characters on an LCD screen don't exactly convey your tone of voice or facial expression. How am I supposed to know if you're being facetious?
Do you mean the use of the definition? That's to clarify not muddy.
I too posted a definition but, for some arbitrary reason, you don't seem to think it occupies equal footing with your own simply because I didn't get it from Merriam Webster or wherever yours came from. Considering the fact that the people who write dictionaries don't aspire to anywhere near the level of intellectual rigour that philosophers do when they come up with their definitions, I see no reason to embrace yours above my own.
He or she clarified that by going into totality...
He didn't "go into" anything whatsoever, he just stated it as a fact and then moved on.
I don't understand the logic in using an established word in a different way.
And I don't understand the logic of clinging to what's "established" just because stepping outside it might be uncomfortable.
I also do not understand why your definition adds to what is a pretty simple use of the word.
If something being "simple" is what makes it worth holding on to, then it's probably just a matter of time before that movie Idiocracy with Luke Wilson becomes a reality. At least down there in Yankee Doodle Dandyland, it looks like it already has.
Why not concede and meet the meaning of the word to make the debate fluent?
Because there's nothing to concede to because you haven't given me good enough reasons to concede to it.
Hopefully you were laughing when you wrote that, otherways I may take it as you think I'm a Jock.
What I think is that this entire conversation has pretty much run it's course and I kinda feel like I'm getting dumber by even continuing to involve myself with it.