14._ Person

We affirm that from the inside of the human level of emergence it is impossible to predict --to know "a priori"-- the characteristics or behaviors of the emergent ones of superior levels. That does not mean necessarily that the emergent behaviors in the human level, and the previous levels, cannot be successfully reduced --"a posteriori", of course-- to those of preceding levels.

But we observe that each level surpasses radically to the precedent "assuming it", is to say that it does not annihilate, it does not ignore, it does not contradict, the preceding emergent characteristics, but that includes them, it assumes them, it incorporates them, exceeding them nevertheless in his absolute newness. Thus we see it when considering that the human being is truly an animal, truly an alive being, truly a material being.We can say that it is deduced of the "dialectic" of the emergence.

If this continues being fulfilled in the future levels, as we believe, then, although it is impossible to predict them with certainty, we can hope that they assume, exceeding them without contradicting them, the essential human qualities. In other words, the emergent futures will be more than human but, at least, they will be basically like the humans in its essential characteristics, in the same way that we the human beings are more than animals, but we have basically the essential characteristics of the animals.

The humans we are essentially self-conscious beings and equipped with symbolic thought. It takes to us to extend the natural impulse of satisfaction and survival that we have as alive beings, in an ethical, aesthetic and cognitive development, that goes from "the individual ego" towards "the universal whole". Thus our qualities of understanding and will are conformed. We summarized it saying that each human individual is a "person".

Following the reasoning previous, we can affirm that the emergent superior ones to the human level will be, at least, persons, although they will go much farther; they will be, we could say, "ultra" personal, but, yes, basically, personal.

In particular, this is applied to God. Although in our level it is impossible to us to know Him, and we do not prune to say nothing positively certain about Him, we think that we can affirm that is, at least, personal. It is radically different, exceeding it, to any existing being, but it looks like, basically, more to a human being than to any other thing which at the moment we pruned to know. We are the "image and similarity" of God.

Thus, in a valid analogy, we can speak of the divine understanding and will.

On the other hand, if we see in our ethical, aesthetic and cognitive development the presence of the spirit of God, a manifestation of the creative tendency that impels towards God, then we can affirm to God like the consumation of our hopes, like the perfect good, the beauty, and the truth.
So that the divine understanding and will would not correspond properly to such a development, but to its perfect consumation, the accomplishment absolutely attained of the Spirit.