Is the concept of interesting necessarily tied to the pursuit of solutions? I agree with Jesse, that when it comes to philosophical debates such as this much of the debate is due to a lack of precise definitions. What scares me about the word "interesting" is its subjective connotation. When we use the word "interesting" to describe something in our day-to-day life, it is based on opinion as much as our use of the words "pretty" or "stimulating". What I find interesting might not be interesting to you since perhaps you already knew about "it", or perhaps "it" isn't relevant to questions that you generally consider in life. Of course colloquially I agree that "interesting" does not have to mean "relating to a solution" since I might find Buffy the Vampire Slayer interesting while you might consider it rubbish. However, scientifically speaking, if we are going to use the word "interesting" in conjunction with emergent phenomena, it should be used to describe results. If I describe the pattern displayed by some emergent model as "interesting", it implies that I see a deeper meaning behind the structure of this model. Interesting tells us that this result could have an application or is a solution to some problem/question/scientific inquiry. At any rate, that's the only interesting use of the word interesting in my opinion.