One way to ensure that theological discussions do not amount to tennis without a net is to tie them where possible to existing fields of empirical study. In order to do this, one first considers the array of interpretive models in a specific scientific field, looking for areas of compatibility with existing theological models and reevaluating one's theology, or perhaps even one's science, as a result. This chapter explores three examples of issues that have arisen in debates concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics: the role of subjectivity, the many-worlds interpretations, and the debate over indeterminacy and free will. In examining these three classic areas in the interpretation of quantum mechanics it has been the authors' goal not so much to decisively establish one set of systematic conclusions as to defend the importance of this type of discussion. Keywords: quantum mechanics; theology
One way to ensure that theological discussions do not amount to tennis without a net is to tie them where possible to existing fields of empirical study. In order to do this, one first considers the array of interpretive models in a specific scientific field, looking for areas of compatibility with existing theological models and reevaluating one's theology, or perhaps even one's science, as a result. This chapter explores three examples of issues that have arisen in debates concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics: the role of subjectivity, the many-worlds interpretations, and the debate over indeterminacy and free will. In examining these three classic areas in the interpretation of quantum mechanics it has been the authors' goal not so much to decisively establish one set of systematic conclusions as to defend the importance of this type of discussion. Keywords: quantum mechanics; theology
Problem Science (and also the myths concerning science) plays a dom inant role in contem porary society. In this study, the epistemological implications of quantum physics were investigated in order to clear aw ay some of the m yths concerning science. Method Q uantum mechanics was studied. After analyzing the basic postulates of quantum mechanics, several interpretations of the theory were examined. From quantum mechanics and its interpretations several epistemological implications were drawn. Results Several m yths concerning science were identified. These include perm anence of science, reductionism, determinism, absoluteness of logic, subject-object dichotomy, and the reality of the objects of a scientific model. Conclusions It is important for theologians to be aware of the myths concerning science. The main benefit of quantum mechanics for theologians is in clearing away these myths from the metaphysical conceptual space of theology.
This chapter explores about action and quantum whose roots trace back four decades in the field of theology and science. It first discusses methodological issues, including the warrant for a bottom-up approach to action and the problems of the multiple interpretability of quantum and historical relativism. Next it turns to two philosophical issues: the phenomenological domain of the measurement problem and its relation to the indeterministic form of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics. The chapter proposes that a trinitarian doctrine of God is the most suitable context for locating the divine action and quantum mechanics thesis. It finally lays out directions for future research on the philosophical implications of quantum and their relevance for action, including a proposed architecture of philosophical issues, an exploration of implications of Bell's theorem, and a comparison of nonlocality and (in)determinism in Bohm's formulation and the Copenhagen interpretation. Keywords: Copenhagen interpretation; action; quantum
The main idea consists in researching the existence of certain characteristics of nature similar to human reasonability and purposeful actions, originating and rigorously inferable from the postulates of quantum mechanics as well as from those of special and general relativity. The pathway of the “free-will theorems” proved by Conway and Kochen in 2006 and 2009 is followed and pioneered further. Those natural reasonability and teleology are identified as a special subject called “God” and studyable by “quantum theology”, a scientific counterpart of classical theology as far as the latter endeavors to justify rationally God (without quotation marks) postulated by religion, but meaning in the present study, first of all, Christianity. The suggested “quantum theology” is situated in the historical opposition and conflict of science and religion in Modernity and its reflection in Heidegger’s conception of “ontotheology”. The conception of “ontomathematics” introduced in previous papers to unite and unify physics, mathematics, and philosophy is reinterpreted in the present context to be conservatively generalized in a way to include “quantum theology”. Two conceptions, “locality” and “nonlocality”, originating initially from physics and especially, from theory of entanglement and quantum information, are also generalized ontomathematically, and thus in relation to the newly introduced “quantum theology”. The “quantum theology” subject of “God” is juxtaposed with God of religion and billions of believers all over the world. Husserl’s conception of “philosophy as a rigorous science” is considered to be generalized now to theology as quantum theology, particularly by the phenomenon (in the sense of his “phenomenology”) of “God”, or by an “epoché” to whether God exists or not. The research of the phenomenon of “God” is extended to the conception of the “totality” being inherent for philosophy, especially for classical German philosophy preceding Husserl’s phenomenology. Those sequences for philosophy implied by the introduction of quantum theology are investigated further, on the pathway of ontomathematics, also in relation to what “God” should mean for today’s physics and mathematics. The option and research field of “experimental quantum theology” is discussed as a direct corollary from quantum theology though being sacrilegious as for classical theology. The concluding section reflects in a more loose way on the relation of “God” for quantum theology to God for religion and billions of believers all over the world.
Abstract Metaphysicians should pay attention to quantum mechanics, but not because it provides definitive answers to many metaphysical questions. The theory itself is remarkably silent on the nature of the physical world, and the various interpretations of the theory on offer present conflicting ontological pictures. Rather, quantum mechanics is essential to the metaphysician because it reshapes standard metaphysical debates and opens up unforeseen new metaphysical possibilities. Even if quantum mechanics provides few clear answers, there are good reasons to think that any adequate understanding of the quantum world will result in a radical reshaping of our classical worldview in some way or other. Whatever the world is like at the atomic scale, it is almost certainly not the swarm of particles pushed around by forces that is often presupposed. This book guides readers through the theory of quantum mechanics and its implications for metaphysics in a clear and accessible way. The theory and its various interpretations are presented with a minimum of technicality. The consequences of these interpretations for metaphysical debates concerning realism, indeterminacy, causation, determinism, holism, and individuality (among other topics) are explored in detail, stressing the novel form that the debates take given the empirical facts in the quantum domain. While quantum mechanics may not deliver unconditional pronouncements on these issues, the range of possibilities consistent with our knowledge of the empirical world is relatively small—and each possibility is metaphysically revisionary in some way.
Abstract Contemporary theology has realized the importance of integrating what we know from the “new physics”-quantum mechanics and relativity theory-into the metaphysical and ontological categories used by theology to consider God, the world, and the God-world relationship. The categories of subjectivity and relationality have risen to prominence in these discussions. Both academic and popular presentations can obscure the vital distinction between what physicists agree on concerning quantum mechanics and the contested interpretation of quantum mechanics, or what quantum mechanics reveals about reality. After (1) summarizing the significant distinction between quantum mechanics per se and the interpretations of quantum mechanics and (2) the agreed upon quantum mechanical experimental procedure and its attendant mathematical formalism, as well as a few of the foremost interpretations, this paper (3) attempts a minimalist culling of some rudimentary but clear ontological principles and categories from what is agreed upon in quantum mechanics, without appeals-tacit or explicit-to one of the many controversial interpretations or to contestable philosophical assumptions and deductions, and these are: experience, subjectivity, relationship, and event. The paper closes by (4) commending one speculative scheme that is especially conducive to developing an interpretation of quantum mechanics consonant with the ontological principles and categories so derived, that of Alfred North Whitehead
The main idea consists in researching the existence of certain characteristics of nature similar to human reasonability and purposeful actions, originating and rigorously inferable from the postulates of quantum mechanics as well as from those of special and general relativity. The pathway of the “free-will theorems” proved by Conway and Kochen in 2006 and 2009 is followed and pioneered further. Those natural reasonability and teleology are identified as a special subject called “God” and studyable by “quantum theology”, a scientific counterpart of classical theology as far as the latter endeavors to justify rationally God postulated by religion, but meaning in the present study. The suggested “quantum theology” is situated in the historical opposition and conflict of science and religion in Modernity and its reflection in Heidegger’s conception of “ontotheology”. The conception of “ontomathematics” introduced in previous papers to unite and unify physics, mathematics, and philosophy is reinterpreted in the present context to be conservatively generalized in a way to include “quantum theology”. Two conceptions, “locality” and “nonlocality”, originating initially from physics and especially, from theory of entanglement and quantum information, are also generalized ontomathematically, and thus in relation to the newly introduced “quantum theology”. The “quantum theology” subject of “God” is juxtaposed with God of religion and billions of believers all over the world. Husserl’s conception of “philosophy as a rigorous science” is considered to be generalized now to theology as quantum theology, particularly by the phenomenon of “God”, or by an “epoché” to whether God exists or not.