Quantum weirdness (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 03, 2013, 17:01 (3787 days ago) @ David Turell

Dhw: Most of what you have written makes perfect sense, but it bears no relation to Henry's ramblings. You write "How does an inorganic universe create consciousness, if none is originally present?" A hugely important question. But once more, according to Henry there is no inorganic universe ... there is only mind.-DAVID: Again, a strange but interesting point of view, held by a number of folks. I can't remember off hand who but the idea that the universe can only exist if our minds are present goes back to the original quantum thinkers in the early 20th Century.-I quoted this only in order to demonstrate the fact that your interpretation had no connection with Henry's ramblings. The Big Daddy of philosophical idealism was Bishop Berkeley (1685-1753), but don't tell Henry because he thinks it's a brand new concept.-dhw: Incidentally, while you are championing statements Henry never wrote, I wonder what you think of this one, which he did write: "The authors make the critical point that religious belief flowing out of quantum mechanics does not in any way validate "intelligent design." (Indeed, in my view ID is insulting to GoS, who is surely not, as the authors emphasize, a tinkerer.)"-DAVID: Just his opinion, deism vs. theism. I never said when I presented this essay that I agreed with all of his thoughts. But as you see he represents one facit of the ways quantum madness is interpreted by philosophers. His thought represents a century of this type of thinking. By exposing yourself to this at least you can survey the range of theories about QM that Feynman says no one understands. Should make you feel better about your own confusion.-I'm afraid Henry's enthusiastic promotion of old ideas dressed in quantum flannel does nothing for me at all, but if your touchingly subjective interpretation and defence of it makes you feel better about your own beliefs, it will have served a useful purpose.