Cosmologic philosophy: Howard A. Smith again (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 13, 2016, 12:36 (2902 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: A nice summary of what we think we know and what we know we don’t know. It’s not clear to me, though, why he thinks we have a significant “cosmic” role, assuming that by cosmos he means all the billions of solar systems that have come and gone and will presumably continue to come and go long after our own disappears. Does he really believe we will be able to control them? And I would question whether we need religion to make us treat one another as priceless beings and care for our home. But I would not question that we need to do both, and I have no doubt that Jesus, Moses, Muhammad,Buddha, Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins would all agree.

DAVID: Your question: " It’s not clear to me, though, why he thinks we have a significant “cosmic” role, " relates to John Wheeler and quantum theory. the idea that without human consciousness to observe the universe it might not exist:
"The third answer touches on philosophy, and comes from quantum mechanics. (If you have taken any modern physics course, it is likely you will have heard this notion before.) Matter is composed of wave functions of probability that only become “real entities” when they are measured by a conscious observer. The quantum mechanical pioneer, John Wheeler, is one of several thinkers who have proposed that the unusual nature of the universe suggests it had to evolve conscious beings in order to become real."

Many thanks for explaining the thinking. As with the article under Time’s Arrow, I’m afraid I remain horribly conventional. For me, the very idea that the universe might not exist without human consciousness is anthropocentrism gone crazy.