Newbie here.

I recently encountered these forums and this provides a good opportunity for me to introduce a certain philosophical viewpoint that has been on my mind recently.

Namely, after viewing a few Christian apologetics videos that have to do with quantum mechanics & idealism, and then encountering classical theism, I found myself thinking whether or not these two philosophical viewpoints can be reconciled

But first, let me showcase the videos in question. These videos deal mostly with scientific evidence relating to the Measurement Problem, which entails, at least according to the videos, a type of idealism.

This specific explanation of quantum phenomenon says that all reality is actually a wave-function at it's most fundamental point. A set of probabilities if you will. And that scientific evidence shows that the human mind collapses the wave-function of matter into being a physical object. In other words, matter does not exist independent of observation.

Here are the relevant videos:








That was the first set, this is the second set by a different author, but it is also very relevant as he goes into more detail:






And this here as well is important, as it concerns the scientific evidence for idealism:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.5294

Basically, the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, which states that consciousness causes the collapse of the wave-function and that an objective reality independent of observation does not exist, is something which is supposedly so certain that there is an actual challenge with a monetary reward if you can prove quantum local realism.

Another interesting thing is, in the video Digital Physics Meets Idealism above, a theory of consciousness is put forward which states that consciousness is actually an Integrated Information state.

The reason why this theory exists is because scientists have found that information in the brain is Integrated when we are conscious, but not when we aren't.

As such they deduced that Integrated Information plays an important part in explaining how consciousness can arise.

Then the video shows how the Wheeler DeWitt equation, which was experimentally verified in 2013, basically states how the entire universe is being collapsed by an Integrated Information state outside the universe.

In other words, God. God is basically the mind that collapses the wave-function of the universe and keeps it in existence the entire time.

Now what I am worried about is whether or not any of this is compatible with Aristotelianism and classical theism.

After all, the DeWitt equation implies that God is in fact a mind, and this implies he is an instance of a kind.

But I also encountered people sympathetic to this entire thing and who attempt to reconcile Aristotelian classical theism with the idealist findings.

Here is an exchange I found on Edward Feser's blog:

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.hr/2014/02/lowder-then-bombs.html

One of the readers points to a paper that analyses parallels between Aristotelian prime matter and consciousness:

http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2011/08/indeterminate-yet-existent.html

What do you think?

Is this scientific evidence that idealism is true? Does this interpretation of quantum mechanics make sense?

Can consciousness be explained as an Integrated Information state? And is God a mind outside the universe causing the universe to exist?

Can the Wheler DeWitt equation which proves the universe is collapsed by a single mind be squared with classical theism or not?

And if this experimental evidence does indeed prove that the mind collapses the wave function of matter and that matter does not exist independent of observation, what are the implications for Aristotelian classical theism?

Can the two positions be reconciled or even married together? Or are there problems with the alleged scientific evidence which rule out idealism, along with philosophical problems that quantum idealism has with classical Aristotelian theism?

I hope you guys could analyse the evidence presented in the videos to clear this all up.

Also:

What do you guys think about Nick Bostrom's simulation hypothesis, where he claims a 20% chance we are being simulated by future humans?

And what about the simulation hypothesis in general, where we are being simulated by beings who live in a reality with completely different physics than ours?

And one more thing:

Now I know that the only way notions of computation and information can intelligibly be applied to the universe is if Aristotelianism is true, but I also encountered this when researching refutations of Nick Bostrom:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1211.7081

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/508246/why-the-universe-is-not-a-computer-after-all/

Mathematician Ken Wharton refutes the idea that we can say the universe is computational even as a tautology by examining several ways in which the universe simply does not act as if it were computing, as well as several other problems, including a look at the classical mechanics of Joseph Louis Lagrange which explains reality without needing any computational language.

Now what is an Aristotelian to make of it?

After all, I am pretty sure that Aristotelians would insist that language of computation does in fact describe something real, but only can be used intelligebly within an Aristotelian framework.

But Wharton denies even this, even though he admits computational language does capture something real about the universe, only that we cannot discover certain important insights about the universe if we focus mainly on computationalistic descriptions of the universe.

What do you guys think?







 

Last edited by believingperpetuum (4/26/2017 11:03 am)