bivalve wrote:
> In part, the objections to relativity as supporting moral relativism may be taken from the claims of moral relativists. James Burke, perhaps in one of the Connections videos, makes the claim that the uncertainty principle means that we should not assert absolute moral and social views. However, as is typical for moral relativism, he promptly rules out certain moral and social views (namely Nazism), in addition to the inherent contradiction of saying that absolutes absolutely do not exist.
>
> Given that the level of uncertainty in quantum mechanics is so small as to be unnoticed in everyday life, the application of this uncertainty to moral principles would not seem to give much flexibility.
The idea of applying the uncertainty principle to morality make little sense as soon as you start to look at what the real uncertainty principle is.
1st, it applies to pairs of canonically conjugate variables, such as position & momentum - ones whose QM operators don't commute. What does that mean for morality? (Can love and justice be "observed" simultaneously? Some might assume that they can't be, but then the whole matter has already been decided & appeal to QM is superfluous. It will have served at most a suggestive role.)
2d, there are dynamical variables which aren't limited by the principle, such as electric charge.
3d, the principle places no limitation of principle on the precision with which a single variable can be known, but only on the joint precision for a conjugate pair.
All of which is really overkill of a kind of silly idea.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Dialogue"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 07:37:23 EST