Re: [asa] QM, Mind, and Multiverse

 I also took notice of Linde's statements.? I have long thought that Atheism is very close to theism, nowadays, but ironically this has developed in such a way that Atheists are not aware it.?

Think of this:? Atheism has become comfortable appealing to things outside the bubble of our universe to explain what we see inside it.? Also, some like Linde are comfortable talking of consciousness as a thing that cannot emerge from non-consciousness, but must simply exist.? If only these two things are put together:? if consciousness can exist within the bubble of this universe, then why can't it exist in whatever that Greater thing is outside our universe?? If so, then we couldn't avoid naming it God.? Also, Goedel's theorem might suggest that truth can't be as simple as a countable set of axioms, and so there is no a priori reason to rule out the organization of a consciousness in whatever is the ultimate source of physical law.

Phil

Original Message-----
From: Schwarzwald <schwarzwald@gmail.com>
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 6:45 am
Subject: [asa] QM, Mind, and Multiverse

I was re-reading the Discover article "Science's Alternative to an Intelligent Creator: The Multiverse". It's an article which has gained some decent attention among Christians as of late for the obvious reason - the 'fine-tuning' aspects of the universe that seem to suggest either an intelligent creator, or some kind of amazing, possibly infinite universe-creating principle. (Perhaps both? There's an avenue that would be fun to explore.)

I know that topic has gotten some discussion on this very list, but there's one part in particular I wanted to highlight - and a part which I notice has seemingly gone unmentioned in every place I've followed the discussion. From the article:

"As for Linde, he is especially interested in the mystery of
consciousness and has speculated that consciousness may be a
fundamental component of the universe, much like space and time. He
wonders whether the physical universe, its laws, and conscious
observers might form an integrated whole. A complete description of
reality, he says, could require all three of those components, which he
posits emerged simultaneously. "Without someone observing the
universe," he says, "the universe is actually dead.""

Now, Linde is a big proponent for the multiverse. He's certainly not God- or religion- biased in any way I can tell (Wikipedia lists him as an atheist, but Wikipedia is also Wikipedia, so take that with a grain of salt.) At the same time, here is Linde conceding that consciousness 'may be a fundamental component of the universe', such that if you have no consciousness, you have no universe.

Dinesh D'Souza recently wrote an article arguing how science in general can no longer be looked to as a compelling argument for atheism, because a number of developments have turned against what was for so long the standard atheist view of the world. Perhaps this is one more bit of evidence that D'Souza is correct, or at least on to something?

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 27 12:31:45 2008