RE: [asa] QM, Mind, and Multiverse

Science, for many of us, is currently defined as the study of the
physical aspect of Nature. Including consciousness into the subject
matter of science is a form of reductionism unless one can extend the
definition of science to go outside of the purely physical and thus
encompass not only the nonphysical but even the supernatural.

Moorad

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of philtill@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 12:31 PM
To: schwarzwald@gmail.com; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: 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?

________________________________

Tis the season to save your money! Get the new AOL Holiday Toolbar
<http://toolbar.aol.com/holiday/download.html?ncid=emlweusdown00000008>
for money saving offers and gift ideas.

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 13:32:15 2008