--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "compost1uk" <compost...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" <richardhughes103@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "compost1uk" <compost1uk@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
> > > > Sounds like someone is holding out for a supernatural solution to
> > > > the mystery.
> > >
> > > No, not at all! Only if you equate naturalism with materialism.
> > > Stenger appears to do just that, but you have yourself helpfully
> > > provided definitions (below) which show how these two 'isms' are
> > > logically distinct.
> > >
> > > Materialism would seem to be under some threat from modern
> > > physics (e.g. the peculiarity of action-at-a-distance with
> > > quantum entanglement). Still, there might be life in the old dog
> > > yet. But naturalism is not at all under threat from such
> > > developments, no?
> >
> > Hmmm, interesting idea. But they seem identical to me. I would
> > say that quantum entanglement is a material phenomenon like everything else
> > discovered so far, it's just that the rules for
> > the world of tiny things are so different to reality as we perceive it. In
> > fact it's all so predictable, real and open to experi-
> > mentation that it's one of the few things you can depend on.
> >
> > It all depends on whether the explanation uses the term "physical matter"
> > from a classical view of the world, as made out of indivisible things, or
> > from the new physics as everything being
> > a construction through interacting probability waves or multiple universes.
> I see your point. But in the context of the history of the idea
> of materialism, this is such a neutering of the concept as to be
> no longer useful.
> Materialism without the "matter" part is a bit like coffee without
> the caffeine. In what sense of "matter" are "interacting probability
> waves" material things? Probabability is a mathematical concept.
> Are the probability values "real" and "material"?
The probability waves create matter, in fact *are* matter when
they are interacting with each other. Take an atom away from the
rest of the universe and it just sits there all fuzzy and undecided about what
to do, a bit like me without caffeine.
I was just underlining the difficulty of keeping a pre-Einsteinian
concept of matter given that the whole universe is in a state of
flux. Matter is energy and vice versa, it just depends on what
speed you are moving.
QP just rewrites concept of matter a bit. While it might seem solid
did you know that if you removed the empty space inside the atoms
of the entire human race you could fit us into a sugar cube?
> > > > > (And why does naturalism equate to materialism?)
> > > >
> > > > Naturalism:- The system of thought holding that all phenomena can
> > > > be explained in terms of natural causes and laws.
> > > >
> > > > Materialism:- The theory that physical matter is the only reality
> > > > and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will,
> > > > can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
