Philosopher’s Carnival

Posted on July 28, 2008
Filed Under Sideblog |

Latest Philosopher’s Carnival. I especially liked the cartoon critique of Everett’s MWI of QM as implying a horrific kind of immortality. A critique of transhumanism was interesting also.

Comments

4 Responses to “Philosopher’s Carnival”

I especially liked that cartoon too… not least because my realistic supertask argument against the axiom of infinity in standard mathematics and logic presumes a collapse view of quantum mechanics. Fans of Everett seem to think that no-collapse is scientifically acceptable, if counter-intuitive, but I wonder about chemical bonding, for example. Electrons are smeared around nuclei, and bonds are formed when nuclei share electrons. But while such smearing and sharing makes sense if those are probability spreads, what if there is just the electron, moving classically in each world? How is it shared (and why does it not radiate away energy as it orbits the nuclei, even when it’s not shared?)?

Even more incidentally though, I was wondering what the Mormon take on theodicies is, e.g. if there is a standard one…

I’ve not yet read the carnival so I can’t comment on that.

Regarding Mormon theodicies there’s not a standard one although there is a common approach (which is not the same as having a theodicy). The standard tact is that God is limited by the nature of pre-existent intelligences and can only help them progress by giving them certain experiences. This life and the evils in it are thus necessary for progression. Further each of us freely chose to come here.

This isn’t a complete theodicy for several reasons. The obvious one is that it doesn’t explain why a life like this is necessary for progression. It also doesn’t deal with many natural evils or evils on animals.

Thanks Clark: I like the idea that we freely chose to come here, as I can’t see any other basis for a theodicy (I’d include non-robotic animals too, as I regard all our minds as the product of similar souls limited by dissimilar brains), but I’ll have to think about the other ideas; do you have any suggestions for simple and sound introductory reading?

Unfortunately there really isn’t one for an LDS context.

Leave a Reply