Quantum drivel for ID

As a rule of thumb, never trust anything coming from a non-physicist with the word “quantum” in it. Hell, be wary even when it comes from a physicist. For example, don’t too easily trust philosophical musing about quantum physics emanating from the first generation of physicists who were inventing quantum mechanics. They were just trying to figure out what the blazes was going on, and inescapably they went down many blind alleys in the process. That’s how it goes.

Here’s an example of quantum drivel, from the intelligent design crowd, no less.

Feser notes that Heisenberg’s understanding of Aristote’s notions of potency and act is not precisely correct in several ways, but he points out that Heisenberg understood that classical hylomorphic understanding of nature anticipated some of the “counterintuitive” aspects of quantum mechanics.

. . . In my view, we are in the midst of a philosophical revolution. Like the materialist ‘Mechanical Philosophy’ revolution in the 18th century, the 20th and 21st century philosophical revolution is driven by contemporaneous advances in science. It began with quantum mechanics in the early 20th century, is now shaking the foundations of biology, and in time will cast aside simplistic materialist theories of the mind.

This bullshit is from Michael Egnor, the scientifically ignorant neurosurgeon in the ID camp who also fancies himself a philosopher. Read all of it.

I teach quantum mechanics in the morning, and then check pseudoscientific websites in the afternoon, where I invariably find people who couldn’t do a real quantum mechanical calculation to save their lives pontificating about What It All Means. This pisses me off.

"dclece,First, the Hare Krishnas were in fact interfering with a fundamental principle of a free ..."

Tolerating the Intolerant: The Central Paradox ..."
"Luke,To the extent that our disagreement is semantic, it probably cannot be resolved. It looks ..."

Tolerating the Intolerant: The Central Paradox ..."
"Yes. It usually comes back to the evolutionary cornerstones of our sense of morality that ..."

Tolerating the Intolerant: The Central Paradox ..."
"It is also difficult to see how a perfect being could create something imperfect, as ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment