Re: [asa] The Multiverse - Physics or Metaphysics?

Iain, you said,

Did you mean Johnston??

I did.? Sorry!

All it does is to substitute one miracle-provider (God) with another miracle-provider (the multiverse), and that in appealing to another miracle provider, he has given up on science.

Yes, I agreed.? I was just pointing out that there is no way within science to choose between God and the extra parts of the?physics that would be needed to drive a multiverse, since both are transcendent, self-existent, and creative.? Their only difference is that one is of them is conscious/intelligent and the other is not.? So unless we have a specific test for the part of them that is different, then we can't distinguish between them.?

But I also see your point that neither one should be allowed within science to begin with since neither is testable.? I would propose that we class all such transcendent explanations together and call them the "Transcendence Hypothesis."? Any attempt to explain improbable things?that lie within the chain of origins (whether physics or biology) by appealing to the Great Beyond outside the universe are philosophically equivalent.?

Theists still have an additional hypothesis beyond this "Transcendence Hypothesis," because we also believe that the Transcendent Entity is a Person rather than Unconscious.? So that is where the debate should be when all parties are otherwise appealing to a Transcendent Entity that creates and is untestable.

Not sure if I agree here.? If there are 1000 reps then in 0.1% of the universes she will measure a live husband if MWI is true.? But if Copenhagen is true, then the chance of measuring a live husband is surely 2^(-1000).

?
Another major problem with Quantum Suicide is that it leads logically to the conclusion that you never experience death.? (Quantum Immortality).? The same argument applies, that a quantum event that leads to your death either happens or doesn't happens, so you always survive in one universe.?

I think these are the key statements,?where i don't agree or else I don't understand.? I think the?main assumption behind these statements is that you only have One consciousness per person, and that is the One consciousness that always survives.? But my understanding of an atheistic worldview that includes MWI is that there are an infinite number of consciousnesses that believe themselves to be Iain.? In a physicalist view, every appearance of the neural patterns capable of processing conscious concepts would actually "BE" consciousness, and so there would be a great many of them.? And they would have no connections, so most of these consciousnesses would die and only one would survive in each experiment.

Have I missed the point and critiqued the wrong thing?

Thanks!
Phil

________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Sep 8 12:04:48 2007