Hello Dr. Craig,
First of all let me say that you are my favorite 'philosopher-missionary' on the scene, and I am just overjoyed and excited everytime I hear that you went somewhere new in the world! I recently watched your debate with the physicist from Finland named Kari . Kari's continued assertion that observations on the sub-atomic level have shown us that classical logic doesn't model the quantum realm is something that is beginning to appear more and more in the blogosphere. I was hoping to get a deeper explanation from you about each of the responses you gave in the debate:
1) Quantum logic is held by a tiny minority of physicists.
2) You seemed to imply that if we adopt a Bohmeian interpretation of quantum mechanics, then classical logic applies to the quantum level (does this also imply that quantum logic presupposes the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics).
3) I think you said that classical logic is distinct from the 9 rules of 'formal' logic (i.e. modus ponens, modus tollens, etc.) and your arguments don't rely on things like the law of excluded middle; but can you really separate these in this manner?
4) You also said that your arguments rely on observational evidence at macro-level where classical logic clearly does apply and not on any quantum observations. But didn't the universe began in some sort of quantum state which might imply that classical logic cannot guide us in our thinking about the origin of the universe (i.e. maybe something can come from nothing)?
5) It is self-defeating to use formal logic to deny applicability of formal logic at the quantum level.
2) You seemed to imply that if we adopt a Bohmeian interpretation of quantum mechanics, then classical logic applies to the quantum level (does this also imply that quantum logic presupposes the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics).
3) I think you said that classical logic is distinct from the 9 rules of 'formal' logic (i.e. modus ponens, modus tollens, etc.) and your arguments don't rely on things like the law of excluded middle; but can you really separate these in this manner?
4) You also said that your arguments rely on observational evidence at macro-level where classical logic clearly does apply and not on any quantum observations. But didn't the universe began in some sort of quantum state which might imply that classical logic cannot guide us in our thinking about the origin of the universe (i.e. maybe something can come from nothing)?
5) It is self-defeating to use formal logic to deny applicability of formal logic at the quantum level.
Thank you,
Kevin
Kevin
United States
Please click HERE to see Dr. Craig's response.
There is nothing wrong with asking questions, there is if you don't ask!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment