Is the Real World Deterministic or Indeterministic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter somy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Real world
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the philosophical debate surrounding determinism in the real world, particularly in relation to quantum mechanics (QM). Participants argue that while classical physics has historically leaned towards determinism, QM introduces elements of randomness that challenge this view. The conversation highlights the metaphysical nature of determinism, suggesting that it cannot be conclusively proven or disproven. Key points include the problem of induction, the implications of identical systems, and the philosophical ramifications of assuming a deterministic universe.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly randomness and determinism.
  • Familiarity with philosophical concepts such as the problem of induction and metaphysics.
  • Knowledge of classical physics and its historical context regarding determinism.
  • Awareness of the implications of determinism on free will and moral responsibility.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of quantum mechanics on determinism, focusing on the Copenhagen interpretation.
  • Explore philosophical literature on determinism, particularly works by David Hume and Immanuel Kant.
  • Investigate the concept of free will in relation to determinism and its impact on ethics and law.
  • Examine experimental designs that attempt to test determinism, such as thought experiments in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, physicists, students of metaphysics, and anyone interested in the implications of determinism on science and ethics.

  • #61
apeiron said:
No, more like a lot of vanity given that the Apeiron was the first model of a vague beginning!

Perhaps it would be considered contradictory (!), but as far as I understand Heidegger and Derrida, I think they take such notions much further, in better directions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
VikingF said:
If random quantum fluctuations happened 13.7 billion years ago, then it could just as easily happen today, couldn't it?

This doesn't directly answer your question, but does describe how some scientists are viewing the multiverse and our ability to comprehend it.http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24239/
 
Last edited:
  • #63
fuzzyfelt said:
Perhaps it would be considered contradictory (!), but as far as I understand Heidegger and Derrida, I think they take such notions much further, in better directions.

Any references to what you are thinking about here? I've not come across vagueness-related approaches with these guys. In modern times, Peirce did the most developing (while Russell was the most vigorous at arguing against).
 
  • #64
Sorry, nothing particularly expressed as ‘vague’, but I was just thinking that there are some similarities that may or may not be helpful.

As far as I understand, following some of Heidegger’s ideas, Derrida writes of ‘differance’, where dichotomies exist in the blur of their boundaries.

A critical method encouraging plural interpretations, investigating hierarchies of antinomies, supplements, paradoxes, etc., suggests this is undermined by ‘irreducible incompleteness’, ‘originary synthesis’, a changing ‘aporia’ of potential, an ‘unresolvable indetermination’ of meaning. I said contradictory for various reasons, including that this is argued against ‘logocentrism'.

With some view to the topic, Deconstruction may be regarded as anti-determinist, but inevitable uncertainty has been mentioned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 157 ·
6
Replies
157
Views
5K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
593
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K