Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- Where We Begin

Presupposition)

I have already discussed the physical-materialist view of determinism, and also the contrasting-premise-but-identical-conclusion view of fundamental chaos. I wish to say something more about that fundamental chaos view, which asserts that since the building blocks of reality—and of our own persons—are subject to random quantum mechanics, every system and decision that is built upon those transient parts must also be random and nondeliberate.

For a moment, let us assume that this theory is correct. Let us assume that all of our choices and behaviors are based upon their material composition, and that the root of that material composition is random and unpredictable.

Even then, this view presupposes that we all begin at the material. It assumes that there is nothing that comes before the random fluctuations of the quantum mechanic layer.

Back to the Metaphysical)

But who is to say what might come before the random? If you were to fall asleep in a thousand theaters, and in each one suddenly wake up in the middle of the second act of a play, the first line of dialogue that you heard would always appear to be random. But none of them actually would be random, they would be the continued thrust of all the unseen moments that came before.

From the metaphysical view, where the material world begins is the same as suddenly gaining consciousness in the middle of the play. Who is to say that there is not an imperceptible spirit whose invisible choices travel through the spiritual realm and then continue their thrust into the material world via quantum mechanics? And the quantum mechanics only seem random because we cannot see all the parts of the play that came before.

If we ever are certain that we have found the true root of the material, that still does not mean we have necessarily found the root of being. Indeed, the more our understanding of the material leads us to conclusions that defy our basic perceptions, such as humanity being all preprogrammed or humanity being all chaotic, the more it seems apparent that the material is not telling us the entire story. The more we know of the physical world the more it seems incapable of aligning with reality by itself. It continually and increasingly becomes apparent that there is something immaterial at play as well.

With that, I will end my examination on these matters for now, though I won’t be surprised if I return to them at some later date.

Posted on by Abe Austin

What We Are, Fundamentally- Chaotic Nature

Competing Nihilism)

I have already criticized the logic of the determinist in my previous posts. Today I will continue by introducing an alternative view that emerges from the same physical-materialist foundation, but which comes to an opposite conclusion.

The determinist, as already discussed, concludes that there is no free will or metaphysical reality because they assume that the environment, stimulus, and reaction are all part of a biochemical closed loop. Because every aspect is controlled, all behaviors are entirely predictable, if only one could measure all of the participating factors.

However there is another argument that also concludes that there is no free will, but by arguing that our material nature is nothing put pure, unpredictable chaos. This notion is based on the observation that our most fundamental components—protons, electrons, leptons, and quarks—seem to be subject to random quantum mechanics. If the lowest level of our material trembles between random states of reality, then how can we claim that everything built up from them, including ourselves, could act in a way that is deliberate, conscious, and chosen?

Both these viewpoints go to great lengths to deny the reality of human choice, but by totally opposite means. On the one hand humans are rigid, fixed machines that only act and react according to predictable programming, on the other hand humans are unpredictable, wild, and chaotic, whose behaviors have nothing to do with thought or reason.

Consistent Inconsistency)

As with determinism, this chaotic view once again defies our basic experience. Perhaps the chaotic view seems to provide a solution for why our behaviors are not totally ordered, but it raises an even bigger problem for why our behaviors aren’t totally chaotic either. Sometimes we do keep to plans, we do hold to our word, and we do follow through. And sometimes we maintain that reliability our whole lives long. How do we have these consistent streaks if at our beginnings is nothing but chaotic noise?

Our own experience balks at the idea that we are either totally predetermined or totally chaotic. These arguments sound intelligent because they take a long time to explain, but they are each childish in their lack of nuance. Their complexity does not bring life into sharper understanding, they try to flatten it into an over-simplistic single dimension.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools- Romans 1:22