[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: mecanicacuantica.png (209 KB, 696x386)
209 KB PNG
There's people who claim that Quantum Mechanics debunk Aquina's thesis on how a material thing only moves (movement in it's Aristotelic sense) when something else moves it, because in Quantum Mechanics there's some things that happen just because.

Now, if this is true, it's the same as saying that the principle of sufficient reason doesn't always hold, which is basically the same as to saying that your own conscious experience can have no explanation, which is the same as saying that for example, you might be reading this post arbitrarily, not because you actually have a post in front of you.

Which would render any empirical knowledge basically impossible, because it could always be an arbitrary experience. But we got to know the quantum world through our empirical experience.
So saying that some things happen just because is self-refuting, and it cannot be the correct interpretation of quantum phenomena.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.