Random Observation

Certain skeptics are able to unquestioningly accept the notoriously mind-bending, counter-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics (even if they don't understand it), while categorically denying any given Christian truth out of hand simply because it strikes them as improbable and/or irrational.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Certain skeptics are able to unquestioningly accept the notoriously mind-bending, counter-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics (even if they don't understand it), while categorically denying any given Christian truth out of hand simply because it strikes them as improbable and/or irrational.

Quantum mechanics (and no I don't understand it particularly well) can be quantified and makes no appeals to magic. The same cannot be said of the supernatural.

Originally posted by Agerg
Quantum mechanics (and no I don't understand it particularly well) can be quantified and makes no appeals to magic. The same cannot be said of the supernatural.

How do you explain the fact that some particles can be in two places at once? That seems pretty supernatural to me.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Certain skeptics are able to unquestioningly accept the notoriously mind-bending, counter-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics (even if they don't understand it), while categorically denying any given Christian truth out of hand simply because it strikes them as improbable and/or irrational.

Christians are not blindly accepting Vedic wisdom either. (And our Vedic friends doesn't blindly accepting Christian wisdom either.) Do we consider Christians (and Vedics) sceptics too?

Originally posted by Agerg
Quantum mechanics (and no I don't understand it particularly well) can be quantified and makes no appeals to magic. The same cannot be said of the supernatural.

Yes, but quantum theory, the most thoroughly tested theory in all of science (so I've heard), doesn't make sense. It may not appeal to the supernatural, but it is definitely irrational. If physical reality is inherently irrational, how is dismissing the spiritual claims of, say, the Bible, based on the perception that such claims are improbable and or irrational, reasonable?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Christians are not blindly accepting Vedic wisdom either. (And our Vedic friends doesn't blindly accepting Christian wisdom either.) Do we consider Christians (and Vedics) sceptics too?

True, anyone can be a skeptic.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Yes, but quantum theory, the most thoroughly tested theory in all of science (so I've heard), doesn't make sense. It may not appeal to the supernatural, but it is definitely irrational. If physical reality is inherently irrational, how is dismissing the spiritual claims of, say, the Bible, based on the perception that such claims are improbable and or irrational, reasonable?

Yes, but quantum theory, the most thoroughly tested theory in all of science (so I've heard), doesn't make sense.

Doesn't make sense to whom? To you?

We will naturally see things as being counter intuitive when they don't follow what we normally see every day, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make any sense.

If physical reality is inherently irrational, how is dismissing the spiritual claims of, say, the Bible, based on the perception that such claims are improbable and or irrational, reasonable?

Quantum physics provides some actual predictions that can be verified and reproduced.

Can you provide any testable reproduction steps for the spiritual claims of any religion?

Originally posted by sonhouse
How do you explain the fact that some particles can be in two places at once? That seems pretty supernatural to me.

But it is still a natural phenomenon - I somehow doubt you would ever have the case that you could have two particles in the same place, suddenly transforming into a bowl of spaghetti. Again (and I appeal to the great work done by phycisists alive or dead), the behaviour of such freaky particles can be quantified.

All bets are off with the supernatural - in particular, certain formulations of Christian God (et al.)
Want to transform dust into humans (inspite of any lack of stuff in that dust from which we humans are comprised)? With god it's perfectly feasible...how about just magicking planets into existence? Again not a problem for God!

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Yes, but quantum theory, the most thoroughly tested theory in all of science (so I've heard), doesn't make sense. It may not appeal to the supernatural, but it is definitely irrational. If physical reality is inherently irrational, how is dismissing the spiritual claims of, say, the Bible, based on the perception that such claims are improbable and or irrational, reasonable?

My response to this is wrapped up in my response to Sonhouse.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
Yes, but quantum theory, the most thoroughly tested theory in all of science (so I've heard), doesn't make sense.

Doesn't make sense to whom? To you?

We will naturally see things as being counter intuitive when they don't follow what we normally see every day, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make any sense.

If physical reality
Can you provide any testable reproduction steps for the spiritual claims of any religion?

We will naturally see things as being counter intuitive when they don't follow what we normally see every day, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make any sense.

Exactly my point. I could say the same of any spiritual claim found in the Bible.

Can you provide any testable reproduction steps for the spiritual claims of any religion?

Yes, though I can only speak for the Christian religion... Believe the Gospel, proclaim your faith publicly, partake of water baptism, and subsequently be filled with the Holy Spirit (i.e., get born-again). The Holy Spirit will confirm, inwardly, the veracity of the spiritual claims found in the Bible, while the change in your character will be the outward evidence of their veracity.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
We will naturally see things as being counter intuitive when they don't follow what we normally see every day, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't make any sense.

Exactly my point. I could say the same of any spiritual claim found in the Bible.

Can you provide any testable reproduction steps for the spiritual claims of any religion?[/ the Bible, while the change in your character will be the outward evidence of their veracity.

Believe the Gospel, proclaim your faith publicly, partake of water baptism, and subsequently be filled with the Holy Spirit (i.e., get born-again). The Holy Spirit will confirm, inwardly, the veracity of the spiritual claims found in the Bible, while the change in your character will be the outward evidence of their veracity.

How would you objectively measure this? What are the specific reproducible steps?

All of that is vague, subjective and not really falsifiable. Where are your falsifiable predictions?

Quantum physics makes objective reproducible steps with falsifiable predictions. That can't be said at all about religions.

There are those from every religion that claim to feel that kind of spirit and exhibit outwardly positive (and negative) changes in their character - does that mean those religions are true also?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Certain skeptics are able to unquestioningly accept the notoriously mind-bending, counter-intuitive nature of quantum mechanics (even if they don't understand it), while categorically denying any given Christian truth out of hand simply because it strikes them as improbable and/or irrational.

Well, I think we can justifiably offer our assent to quantum mechanics, not because we ourselves understand it and have checked the proofs, but because it has majority support from the relevant scientific authorities. In the case of Christian doctrine, however, people may be rightly skeptical, even if they do not understand the doctrines, but because the doctrines are heavily contested among different theological schools whose credibility may also be suspect.

Originally posted by Agerg
But it is still a natural phenomenon - I somehow doubt you would ever have the case that you could have two particles in the same place, suddenly transforming into a bowl of spaghetti. Again (and I appeal to the great work done by phycisists alive or dead), the behaviour of such freaky particles can be quantified.

All bets are off with the supernatural - in ...[text shortened]... fectly feasible...how about just magicking planets into existence? Again not a problem for God!

If Jesus Christ does, in fact, exist in a spiritual realm beyond the means of modern science to confirm (BTW, much of String Theory is currently unconfirmable), and if the entire natural world does, in fact, proceed from an 'uncaused Cause' -- if all this is true, of what use would it be to distinguish between natural and supernatural? Isn't that besides the point? For all you know such is the state of things. What I'm talking about here is ultimate reality. If physical reality on a fundamental level is irrational, counter-intuitive, improbable, etc., how much of a stretch is it to imagine any possible spiritual reality being any less weird?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Well, I think we can justifiably offer our assent to quantum mechanics, not because we ourselves understand it and have checked the proofs, but because it has majority support from the relevant scientific authorities. In the case of Christian doctrine, however, people may be rightly skeptical, even if they do not understand the doctrines, but because the do ...[text shortened]... are heavily contested among different theological schools whose credibility may also be suspect.

Skepticism is good. Whether we're talking claims made by Stephen Hawking or Paul the Apostle. My point is, we accept extremely irrational, improbable, counter-intuitive aspects of physical reality, like quantum theory, while simultaneously dismissing certain religious truths (e.g., Christ's divinity) based entirely on their appearing extremely irrational, improbable, counter-intuitive, etc. I'm not suggesting quantum physics means the end of skepticism.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Skepticism is good. Whether we're talking claims made by Stephen Hawking or Paul the Apostle. My point is, we accept extremely irrational, improbable, counter-intuitive aspects of physical reality, like quantum theory, while simultaneously dismissing certain religious truths (e.g., Christ's divinity) [b]based entirely on their appearing extr ...[text shortened]... ble, counter-intuitive, etc. I'm not suggesting quantum physics means the end of skepticism.[/b]

Skepticism is good. Whether we're talking claims made by Stephen Hawking or Paul the Apostle.

I disagree. I think that the credibility of the person propounding the claim may also be important. When a scientific theory is universally accepted in the scientific theory, it is in fact a virtuous act of humility to give one's assent. To refuse assent would be quite audacious. When, however, a religious doctrine is heavily contested and there are multiple dissenting voices, then skepticism is mere prudence. Obviously this is not perfect. Scientific theories have in the past been dismissed because they were unpopular in the scientific community; religious doctrines have been believed simply because of a wider consensus. The opposite is also possible. Nonetheless, when a person does not understand something, I think one is justified to consider the credibility of the person proposing the theory.

Personally, I do not think quantum mechanics is so counter-intuitive. In Australia, physics students are taught basic quantum mechanics in their final year of high school. They can explain the difference between classical theory and quantum mechanics; they should be able to calculate wave length; they should be familiar with Planck's constant, etc.