Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA15676 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 16 Mar 2002 23:18:44 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.240.222.132] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: FW: MD Dawkins on quantum/mysticism convergence Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:11:06 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F42tNV1HINcKPey7ZyZ0001f9cf@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Mar 2002 23:11:07.0250 (UTC) FILETIME=[DA519D20:01C1CD3F] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: <AaronLynch@aol.com>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: FW: MD Dawkins on quantum/mysticism convergence
>Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 14:17:30 EST
>
>In a message dated 3/16/2002 11:45:46 AM Central Standard
>Time, Douglas Brooker <dbrooker@clara.co.uk> writes:
>
> > Lawrence DeBivort wrote:
> >
> > > Good morning, everyone,From another list...
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> > > [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of nargess
> > > sabeti
> > > Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 7:41 AM
> > > To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> > > Subject: Re: MD Dawkins on quantum/mysticism convergence
> > >
> > > Glenn Bradford <gmbbradford@netscape.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard Dawkins, in a Forbes article written three
> > > years ago, speaks his
> > > mind on the notion, popularized by Fritjof Capra
> > > and others, that the
> > > science of quantum mechanics is converging with
> > > religious mysticism.
> > >
> > > DAWKINS:
> > > [A] kind of marriage has been alleged between
> > > modern physics and
> > > Eastern mysticism. The argument goes as follows:
> > > Quantum mechanics, that
> > > brilliantly successful flagship theory of modern
> > > science, is deeply mysterious
> > > and hard to understand. Eastern mystics have
> > > always been deeply
> > > mysterious and hard to understand. Therefore,
> > > Eastern mystics must have
> > > been talking about quantum theory all along.
> > >
> > > Similar mileage is made of Heisenberg's
> > > uncertainty principle ("Aren't we all,
> > > in a very real sense, uncertain?"), fuzzy logic
> > > ("Yes, it's okay for you to be fuzzy,
> > > too"), chaos and complexity theory (the butterfly
> > > effect, the Platonic, hidden
> > > beauty of the Mandelbrot Set--you name it,
> > > somebody has mysticized it and!
> > > turned it into dollars). You can buy any number of
> > > books on "quantum
> > > healing," not to mention quantum psychology,
> > > quantum responsibility,
> > > quantum morality, quantum immortality, and quantum
> > > theology. I haven't
> > > found a book on quantum feminism, quantum
> > > financial management, or
> > > Afro-quantum theory, but give it time.
> > >
> > > The whole dippy business is ably exposed by the
> > > physicist Victor Stenger in
> > > his book, The Unconscious Quantum, from which the
> > > following gem is taken.
> > > In a lecture on "Afrocentric healing," the
> > > psychiatrist Patricia Newton said that
> > > traditional healers "are able to tap that other
> > > realm of negative entropy--that
> > > superquantum velocity and frequency of
> > > electromagnetic energy--and bring
> > > them as conduits down to our level. It's not
> > > magic. It's not mumbo jumbo. You
> > > will see the dawn of the 21st century, the new
> > > medical quantum physics really
> > > distributing these energies and what they are
> > > doing."
> > >
> > > Sorry, but mumbo jumbo is ! precisely what it is.
> > > Not African mumbo jumbo but
> > > pseudosc! ientific mumbo jumbo, down to the
> > > trademark misuse of the word
> > > energy. It is also religion, masquerading as
> > > science in a cloying love
> > > feast of bogus convergence.
> > > --
>
>Hi Douglas.
>
>My earlier use of the phrase "the ineffable Quantum of being"
>a few months ago was also in reference to some of the mystical
>interpretations of quantum mechanics.
>
> > and memetics is a science?
>
>Just suppose that Eastern mysticism got attached to quantum
>physics in the early days, so that a substantial fraction of
>the physicists reading their first quantum physics books were
>asked to swallow a lot of mysticism. The word "quantum"
>would have gained a very bad reputation among serious
>physicists.
>
> > sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.
>
>Perhaps this is the old strategy of the best defense
>being a good offense.
>
>
Dawkins is right on the money. "Quantum" seems to be a popular adjective to
attach to a lot of goofy ideas making them more trendy in pop culture. It's
like a vague allusion to QM has hybridized with various kooky pet theories.
Dawkins says some similar stuff to the above in _Unweaving the Rainbow_
which was probably cryptomnesically bubbling below the surface in my mnemon
store when I made some casual jokes about a "quantum" (or anti-"quantum")
filter not so long ago. A rough list offered by Dawkins (in _UtR_,
paperback, p 188) includes "quantum healing", "quantum psychology", "quantum
responsibility", "quantum morality", "quantum aesthetics", "quantum
immortality", and "quantum theology". Dawkins laments that "quantum caring"
was absent :-)
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 16 2002 - 23:29:20 GMT