chance
Rabbi,
I watched the podcast “There is no God” in which you participated, and there you said that there is no such thing as coincidence, and it certainly is not the axiom on which you base your belief. On the other hand, in another podcast, “Head to Head” on free choice, you said that you accept all the claims that support the existence of free choice from science (in the context of quantum processes and the uncertainty principle). But how do you reconcile these contradictory statements?
I emphasize that I have no quantum knowledge, so I wouldn’t be surprised if there is no connection between what was said in the podcast and a claim about coincidence.
I didn’t understand the question. I didn’t really say that I accept the claims that support free will in science. On the contrary, in my opinion, they shouldn’t be accepted.
The rabbi said that scientific claims should not be brought into the question of freedom of choice and that the discussion should be in the realm of philosophy, and immediately afterwards you said that when questions are asked of you based on science, you will accept them completely.
I don't understand what you're saying. I'll tell you my position now, and this is what I say everywhere: In my opinion, science has nothing to say on questions of free choice. Free will cannot be introduced into physics, not even through quantum theory.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
