חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Q&A: Forgiveness

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Forgiveness

Question

There was a question here about sufficient reason and multiple dimensions that I thought was phrased very unclearly, so I couldn't resist joking around and sent in a humorous question with a similar structure (which of course was deleted, as it should have been). Perhaps it gave the impression that the original question too was just empty trolling, and so it was deleted as well. But the original questioner apparently meant it seriously, and since because of me he was probably suspected of being a troll, I feel bad and will try to explain what he meant (although I'm not sure I understand the meaning of the words myself).
A. He is dealing with a view called “multiple universes,” which says that for every theoretical possibility of a state of affairs in the world, there is a “universe” in which it is actually realized. For example, with free choice, every act of choice splits the universe into two new universes identical in every respect except for the difference in the outcome of the choice. (Or is it when there is quantum indeterminacy?)
B. He assumes that every hypothetical possibility really does exist in some universe. In front of me is a white plate with rounded gold decoration; there exists a universe where everything is identical except that the decoration is a bit less rounded. And so on: for every possibility one can imagine concerning a state of affairs in our world, there is a world in which that very possibility is actually realized.
C. He understands the principle of sufficient reason to mean that if one possibility appears and we know there are theoretically other possibilities, then there must be a sufficient reason for why it appears (even if not a cause).
So now he asks: if every theoretical possibility exists in its own world, then there is no point at all in asking, in each of the worlds, about the possibility that appears in that world. (Maybe one could ask what the sufficient reason is for “every possibility appearing in a world of its own,” since that too has another possibility—for example, that there are no multiple universes. And maybe there is one universe in which there are multiple universes, and another universe in which there are no multiple universes, and so on.)
 

Answer

The multiple-universes view, especially as formulated here, is baseless speculation (even in quantum theory this is just empty talk), and I see no point in discussing it. Especially since perhaps the principle of sufficient reason does not exist in all universes.

השאר תגובה

Back to top button