Q&A: Modern Physics and Aristotelian Physics
Modern Physics and Aristotelian Physics
Question
Hello,
It is clear to us that our physics is more correct than Aristotelian physics—we can launch a spacecraft to the moon; Aristotle could not.
One of the differences between our physics and the ancient one is that Aristotle (and Maimonides) (to the best of my understanding) looked at all the branches of wisdom as interconnected in a related way (physics, metaphysics, ethics…).
Today we do not tend to attach importance to this and instead maximize technology—physics is considered more correct insofar as it succeeds in launching more spacecraft.
But in the end it seems that physical conceptions shape (rightly or wrongly) our cultural-moral conceptions—for example, physics is deterministic and therefore I have no free choice, and if there are quantum phenomena then the world is random and there is no meaning to what happens in my life. Physics fundamentally describes a causal world and not a teleological one, and therefore the world has no purpose.
I know one can offer excuses for these problems, but usually they are disconnected from the study of nature. So my claim is that the study of nature should be connected to ethics. Would that way lead us to better ethics? Would we arrive at better physics? What do you think about this issue?
Would there at least be cultural/pedagogical benefit in strengthening morality and culture that arise out of nature?
Answer
In principle, there is no such thing as more or less correct. These are two different languages, but both explain the phenomena. Our physics is more useful because technology can be built on it. There are, of course, some phenomena regarding which Aristotle was mistaken—for example, the speed of falling as a function of mass—but even if he had been right, he would have explained it in his own language.
I do not understand your question. If there is a real connection to our worldview, then of course it is worthwhile to study physics. But it is hard to respond to such general statements. Give an example, and then it will be possible to discuss it. The connections you made in the two examples are not correct.