scholarly journals A Cause Among Causes? God Acting in the Natural World

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 99-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Silva
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Laws Of Nature ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Natural Sciences ◽  
Divine Action ◽  
Interpretations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Secondary Causes

Contemporary debates on divine action tend to focus on finding a space in nature where there would be no natural causes, where nature offers indeterminacy, openness, and potentiality, to place God’s action. These places are found through the natural sciences, in particular quantum mechanics. God’s action is then located in those ontological ‘causal-gaps’ offered by certain interpretations of quantum mechanics. In this view, God would determine what is left underdetermined in nature without disrupting the laws of nature. These contemporary proposals evidence at least two unexamined assumptions, which frame the discussion in such a way that they portray God as acting as a secondary cause or a ‘cause among causes’. God is somewhat required to act within these ‘gaps’, binding God to the laws of nature, and placing God’s action at the level of secondary causes. I suggest that understanding God’s action, following Thomas Aquinas, in terms of primary and secondary causation could help dissolve this difficulty. Aquinas moves away from this objection by suggesting to speak of an analogical notion of cause, allowing for an analogical understanding of God’s causality in nature. With a radically different understanding of the interplay between secondary causes and God, Aquinas manages to avoid conceiving God as a cause among causes, keeping the distinctive transcendent character of God’s causality safe from objections.

scholarly journals Allah versus Setan Laplace: Sebuah Usulan Konsep Tindakan Ilahi Khusus yang Trinitarian, Kovenantal dan Saintifik

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-49
Author(s):  
David Alinurdin
Keyword(s):  
Laws Of Nature ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Biblical Theology ◽  
Divine Action ◽  
Physical Processes ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
Action Project ◽  
Science And Theology ◽  
The Universe

Dalam dekade terakhir, interaksi sains dan teologi dalam upaya membangun konsep tindakan ilahi di dalam dunia natural telah sampai pada satu kesimpulan untuk mencari titik temu kausal di mana Allah Pencipta yang transenden dan nonfisik dapat bertindak di dalam proses-proses natural yang terjadi di dalam dunia ciptaan. Sebuah gerakan akademis yang diakui kredibilitasnya dalam usaha menemukan titik temu kausal dengan cara-cara baru yang memasukkan penafsiran filosofis dari sains kekinian ke dalam teologi adalah Divine Action Project (DAP), yang merumuskan sebuah teori tindakan ilahi yang disebut NIODA (Noninterventionist Objective Divine Action). NIODA berusaha mencari lokus tindakan ilahi khusus yang tidak bertentangan dengan hukum alam yaitu di dalam proses-proses fisik yang dapat ditafsirkan sebagai indeterminisme secara ontologis, seperti mekanika kuantum. Tulisan ini akan mengkaji asumsi-asumsi filosofis di balik NIODA dan memperlihatkan bahwa konsep ini dapat diterima secara saintifik namun tidak memadai secara teologis karena masih terikat dengan asumsi Laplace warisan zaman pencerahan yang menganggap alam semesta ini tertutup secara kausal bagi tindakan ilahi. Karena itu, di bagian terakhir, tulisan ini juga akan mengusulkan beberapa poin penting dalam upaya membangun sebuah konsep tindakan ilahi yang memadai secara teologis maupun saintifik, yang dibangun di atas fondasi teologi penciptaan yang trinitarian dan kovenantal. In the last decade, the interaction between science and theology in the effort to develop the concept of divine action in the natural world has come to a conclusion to find a causal joint where transcendent and nonphysical Creator God can act in natural processes that occur in the world of creation. An academic movement whose credibility has been recognized in its efforts to find a causal joint in new ways that incorporate philosophical interpretations of contemporary science into theology is the Divine Action Project (DAP), which formulates a concept of divine action called NIODA (Noninterventionist Objective Divine Action). NIODA seeks to find a locus of special divine action that does not conflict with laws of nature in physical processes that can be interpreted as ontological indeterminism, such as quantum mechanics. This paper will examine the philosophical assumptions behind NIODA and show that this concept is scientifically acceptable but not theologically adequate because it is still bound by Laplace's assumption of the enlightenment's legacy which considers the universe to be causally closed to divine action. Therefore, in the last part, this paper will also propose several important points in the effort to develop a concept of special divine action that is both theologically and scientifically adequate, built on the basis of a trinitarian and covenantal biblical theology of creation.

Quantum Randomness, Hylomorphism, and Classical Theism

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 147-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark K. Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Physical World ◽  
Physical Systems ◽  
Classical Theism ◽  
Divine Omnipotence ◽  
Quantum Randomness ◽  
Interpretations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Secondary Causes

According to certain interpretations of quantum mechanics, the behavior of some physical systems is random—that is, certain current states of physical systems are related to other current states and the set of possible future states in a probabilistic, rather than a deterministic, fashion. This account of physical systems seems to conflict with the claim that there is an omnipotent God—that is, a God Who can efficaciously bring about any logically possible creaturely state, and Who can cause efficacious secondary causes—and so raises problems for classical theism. After explaining these problems, I provide a solution to them based upon a version of hylomorphism, which I call Theistic Hylomorphism with Randomness. On this view, it can be affirmed that the physical world is both random and in determinate states, and divine omnipotence can be upheld in a random world. After presenting this version of hylomorphism and showing how it defeats the problems for classical theism raised by quantum mechanics, I defend it against three objections.

scholarly journals E. Schrödinger’s 1931 paper “On the Reversal of the Laws of Nature” [“Über die Umkehrung der Naturgesetze”, Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, physikalisch-mathematische Klasse, 8 N9 144–153]

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphaël Chetrite ◽  
Paolo Muratore-Ginanneschi ◽  
Kay Schwieger
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Diffusion Process ◽  
Markov Processes ◽  
Time Reversal ◽  
English Translation ◽  
Laws Of Nature ◽  
Detailed Balance ◽  
Interpretations Of Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Statistical Laws ◽  
Reciprocal Processes

AbstractWe present an English translation of Erwin Schrödinger’s paper on “On the Reversal of the Laws of Nature‘’. In this paper, Schrödinger analyses the idea of time reversal of a diffusion process. Schrödinger’s paper acted as a prominent source of inspiration for the works of Bernstein on reciprocal processes and of Kolmogorov on time reversal properties of Markov processes and detailed balance. The ideas outlined by Schrödinger also inspired the development of probabilistic interpretations of quantum mechanics by Fényes, Nelson and others as well as the notion of “Euclidean Quantum Mechanics” as probabilistic analogue of quantization. In the second part of the paper, Schrödinger discusses the relation between time reversal and statistical laws of physics. We emphasize in our commentary the relevance of Schrödinger’s intuitions for contemporary developments in statistical nano-physics.

GREAT MINDS THINK (ALMOST) ALIKE THOMAS AQUINAS AND ALVIN PLANTINGA ON DIVINE ACTION IN NATURE

2014 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Silva
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Alvin Plantinga ◽  
Divine Action ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Universe

In the first part of this paper I argue that even if at first Alvin Plantinga’s reasons for allowing special divine action seem similar to those of Thomas Aquinas, particularly in De Potentia Dei for allowing miracles, the difference in their metaphysical language makes Aquinas’ account less prone to the objections raised against Plantinga’s. In the second part I argue that Plantinga errs when recurring to quantum mechanics for allowing special divine action, making God to be a cause among causes. Thomas Aquinas, by speaking of primary and secondary causality when referring to God’s activity, avoids taking this step, evading the conclusion that God could be seen as a cause among causes. Aquinas, however, maintains in a statement which goes beyond Plantinga’s, that God’s providence requires the universe to be indeterministic because this indeterministic feature makes the universe more perfect.

scholarly journals Thomas Aquinas and Alfred North Whitehead on God‘s Action in the World

Open Theology ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hosinski
Keyword(s):  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Alfred North Whitehead ◽  
Divine Action ◽  
Limited Participation ◽  
Creative Power ◽  
The World ◽  
Divine Life ◽  
Secondary Causes

AbstractThomas Aquinas’ intentions in his position that God acts through secondary causes are both laudable and correct. In affirming God’s action within secondary causes Thomas intended to affirm true freedom and contingency in the world and the creatures’ limited participation in God’s creative power. But his interpretation of these topics rests on assumptions about divinity that subvert his intentions. This article summarizes Thomas’ analysis and discusses the principal difficulties with his interpretation of God’s action. It then presents an interpretation of how Alfred North Whitehead’s position on divine action avoids these difficulties and achieves a more coherent understanding of God’s action in the world, even though it too requires revision. If Whitehead’s metaphysics is revised to think of creativity as the divine life rather than as ultimately distinct from God, then it, too, presents God as sharing the divine life with creatures by endowing them with the creativity and freedom to create themselves on the divinely-given ground of possibility. Thomas’ intentions and a revised Whiteheadian interpretation of divine action are compatible and complement each other on the topic of divine action in and through creatures and on the idea of existence as participation in the divine life.

scholarly journals Revising the Supernatural: Prospero Lambertini's Reconsideration of the Concept of Miracle

2021 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-67
Author(s):  
Alessandro Laverda
Keyword(s):  
Laws Of Nature ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
New Classification ◽  
The Future ◽  
Magnum Opus ◽  
Fourth Book ◽  
The Invisible

AbstractAccording to Thomas Aquinas, a miracle had to surpass the whole of the created nature, which meant the visible and corporeal, as well as the invisible and incorporeal nature. Prospero Lambertini (1675–1758), the future Pope Benedict XIV, when he was promoter of the faith, noticed that it was impossible to distinguish a cure that occurred beyond the boundaries of incorporeal and invisible nature (the whole nature) from one that exceeded just corporeal and visible nature. The issue was of utmost importance since it risked delegitimizing the whole system of miracle verification. Consequently, Lambertini, in the fourth book of his magnum opus De servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione (On the Beatification of the Servants of God and the Canonization of the Blessed, 1734–1738), developed a new classification of miracles, which included the works of angels, with the aim of solving the problem. Furthermore, to counteract Spinoza's denial of miracles, he claimed that miracles were not contrary to the laws of nature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document