Abstract
Randomness is an unavoidable notion in discussing quantum physics, and this may trigger the curiosity to know more of its cultural history. This text is an invitation to explore the position on the matter of Thomas Aquinas, one of the most prominent philosophers and theologians of the European Middle Ages.
This text has been written for the Proceedings of the Conference Quantum [Un]Speakables II: 50 Years of Bell’s Theorem (Vienna, 19–22 June 2014).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For a recent perspective on determinism by a quantum colleague: L. Vaidman, Quantum theory and determinism, Quantum studies: mathematics and foundations 1, 5–38 (2014); http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40509-014-0008-4.
- 2.
Interestingly, a quantum colleague, who contrary to me cannot be suspected of Catholic leaning, has also advocated recently a re-discovery of Aquinas’ thought: D.M. Appleby, Mind and Matter, http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.7381. This text sketches a much more ambitious program than mine here; Aquinas’ philosophy is proposed as a possible way of avoiding Cartesian dualism.
- 3.
A very convenient summary of Aquinas’ philosophical work is available as: Aquinas, Selected philosophical writings (Oxford World’s Classics, Oxford University Press, 2008). The Latin text and English translation of most of Aquinas works can be found online in http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/. When available, I’ll give the link to this website.
- 4.
See e.g. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/providence-divine/; Aquinas’ position is discussed in paragraph 6.
- 5.
In this text, “cosmology” will be used in the sense of Weltanschauung, not in the sense of the discipline of physics that studies the universe at large.
- 6.
http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#98. I am citing from the more readable translation of Timothy McDermott in the Oxford book cited above.
- 7.
For a text that mentions Aquinas extensively and provides a glimpse of the complexity of the issue, see http://inters.org/finalism, paragraphs I and II.
- 8.
I am grateful to V. Cordonier for sharing with me her text “La doctrine aristotélicienne de la Providence divine selon Thomas d’Aquin” [in: P. D’Hoine, G. van Riel (ed.), Fate, Providence and Moral Responsibility in Ancient, Medieval and Early Modern Thought. Studies in Honor of Carlos Steel (Peters, Leuven, 2014) pp. 495–515, in which I found this very relevant citation (footnote 14). My translation.
- 9.
It is acknowledged that this is a foundational element of Aquinas’ theory of knowledge. If prompted to find a citation, probably the most famous is primum enim quod in intellectum cadit, est ens (De Pot. 9, 7, ad 15 http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/QDdePotentia9.htm#9:7).
- 10.
http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#97; I am citing again the translation from McDermott.
- 11.
Aquinas was aware that some Arabic philosophical schools of Andalusia promoted this doctrine. One century after Aquinas’ death, it was going to be championed again, this time in the Christian world by William of Ockham. It still lurks behind many anti-scientific attitudes of our times.
- 12.
Aquinas inherited the “negative theology” of Pseudo-Dionysius: we can’t know anything of God’s plan, besides what He chooses to reveal to us. The Revelation accepted by both deals with the finality set by God for human beings, but says close to nothing about that for the material world (indeed, basically all that Christian belief has to say on the final destiny of matter is that the final destiny of humans does involve a material element, in the following of Jesus, who resurrected with what we could call an “upgraded version” of his own body).
- 13.
Notice again the discrepancy with the later cosmology: Liebniz argued that the God-watchmaker must have created the best possible world in all the details of its gears.
- 14.
- 15.
The most probable date is around 1268, which would put it some 5 years after the most probable date for CG—anyway, all that matters here is that the two texts belong to the same period, so that in first approximation we can assume them to be consistent with each other.
- 16.
In Physic. II, l.10 (http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/Physics2.htm#10).
- 17.
In Physic. II, l.7 (http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/Physics2.htm#7).
- 18.
In Physic. II, l.8 (http://www.dhspriory.org/thomas/Physics2.htm#8).
- 19.
Authors like Heisenberg, Jauch and Piron, have used the wording of “potency and act” in their attempts to appraise quantum physics. Inspired by this, some years ago I browsed extensively Aquinas’ works to see if a hint of the quantum could be found there: I can say with high confidence that such is not the case. Let me give an example. For Aquinas (and Aristotle), the statement “I am in potency of being at B” means that I actually am at A, and by motion I could exchange my “being at A” with “being at B”. In no way they had thought of “not being actually localized anywhere”, which is what Heisenberg, Jauch and Piron were aiming at—as to whether this extension is legitimate and successful, I am skeptical but with no strong feelings.
- 20.
When speaking of “holism” or “pantheism”, Indian-born religions come immediately to mind, but similar hints can be found even in Plato. Very relevant for our story is the fact that Averroes explicitly commented Aristotle in a holistic sense, making him very suspicious in the Christian world: the “redemption” of Aristotle from that interpretation was arguably Aquinas’ greatest challenge (see e.g. G.K. Chesterton, Saint Thomas Aquinas, the “Dumb Ox”, several editions). In later times, some humanists will promote again the doctrine of an anima mundi, and Spinoza will champion a renewed form of pantheism. Presumably some members of the Church of the Larger Hilbert Spaces have a similar doctrine in mind.
Acknowledgments
This text has greatly benefitted from discussions with and feedback or encouragement from: Antonio Acín, Michael Brooks, Jeff Bub, Jonathan Chua Yi, Valérie Cordonier, Artur Ekert, Berge Englert, Nicolas Gisin, Jenny Hogan, Matthew Leifer, Antoine Suarez, Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti and Anton Zeilinger. My research on randomness is sponsored by the Ministry of Education, Singapore, under the Academic Research Fund Tier 3 MOE2012-T3-1-009 “Random numbers from quantum processes”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Scarani, V. (2017). The Universe Would Not Be Perfect Without Randomness: A Quantum Physicist’s Reading of Aquinas. In: Bertlmann, R., Zeilinger, A. (eds) Quantum [Un]Speakables II. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38987-5_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38987-5_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-38985-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-38987-5
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)