THE MANY WORRIES OF MANY WORLDS: with Mark Harris, "Quantum Theology beyond Copenhagen: Taking Fundamentalism Literally"; Shaun C. Henson, "What Makes a Quantum Physics Belief Believable? Many‐Worlds among Six Impossible Things before Breakfast"; Emily Qureshi‐Hurst, "The Many Worries of Many Worlds"; Elise Crull, "Interpretation Neutrality for Quantum Theology"; Wilson C. K. Poon and Tom C. B. McLeish, "Is There a Distinctive Quantum Theology?"; and Ernest L. Simmons, "The Entangled Trinity, Quantum Biology, and Deep Incarnation."

Theological engagement with quantum mechanics has been dominated by the Copenhagen interpretation, failing to reflect the fact that philosophers and physicists alike are increasingly moving away from the Copenhagen interpretation in favor of other approaches. One such approach, Hugh Everett's so‐cal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science Vol. 58; no. 1; pp. 225 - 246
Autor principal: Qureshi‐Hurst, Emily
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Open Library of Humanities Mar2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Theological engagement with quantum mechanics has been dominated by the Copenhagen interpretation, failing to reflect the fact that philosophers and physicists alike are increasingly moving away from the Copenhagen interpretation in favor of other approaches. One such approach, Hugh Everett's so‐called Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI), is being taken increasingly seriously. As the MWI's credibility grows, it is imperative that metaphysicians, theologians, and philosophers of religion engage with its ideas and their implications. This article does just that, setting out some implications of Everettian Quantum Mechanics that are particularly relevant to theism. It argues that taking seriously the radical consequences of the Everett interpretation means facing at least three major worries for theism pertaining to personal identity, the problem of evil, and salvation. The article concludes by calling on theologians and philosophers of religion to address these worries, in order that these matters of religious significance remain both coherent and credible if the MWI turns out to be correct.