Wolfgang Smith - Philosophy

Philosophy

Smith is a member of the Traditionalist School of Metaphysics, having contributed extensively to its criticism of modernity while exploring the philosophical underpinnings of the scientific method and emphasizing the idea of bringing science back into the Aristotlean framework of traditional ontological realism.

Identifying with Alfred North Whitehead's criticism of Scientism's "bifurcationism" and "physical reductionism", i.e., the belief that, first, the qualitative properties of the objects of perception (the "corporeal objects") are ultimately distinct from the their respective quantitative properties (the "physical objects" studied by the different sciences); and second, that the physical objects are "in fact" all there is, meaning the corporeal objects are reduced to their physical counterparts, Smith examines critically in his work Cosmos and Transcendence (1984) the Cartesian roots of modern physical sciences.

Proceeding from his critique of Scientism, in his The Quantum Enigma (1995) Smith poses the questions of whether the scientific method is actually dependent on the Scientistic philosophy and, if it isn't, whether linking it to other philosophical frameworks would provide better solutions to the way we interpret physical phenomena. Demonstrating that in no case either the scientific method or its results depend upon or require adhering to a scientistic metaphysics, he answers in the positive to the first question, with the end result that it's possible to link the scientific method to any underlying metaphysics, or to none at all. Working then into the second question, he proposes linking the scientific method, thus the modern sciences, to a non-bifurcationist, non-reductionist metaphysics in the form of a modified thomistic ontology, showing how such a move can provide a positive outcome by solving the apparent incoherences perceived in Quantum Mechanics' phenomena.

According to Smith, such an interpretation of quantum mechanics allows for the usage of the hylomorphic concepts of act and potential to properly understand Quantum superpositions. For example, instead of considering that a photon is simultaneously a wave and a particle, or a particle in two distinct position, and other counterintuitive constructs, one would consider that the photon (or any other "physical object") at first doesn't exist "in act", but only "in potency", i.e., as "matter" in the hylomorphic meaning of the word, having the potential of becoming a wave, or a particle, or of being here or there etc. Whether one of these outcomes will happen to this undifferentiated matter is dependent on the determination imposed upon it by the macroscopic "corporeal object" that provides to it its actualization. A photon, thus, would be no more strange for having many potentials than, say, an individual who has the "superimposed" potentials of learning French and/or Spanish and/or Greek, all the while reading and/or walking and/or stretching his arms etc. And a further consequence of such an interpretation would be a corporeal and its related physical objects aren't dichotomized or reduced one to the other anymore, but quite the opposite, they all together constitute a whole of which different aspects are dealt with depending on perspective.

Smith's understanding of the relationship between corporeal and physical objects extend to his interpretation of biology, where he has become an opponent of Darwinian evolution, as the fundamental element in a species would be its form, not its causal history, which evolutionists favor. This leads him to be a supporter of the intelligent design movement, even though the hylomorphic approach itself isn't widely adopted by the mainstream intelligent designers, who also favor causal history, even though differently from evolutionists.

Smith is a geocentrist.

Read more about this topic:  Wolfgang Smith

Famous quotes containing the word philosophy:

    The Scripture was written to shew unto men the kingdom of God; and to prepare their minds to become his obedient subjects; leaving the world, and the Philosophy thereof, to the disputation of men, for the exercising of their natural Reason.
    Thomas Hobbes (1579–1688)

    While you’re playing cards with a regular guy or having a bite to eat with him, he seems a peaceable, good-humoured and not entirely dense person. But just begin a conversation with him about something inedible, politics or science, for instance, and he ends up in a deadend or starts in on such an obtuse and base philosophy that you can only wave your hand and leave.
    Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860–1904)

    Even healthy families need outside sources of moral guidance to keep those tensions from imploding—and this means, among other things, a public philosophy of gender equality and concern for child welfare. When instead the larger culture aggrandizes wife beaters, degrades women or nods approvingly at child slappers, the family gets a little more dangerous for everyone, and so, inevitably, does the larger world.
    Barbara Ehrenreich (20th century)