No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 September 2014
In order to overcome the fragmentation between science and theology, interdisciplinary criteria for meaning must be established. This task is made more complex because of increasing pluralism in the theoretical foundations both of science and of theology. In addition to the traditional coherence and correspondence criteria, the meaningfulness of an idea emerging out of a particular discipline should be directly related to the breadth of its generalized applicability in diverse disciplines. In the article, the thematic content of holistic quantum physics is explicated in order to explore the implications of quantum theory vis-à-vis Christian anthropology. I argue that quantum physics offers scientific foundations for affirming the holistic approach to human existence rooted in the Biblical tradition.
1 See for example Barth, Karl, The Humanity of God (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1960) p. 11Google Scholar and Cobb, John B. Jr.,, God and the World (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969), p. 9.Google Scholar
2 These three points are based loosely on Whitehead, Alfred North, Science and the Modern World (New York: Free Press, 1967 [1925]), pp. 181–192.Google Scholar
3 Suppe, Frederick, ed., The Structure of Scientific Theories (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1974), p. 125.Google Scholar
4 Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), pp. 111–135.Google Scholar
5 Rahner, Karl, “Towards a Fundamental Theological Interpretation of Vatican II,” Theological Studies 40/4 (December 1979), p. 725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a similar point see Cobb, John B. Jr.,, “Can the Church Think Again?” United Methodist Board of Higher Education and Ministry, 1/12 (August 1976), p. 12Google Scholar, where he writes: “If the church in its thinking recognizes what has always been the case, that it is a living historical movement most vital when it changes in creative response to its situation, then it can hold and support its children in their prophetic work.”
6 For an interesting summary of the Quark Theory and the problem of finding quarks in isolation see Johnson, Kenneth A., “The Bag Model of Quark Confinement,” Scientific American, 241/1 (July 1979), pp. 112–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Bohm, David, “The Implicate Order: A New Order for Physics,” transcribed and edited by Fowler, Dean R., Process Studies, 8/2 (Summer 1978), pp. 73–102.Google Scholar
8 Chew, Geoffrey F., “Hadron Bootstrap: Triumph or Frustration?” Physics Today (October 1970), p. 23.Google Scholar
9 Idem, “‘Bootstrap’: A Scientific Idea?” Science, 161, p. 762.
10 Stapp, Henry Pierce, “S-Matrix Interpretation of Quantum Theory,” Physical Review D. 3:1306.Google Scholar
11 Ibid., p. 1307.
12 Ibid., p. 1319.
13 For an excellent survey of the impact of holistic thinking in a wide range of disciplines see Miller, James, Living Systems (New York: McGraw Hill, 1978).Google Scholar
14 Chew, , “Hadron Bootstrap: Triumph or Frustration?” p. 25.Google Scholar
15 Capra, Fritjof, The Tao of Physics (Berkeley, California: Shambhala Publications, Inc., 1975).Google Scholar