Se a textura última da realidade fose puramente informacional e probabilística, cambiaría iso o modo en que asumimos a fraxilidade, o sufrimento e a perda?

"John Polkinghorne" divine action quantum physics evil suffering information

### Divine Action, Openness, and theodicy in Polkinghorne Within contemporary Christian theology and the philosophy of science, mathematical physicist and Anglican priest **John Polkinghorne** (1930–2021) developed a critical-realist model of **non-interventionist objective divine action**. Polkinghorne sought to reconcile traditional Christian providence with contemporary physics without portraying God as a cosmic micromanager or resorting to episodic, law-breaking interventions. #### Open Systems and "Active Information" Polkinghorne argued that physical reality is intrinsically open rather than causally closed. While contemporaries like Robert John Russell situated divine agency within quantum indeterminism, Polkinghorne looked to chaotic, nonlinear dynamics. He executed a metaphysical move from *epistemology* (the unpredictability of chaotic systems) to *ontology* (an actual flexibility in nature). Within these macroscopic flexibilities, Polkinghorne posited that God acts through a "top-down" input of **active information**—shaping probabilistic trajectories without injecting energy or violating thermodynamic conservation laws (*Science and Providence*, 1989; *Belief in God in an Age of Science*, 1998). #### The Free-Process Defense Polkinghorne addressed evil and suffering by expanding the classical "free-will defense" (for moral evil) into a **"free-process defense"** for natural evil. Grounding his theodicy in divine *kenosis* (voluntary self-limitation), he maintained that God lovingly endowed the cosmos with the autonomy to "make itself": > *"Bringing the world into being was a kenotic act of self-limitation on the Creator's part, so that not all that happens does so under tight divine control... I believe that God wills neither the act of a murderer nor the incidence of an earthquake, but both are allowed to happen in a creation given its creaturely freedom."* (*Exploring Reality*, 2005) Under this view, physical suffering (e.g., genetic mutations leading to cancer, tectonic shifts causing earthquakes) is the inescapable cost of a fertile, evolving creation capable of producing conscious life. #### Tensions and Epistemic Status - **Physical Consensus vs. Metaphysical Speculation:** Standard physics treats mathematical chaos as deterministic; inferring an ontological openness or room for non-energetic "information input" is a speculative theological-philosophical hypothesis, not established physics. - **Internal Tensions:** Critics within theology (such as Stephen Barr) argue that Polkinghorne’s implicit alignment with open theism diminishes divine omniscience and fails to explain why a benevolent God cannot input information to avert catastrophic suffering.

• ox.ac.uk
• asburyseminary.edu
• cis.org.uk
• harding.edu
• zygonjournal.org
• whyevolutionistrue.com
• calvin.edu
• bethanypc.org
• firstthings.com

1 source from the original research is no longer reachable

Buddhism pratityasamutpada sunyata quantum information theory suffering dukkha

### Buddhist Soteriology and Dependent Arising In Buddhist thought, existential suffering (*dukkha*) originates in fundamental ignorance (*avidyā*): the habitual reification of fluid experience into permanent, self-sufficient entities. The core antidote is *pratītyasamutpāda* (Pāli: *paṭiccasamuppāda*, "dependent origination"), which posits that phenomena do not exist unconditionally or inherently; rather, they arise, persist, and dissolve solely in dependence on causes and conditions. In the Theravāda canon, this principle is classically formulated in the *Kaccānagotta Sutta* (SN 12.15) as the Middle Way avoiding the extremes of eternalism ("everything exists") and annihilationism ("everything does not exist"). Theravāda practitioners apply this therapeutically through *vipassanā* (insight meditation), directly observing the transient, interdependent arising of physical and mental aggregates (*khandhas*) to dismantle attachment and realize non-self (*anattā*). ### Internal Tensions: Abhidharma vs. Madhyamaka A major philosophical tension separates early scholastic Abhidharma schools from the Mahāyāna Madhyamaka tradition: * **Theravāda / Abhidharma:** Rejects an enduring personal self (*pudgala-nairātmya*), yet its analytical frameworks often treat ultimate momentary phenomena (*dharmas*) as having intrinsic characteristics or nature (*sabhāva*). * **Madhyamaka:** Founded by Nāgārjuna (c. 150–250 CE), this school radicalizes dependent arising into *dharma-nairātmya* (the selflessness of all phenomena). Nāgārjuna equates dependent origination directly with emptiness (*śūnyatā*)—the complete absence of inherent existence (*svabhāva*) in any entity. In the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* (24:18), he declares: > *"Whatever is dependently co-arisen, that is explained to be emptiness. That, being a dependent designation, is itself the middle way."* For Madhyamaka, *śūnyatā* is not nihilistic nothingness but an ontological fluidity. Relinquishing the metaphysical assumption of independent substances dissolves the cognitive reification that generates grasping and suffering. ### Dialogue with Quantum Information and Epistemic Distinctions Comparative thinkers and physicists—such as Carlo Rovelli (in *Helgoland*, discussing Relational Quantum Mechanics) and Anton Zeilinger (exploring informational foundations of quantum states)—have highlighted structural parallels between Nāgārjuna’s relational ontology and interpretations of quantum mechanics. Both challenge classical substance ontology: just as quantum states can be interpreted as informational relations between systems rather than observer-independent intrinsic properties, Madhyamaka treats entities as empty relational designations. **Epistemic Caveat:** While the mathematical formalism and experimental predictions of quantum mechanics represent established scientific consensus, interpreting these findings via quantum information theory, relational physics, or Buddhist metaphysics remains an ongoing, speculative philosophical analogy. In living Buddhist practice, *śūnyatā* and *pratītyasamutpāda* are primarily soteriological and phenomenological remedies for existential suffering, not empirical physical theories of physical matter.

• routledge.com
• iasexpress.net
• wikipedia.org
• newdualism.org
• scribd.com
• dharma.org
• boloji.com
• substack.com
• thezensite.com
• askfilo.com
• note.com
• wordpress.com

1 source from the original research is no longer reachable

Stoic providence determinism quantum indeterminacy Epictetus grief suffering

### Classical Stoic Determinism and Providence In classical Stoicism, the universe is an interconnected, rational living organism governed by an immanent divine principle (*Logos*). Within this cosmology, divine providence (*pronoia*) and fate (*heimarmene*) are functionally identical: an unbroken, web-like chain of cause and effect wherein nothing occurs by chance. To preserve moral accountability within this determinism, Chrysippus formulated an early compatibilism, illustrated by his rolling cylinder analogy (recorded in Cicero’s *De Fato*, 39–44): while an external push initiates the cylinder’s movement, its intrinsic shape determines *how* it rolls. ### Epictetus on Grief, Suffering, and *Prohairesis* Epictetus translated this metaphysics into a daily discipline grounded in the "dichotomy of control" (*Discourses* 1.1; *Enchiridion* 1). He divided reality into things in our power (*eph’ hēmin*—judgments, desires, aversions) and things outside our power (*ouk eph’ hēmin*—the body, wealth, reputation, death). For Epictetus, suffering and grief are not properties of events themselves, but cognitive errors generated when the faculty of reasoned volition (*prohairesis*) grants assent (*synkatathesis*) to irrational impressions (*phantasiai*). As he famously observes: > *"What upsets people is not things themselves, but their judgments about the things. For example, 'death is nothing dreadful'... but the judgment about death, that it is dreadful, that is what is dreadful."* > —*Enchiridion*, 5 Practitioners met adversity not with passive resignation, but by seeing trials as the providential arena for exercising moral character (*Discourses* 1.6). ### Internal Tensions and Modern Epistemic Distinctions - **Providence vs. Atoms:** Marcus Aurelius repeatedly acknowledged an ancient tension—"either providence or atoms" (*Meditations* IV.27, IX.28)—concluding that even if Epicurean atomistic randomness governed physics rather than a providential Stoic *Logos*, an individual’s internal capacity for virtue remained intact. - **Physical Indeterminacy:** Stoic physics demanded absolute, gapless causal determinism. In modern physics, by contrast, the mainstream scientific consensus (the standard Copenhagen formulation of quantum mechanics) models fundamental reality as objectively indeterminate at the microscopic level. Deterministic accounts (e.g., De Broglie–Bohm pilot wave theory or the Everettian many-worlds interpretation) remain minority or competing theoretical frameworks. Stoic *heimarmene* is an ancient teleological metaphysics of unbroken necessity, distinct from modern empirical quantum theory.

• routledge.com
• utm.edu
• viastoica.com
• vreeman.com
• dailystoic.com
• reddit.com
• sacred-texts.com
• stanford.edu

existential meaning-making physicalism contingency suffering death Frankl

### Position and Lived Practice Secular existential phenomenology approaches human existence within an indifferent, contingent physical universe devoid of predefined metaphysical purpose. Rather than reducing human life to mechanistic physicalism, phenomenology insists on starting from first-person lived experience (*Erlebnis*). Practitioners live this philosophy through radical accountability: confronting finitude and suffering without transcendent consolations, generating purpose through deliberate action, engagement, and relational responsibility. ### Key Tensions and Figures A central internal tension divides radical subjectivist existentialism from meaning-discovery frameworks: * **Jean-Paul Sartre** (*Being and Nothingness*, 1943) famously argues that “existence precedes essence,” viewing reality as brute, contingent facticity. For Sartre, mortality is an external, absurd limit that cuts projects short rather than completing them. Meaning is entirely invented *ex nihilo* through sovereign choice. * **Martin Heidegger** (*Being and Time*, 1927) conceptualizes human being (*Dasein*) as marked by *Geworfenheit* (“thrownness”) into a contingent world. Heidegger reframes mortality as *Sein-zum-Tode* (“being-toward-death”)—an internal, non-relational boundary condition that shatters social complacency (*das Man*) and enables authentic individuation. * **Viktor E. Frankl** (*Man’s Search for Meaning*, 1946) bridges phenomenological philosophy and clinical psychiatry via logotherapy. Diverging from Sartre, Frankl insists meaning is not merely invented but encountered as an objective call to responsibility. Even within unavoidable pain, humans retain the interior capacity to transmute suffering into achievement. ### Distinctive Terminology * **Facticity vs. Transcendence:** The interplay between given physical, biological, and historical constraints and the conscious capacity to choose one's response to those limits. * **The Tragic Triad:** Frankl’s framing of the inescapable facets of human limitation: pain/suffering, guilt, and death. ### Representative Direct Quotes > “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.” > — Viktor E. Frankl, *Man’s Search for Meaning* (1946) > “Freedom is the source from which all signification and all values spring.” > — Simone de Beauvoir, *The Ethics of Ambiguity* (1947) ### Epistemic Status Existential phenomenology is a qualitative philosophical tradition and psychotherapeutic modality. While meaning-centered psychotherapies show empirical efficacy in clinical trials for alleviating existential distress in palliative and psychiatric care, existential claims regarding ontology, radical freedom, and authenticity are normative and descriptive phenomenological frameworks, not mechanistic hypotheses within mainstream physical science.

• wiley.com
• stanford.edu
• wikipedia.org
• nih.gov
• wikipedia.org
• everendium.com
• stanford.edu
• nih.gov

1 source from the original research is no longer reachable

"bereavement" "meaning reconstruction" Neimeyer metaphysical beliefs grief coping

### Position of the Discipline and Clinical Practice Mainstream clinical psychology and contemporary bereavement care reject rigid, linear stage theories of grief (such as the traditional Kübler-Ross model) in favor of active, cognitive-narrative adaptation. Within this consensus, the constructivist framework pioneered by Robert A. Neimeyer treats grief as a process of meaning reconstruction. Loss is viewed as an event that shatters the mourner’s **assumptive world**—the implicit, deeply held system of beliefs regarding predictability, benevolence, and self-worth (rooted in Ronnie Janoff-Bulman’s trauma theory). Practitioners do not adjudicate the literal or metaphysical truth of a client’s spiritual beliefs; rather, they engage them functionally as narrative resources. Clinicians facilitate the re-authoring of life stories, helping grievers integrate the loss into a revised worldview. ### Distinctive Concepts and Key Texts Neimeyer’s foundational volume, *Meaning Reconstruction and the Experience of Loss* (APA, 2001), outlines how trauma destabilizes personal identity and requires explicit cognitive and existential reorganization. Central concepts include: - **Sense-Making:** The cognitive struggle to find a plausible explanation for the death within one’s overarching framework. Neimeyer observes that bereavement disrupts self-narratives, launching survivors *"into an unsought quest for meaning in the loss as well as in their changed lives"*. - **Benefit-Finding:** Discovering positive life revisions, empathy, or personal growth in the wake of trauma without trivializing the tragedy. - **Continuing Bonds:** Rejecting the older psychoanalytic mandate of "detaching" from the deceased, this model encourages healthy, symbolic post-death attachment. Empirical work by Currier, Holland, and Neimeyer (2006) demonstrates that the inability to make sense of a loss strongly mediates the severity of complicated grief, particularly after violent or sudden loss. ### Internal Tensions and Epistemic Distinctions While positive religious coping often acts as a protective buffer, research by Laurie Burke and Neimeyer highlights **complicated spiritual grief**—a state in which traumatic death shatters faith, provoking spiritual distress, anger at God, and church alienation, which significantly predicts Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD). Epistemically, mainstream psychological consensus treats metaphysical, transcendent, and afterlife beliefs strictly as psychosocial schemas, cognitive coping mechanisms, and narrative constructs. Clinical science makes no ontological assertions about metaphysical reality; it evaluates spiritual meaning-making entirely through empirical markers of psychological coherence, functional coping, and symptom reduction.

• thelossfoundation.org
• centrewellness.ca
• nih.gov
• youtube.com
• woventraumatherapy.com
• ovid.com
• rivistadipsichiatria.it
• willowhouse.org
• apa.org
• researchgate.net
• researchgate.net
• nih.gov
• meaning.ca
• informit.org
• squarespace.com

"it from bit" Wheeler ontology ethics consciousness loss suffering value

### Tradition and Ontological Core In analytic philosophy of physics and philosophy of mind, the informational turn reinterprets the fabric of reality not as inert matter, but as relational information. Coined by physicist John Archibald Wheeler in his landmark 1989 paper *Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links*, the doctrine of **“it from bit”** asserts: > “[E]very *it*—every particle, every field of force, even the spacetime continuum itself—derives its function, its meaning, its very existence entirely... from the apparatus-elicited answers to yes or no questions, binary choices, bits”. Wheeler proposed a “participatory universe” where acts of measurement bring phenomena into being. Within analytic traditions, this spurred two major branches: 1. **Physical/Structural Realism**: Information is ontologically basic, but observer involvement requires only physical registration, not mind. 2. **Dual-Aspect & Pan-Informational Metaphysics**: Information bridges the objective physical domain and subjective conscious experience. ### Consciousness, Suffering, and Value Analytic philosophers have extended Wheeler’s ontology to axiology, consciousness, and moral patiency: - **Dual-Aspect Information and Qualia**: In *Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness* (1995) and *The Conscious Mind* (1996), David Chalmers uses Wheeler’s doctrine to propose that information possesses both a physical and a phenomenal aspect. Chalmers argues that moral status and suffering depend strictly on consciousness: if digital or informational configurations realize genuine phenomenological states (a possibility defended in *Reality+*, 2022), they acquire moral standing and become vulnerable to real loss and suffering. - **Information Ethics (IE) and Entropy**: Luciano Floridi (*The Ethics of Information*, 2013) expands the ontology into a systemic macroethics. For Floridi, all entities in the “infosphere” possess a minimal intrinsic claim to existence. Evil, suffering, and existential loss are conceptualized as *informational entropy*—the unjustified depletion, destruction, or semantic corruption of structured reality. ### Distinctive Concepts - **Participatory Observer-Participancy**: Reality is co-constituted through binary inquiry; physical properties remain indefinite until measurement occurs. - **Informational Entropy (Axiological)**: The moral metric for harm or loss, redefined as the degradation of coherent informational structures rather than mere physiological pain. ### Epistemic Demarcation While quantum information theory (e.g., qubits, von Neumann entropy) is well-established, mainstream physics, **“it from bit” as a literal metaphysical cosmology remains a speculative hypothesis**. Wheeler explicitly resisted mystical conflations of quantum measurement with human consciousness; likewise, Chalmers’ dual-aspect theory and Floridi’s informational axiology are minority, speculative frameworks in contemporary analytic metaphysics, not empirical scientific consensus.

• jelenaberenc.com
• stanford.edu
• wpmucdn.com
• unfinishablemap.org
• mapadelaconsciencia.es
• returntoconsciousness.org
• substack.com
• consc.net
• zygonjournal.org
• lib.ru
• note.com
• 80000hours.org
• dokumen.pub
• mpg.de
• ymaws.com
• researchgate.net

1 source from the original research is no longer reachable

Ash'arite atomism occasionalism continuous creation suffering divine decree qadar

### The Ashʿarite Synthesis: Atomism, Occasionalism, and Divine Decree **Tradition & Core Position** In mainstream classical Sunni theology (*kalām*), the Ashʿarite school (founded by Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī, d. 936) formulates a radically voluntarist metaphysics designed to safeguard absolute divine omnipotence and unity (*tawḥīd*). Ashʿarism denies inherent causal efficacy to created matter. Instead, the universe consists of indivisible spatial-temporal atoms (*jawāhir*) and transient accidents (*aʿrāḍ*) that do not endure across two moments of time (*al-ʿaraḍ lā yabqā zamānayn*). Reality is an unfolding matrix of **continuous creation** (*khalq mustamirr*): God directly recreates every atom and accident *ex nihilo* at every indivisible instant. What appears as natural secondary causality is merely God’s established custom (*ʿāda*) or empirical habit, maintained consistently yet contingent and alterable at will (e.g., in miracles, *khawāriq al-ʿāda*). **Key Figures & Primary Texts** * **Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī**, *Kitāb al-Lumaʿ* (“The Book of Highlights”), established the baseline refutation of Muʿtazilite rationalist ethics and intrinsic creaturely efficacy. * **Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī** (d. 1013), *Kitāb al-Tamhīd*, formalized the foundational atomist ontology of *jawhar* and *ʿaraḍ*. * **Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī** (d. 1111), *Tahāfut al-Falāsifa* (*The Incoherence of the Philosophers*), Discussion 17, famously argued against Avicennian causal necessity: > *“The connection between what is habitually believed to be a cause and what is believed to be an effect is not necessary according to us… their conjunction is due to the prior decree of God, Who creates them side by side, not to its being necessary in itself.”* **Agency, Suffering, and *Qadar*** Because God is the sole creator of all entities and events (*khāliq al-afʿāl*), both virtue and vice, pleasure and suffering, are willed and authored directly by God. To preserve human accountability without compromising monotheistic monopoly on agency, Ashʿarites developed the concept of **acquisition** (*kasb*): God creates the human capacity and the action simultaneously, while the human "acquires" responsibility through conscious appropriation. Regarding suffering and theodicy, Ashʿarism champions theological voluntarism, directly clashing with the Muʿtazilites (who held God is morally bound to enact what is best, *al-aṣlaḥ*). Divine justice (*ʿadl*) is defined not by external human moral criteria, but by divine ownership: God owns creation entirely, so no divine action can constitute injustice (*ẓulm*). As scripture notes, *“He cannot be questioned about what He does, but they will be questioned”* (Qurʾān 21:23). **Lived Dimension & Internal Tensions** Practitioners internalize this metaphysics through unconditional trust (*tawakkul*), patience (*ṣabr*), and contentment with the divine decree (*riḍā bi-l-qaḍāʾ*), viewing trials not as random natural evils, but as intentional divine trials. The enduring tension within Sunni orthodoxy—most evident between strict Ashʿarism and the parallel Māturīdite or Ḥanbalī/Atharī schools—remains whether *kasb* successfully salvages moral accountability or collapses practically into determinism (*jabr*).

• stanford.edu
• muslimphilosophy.com
• thequran.love
• wikipedia.org
• stanford.edu
• stanford.edu
• thequran.love
• studycorgi.com
• gulbenkian.pt
• ivypanda.com
• newageislam.com
• scribd.com
• cornellmuslimlife.org

1 source from the original research is no longer reachable