Events

Most artists, most artisans – really, anyone who creates – go through some process of envisioning…formulating…gestating…imagining. There are, as well, processes of intending, expressing, embodying, disclosing. And then further, manifesting, revealing, exhibiting. Some of these processes may operate prior to the threshold of conscious awareness. Some of them may move in a grey area. Some may be, or may become, overtly intentional. These various processes – and many others not named – may loop back on one another, interpenetrate one another, fuel or negate one another. For many who create, there is an element of mystery, of uncertainty, a dance of the unexpected and unforeseen.

It is impossible to overstate the effects of Covid-19 on the manner in which human beings interact. High on the list of these effects is a massive shift to online interaction for work, social engagement, and personal interaction. Dialogue in its many forms – Bohmian or otherwise – has also been significantly impacted by this online shift. In this session we will draw on the experience of seven people who have deep roots in various aspects of dialogue, both before and during the Covid pandemic. At the forefront of our inquiry will be the many variances that occur between in-the-flesh interaction on one hand, and interaction through the medium of streaming video on the other. What experiences are gained through the digital milieu? What experiences are lost? Is the future of dialogue – and conversation more generally – being re-shaped in accord with technology? As Covid-19 becomes endemic, will groups still gather face-to-face? What are the implications of these many changes?

The concept of “ecological niche” has gained much traction since the early 20th century, with many hundreds of plant and animal species now thoroughly assessed, analyzed, and categorized under this rubric. But what is the ecological niche of homo sapiens – of us, human beings? We know that, like any other species, humans exist in a very narrow band of specific conditions within which we can live and flourish. With the onset of the Anthropocene – the “new human” era – those specific conditions have increasingly come under assault, threatening the well-being not only of homo sapiens, but of all life, of the entire planet.

This introductory talk will provide an overview of the topic of Bohm and philosophy.  Bohm worked on many topics and from different points of view over the years.  Are there some themes and views which persisted?  What might contemporary philosophers learn from Bohm?

One issue that David Bohm was concerned with was creativity. In physics some of his models appeared deterministic, raising the question of how genuine creativity is possible if everything is pre-determined.  In this discussion Limnell and Pylkkänen explore how creativity and freedom can be understood in the Bohmian physical universe.

Basil Hiley worked with David Bohm for over 30 years. While their research focused on physics, philosophy played an important role in the discussions.  What was this role? In this session Petteri Limnell interviews Basil Hiley to find out.

David Bohm’s interpretation of quantum mechanics can be understood as driven by a need for an intelligible account of the physics of the world. But Bohm went beyond physics and linked the physics to metaphysics, especially the metaphysics of consciousness. I will explore how the drive towards an intelligible account of the world and our place in it led Bohm to a view of nature which is arguably a form of panpsychism.

In this installment of The Future Scientist series, we will consider the interesting triad formed by the words “evidence”, “experts” and “extraterrestrial”. On October 19th 2017 an interstellar object called ‘Oumuamua was detected passing relatively close to the Earth. Its behavior was anomalous-enough to interpret it as either a natural object of a type never seen before, or as an artificial object. Whether ‘Oumuamua is some sort of extraterrestrial technological debris or not we cannot say with certainty now, but we can certainly prepare ourselves to search for more.

David Bohm’s theory of quantum mechanics is mostly known as a way to give a fully deterministic account of quantum mechanics. For this reason, it has often been thought that Bohm’s aim was to restore the determinism of classical physics, and he has been criticized as conservative and unwilling to accept the radical implications of quantum physics.

It is well known that David Bohm’s causal interpretation of quantum mechanics and its development with Basil Hiley offers a realist ontological view of particles, waves, quantum potential, and active information (Bohm 1952, 1985, 1988, 1989, 1990; Bohm and Hiley 1975, 1987, 1993). However, the other epistemological and metaphysical underpinnings of the causal interpretation are still in need of detailed scrutiny. This presentation will explore two other realist components in Bohm’s thinking which bear some resemblance to Aristotle’s philosophy. The familiar argument from laws to the existence of the quantum objects and the reality of their properties will be only briefly mentioned. The focus will be on Bohm’s peculiar methodology of intuitive intelligibility (II), and his argument for the two metaphysical properties of causal powers, which bear clear similarities to Aristotle’s epistemology and metaphysics.