What do you think?
Rate this book
My View of the World
A Nobel prize winner, a great man and a great scientist, Erwin Sebrodinger has made his mark in physics, but his eye scans a far wider here are two stimulating and discursive essays which summarize his philosophical views on the nature of the world. Schrodinger's world view, derived from the Indian writings of the Vedanta, is that there is only a single consciousness of which we are all different aspects. He admits that this view is mystical and metaphysical and incapable of logical deduction. But he also insists that this is true of the belief in an external world capable of influencing the mind and of being influenced by it. Schrodinger's world view leads naturally to a philosophy of reverence for life.
118 pages, Paperback
First published January 2, 1951
About the author
Erwin Schrödinger
85 books477 followersErwin Rudolf Josef Alexander Schrödinger, sometimes written as Erwin Schrodinger or Erwin Schroedinger, was a Nobel Prize-winning Austrian physicist who developed a number of fundamental results in the field of quantum theory, which formed the basis of wave mechanics: he formulated the wave equation (stationary and time-dependent Schrödinger equation) and revealed the identity of his development of the formalism and matrix mechanics. Schrödinger proposed an original interpretation of the physical meaning of the wave function.
He won the 1933 Nobel prize in physics with colleague Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory"
He won the 1933 Nobel prize in physics with colleague Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory"
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
April 29, 2024
I'm honestly not sure what to think of this work. It was a great read, however, there was a lot of language I could not fully grasp. Despite my ignorance to much of what I'm sure was second nature knowledge to Shrodinger, it was a pleasure to get a glimpse of his view of the world. As the fish is the last to discover the water, this book seems an attempt to explain and get a handle on that which is essentially not meant to be fully grasped. Whether it is an attempt at grabbing a fist full of water or shaping a nice glass for which the reader to sip the shapeless contents, it is plain to see Shrodinger gave some thought to the nature of that which his science could not explain fully.
July 25, 2013
Coming from a man of science, this book(or rather two essays written 35 years apart) is fairly good at giving an insight into his view of the world. Schrödinger discusses metaphysics, reality, language and understanding with clarity.
I, as a student of science, was interested in what he would say of all the metaphysical and mystical tones about which his work must have compelled him to think.
Very nice.
He called himself unmusical. Your mind was awashed with the other kind of waves ES!
I, as a student of science, was interested in what he would say of all the metaphysical and mystical tones about which his work must have compelled him to think.
Very nice.
He called himself unmusical. Your mind was awashed with the other kind of waves ES!
January 1, 2019
CITATIONS
In all the world, there is no kind of framework within which we can find consciousness in the plural; this is simply something we construct because of the spatio-temporal plurality of individuals, but it is a false construction.
Briefly summarising, we can express the proposed law thus: consciousness is bound up with learning in organic substance; organic competence is unconscious. Still more briefly, and put in a form which is admittedly rather obscure and open to misunderstanding: Becoming is conscious, being unconscious.
In all ages and amongst all peoples self-conquest has formed the underlying basis of all virtue.
This appears at once in the fact that a moral teaching always appears arrayed as a demand, ‘Thou shalt’; and it must be so, because if we consider the practical behaviour which we value as morally elevated, positively significant, or wise, the behaviour which, for reasons very variously stated, we applaud, respect or admire, we find that such behaviour, however constituted in detail, always has one thing common to it: a certain opposition to primitive desire.
In all the world, there is no kind of framework within which we can find consciousness in the plural; this is simply something we construct because of the spatio-temporal plurality of individuals, but it is a false construction.
Briefly summarising, we can express the proposed law thus: consciousness is bound up with learning in organic substance; organic competence is unconscious. Still more briefly, and put in a form which is admittedly rather obscure and open to misunderstanding: Becoming is conscious, being unconscious.
In all ages and amongst all peoples self-conquest has formed the underlying basis of all virtue.
This appears at once in the fact that a moral teaching always appears arrayed as a demand, ‘Thou shalt’; and it must be so, because if we consider the practical behaviour which we value as morally elevated, positively significant, or wise, the behaviour which, for reasons very variously stated, we applaud, respect or admire, we find that such behaviour, however constituted in detail, always has one thing common to it: a certain opposition to primitive desire.
February 22, 2021
To me, it seems fortuitous that this book even exists. When I learned that one of the most brilliant scientists in the field of quantum mechanics wrote a book on mysticism, it seemed too good to be true. But perhaps not. Maybe it makes sense that the man who conceived the "Schrodinger's Cat" paradox, a mind-bending thought exercise used to accurately describe reality on the quantum level, isn't afraid of mystical speculation.
Other books written by spiritual thinkers start out with the presupposition that metaphysics is valuable and thus chart their argument from there. Schrodinger, on the other hand, has to defy all of his colleagues and admirers, for to them he is the paragon of logical deduction and scientific inquiry. He eloquently does this when he argues that metaphysics cannot compete with science, but science cannot exist without it; crafting an articulate warning against the materialism and ego-driven scientific objectivity of the twentieth century, calling for an embrace of the metaphysical as a valuable source of motivation and ethics that may undergird existence.
To some who have not read it, this book may be seen as a form of career suicide, as it violates the separation of science and spirituality. Once read; however, it is obvious that Schrodinger has no objective truths to apply to his investigation of spirituality, and is simply engaging in it because pondering our existence and thinking about god has been the quintessential human pastime for centuries, and this his conclusions on the importance of the Vedas are most remarkable when analyzed from his perspective not as a scientist, but as a human.
Other books written by spiritual thinkers start out with the presupposition that metaphysics is valuable and thus chart their argument from there. Schrodinger, on the other hand, has to defy all of his colleagues and admirers, for to them he is the paragon of logical deduction and scientific inquiry. He eloquently does this when he argues that metaphysics cannot compete with science, but science cannot exist without it; crafting an articulate warning against the materialism and ego-driven scientific objectivity of the twentieth century, calling for an embrace of the metaphysical as a valuable source of motivation and ethics that may undergird existence.
To some who have not read it, this book may be seen as a form of career suicide, as it violates the separation of science and spirituality. Once read; however, it is obvious that Schrodinger has no objective truths to apply to his investigation of spirituality, and is simply engaging in it because pondering our existence and thinking about god has been the quintessential human pastime for centuries, and this his conclusions on the importance of the Vedas are most remarkable when analyzed from his perspective not as a scientist, but as a human.
March 31, 2023
Amazon 2008-07-26. Sung to the tune of the Super Golden Crisp jingle: Can't get enough Erwin Schrödinger; he's got the wave that pays!
surprisingly strong given all the eastern jibberjabber. holy shit, people were broadly educated in the classics back then. lots to take away here. very dense.
surprisingly strong given all the eastern jibberjabber. holy shit, people were broadly educated in the classics back then. lots to take away here. very dense.
November 17, 2021
Two interesting essays by the eminent physicist, touching on several topics such as Self, Consciousness, Reality, Language, Ethics etc. Schrödinger's philosophical beliefs appear to have been heavily influenced by the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, a Monist school of thought.
Though the content itself is very interesting, the writing style is a bit dull at places and it takes quite an effort to avoid skimming through pages.
Though the content itself is very interesting, the writing style is a bit dull at places and it takes quite an effort to avoid skimming through pages.
March 28, 2021
As the title states, the book ( rather two assays) is about the way the author saw the world.
I am inclined to say that I don’t agree with his views but I dare not touch the sun. The truth is I do not posses brainpower to digest it fully, hence the subjective absurdity for me.
What is pure bliss in reading the texts by these intellectual giants is observing with how much ease they can juggle and play with ideas ranging from Democritus to Carl Jung, and synthesize their own frameworks.
He would be rather disappointed today, I think, that we still haven’t figure out what is consciousness made of. Mind and matter are two different natural phenomena in XXI. We await another giant on the scale of Schrodinger to figure that out for us.
I am inclined to say that I don’t agree with his views but I dare not touch the sun. The truth is I do not posses brainpower to digest it fully, hence the subjective absurdity for me.
What is pure bliss in reading the texts by these intellectual giants is observing with how much ease they can juggle and play with ideas ranging from Democritus to Carl Jung, and synthesize their own frameworks.
He would be rather disappointed today, I think, that we still haven’t figure out what is consciousness made of. Mind and matter are two different natural phenomena in XXI. We await another giant on the scale of Schrodinger to figure that out for us.
April 9, 2023
Its hard to understand why Shrodinger's work is important in this day and age, but none of our modern conveniences would be possible without advances by him and others such as Heisenberg. The IR-spectrum experiment, which was dependent on the Shrodinger equation, revolutionized chemistry and paved the way for modern science. Literally ALL modern conveniences come from these experiments in one way or another.
In his book, Shrodinger uses vivid imagery and anecdotes to put his own scientific work in the context of the daily lives that we care about. He also reminds us that no matter how sterile we try to make a science, it is always intertwined with our seemingly fickle human desires. The major point that he stressed in his book is about non-duality, painting the concept as a means-to-an-end for destroying a solipsistic, egocentric view of the world in place of a holistic framework, to view the world in a higher societal consciousness beyond our immediate perceptions.
I recommend this book to any other scientist.
In his book, Shrodinger uses vivid imagery and anecdotes to put his own scientific work in the context of the daily lives that we care about. He also reminds us that no matter how sterile we try to make a science, it is always intertwined with our seemingly fickle human desires. The major point that he stressed in his book is about non-duality, painting the concept as a means-to-an-end for destroying a solipsistic, egocentric view of the world in place of a holistic framework, to view the world in a higher societal consciousness beyond our immediate perceptions.
I recommend this book to any other scientist.
February 3, 2019
260618: i liked it, thought his use of vedanta interesting, his references to russell, wittgenstein, hume, less engaging as it is not my usual sort of philosophy. interesting sources/parallels could be useful investigating, this is a good example, perceptive, it is not that philosophy is destined to become science, but that science is destined to become philosophy...
January 17, 2021
The limit of science is its metaphysics.
The limit of language is its concepts.
The view of the World is not seen with the eye, but with the Mind.
The one all-highest Godhead Subsisting in each being And living when they perish— Who this has seen, is seeing. For he who has that highest God in all things found, That man will of himself upon himself inflict no wound.
The limit of language is its concepts.
The view of the World is not seen with the eye, but with the Mind.
The one all-highest Godhead Subsisting in each being And living when they perish— Who this has seen, is seeing. For he who has that highest God in all things found, That man will of himself upon himself inflict no wound.
August 4, 2014
Some parts I understood, some just went over me. But it was interesting to see a scientist talk about philosophy.
August 31, 2020
Schrödinger was an outstanding physicist, an awkward philosopher, and a terrible writer.
May 21, 2022
Werner Heisenberg discovered matrix mechanics in 1925. The other great founder of quantum mechanics, Erwin Schrödinger, invented wave mechanics not too long thereafter. The two were proved formally equivalent by Paul Dirac but this does not mean that their authors espoused equivalent philosophies of science, much less agreed in their views on everything else in life. Scientific biography is fascinating for the reason that formalisms come and go, but the attitudes behind them last seemingly forever. Therefore we are fortunate that aside from his strictly scientific work Schrödinger produced a document that sets forth his view of the world that can be opposed to Heisenberg’s essay Ordnung der Wirklichkeit which we have reviewed a while back (see review here).
The present work comprises two parts, an autobiographical essay and a philosophical testament. The former confines itself to a mere recounting of bare facts. We learn in passing about other incidents of Schrödinger’s upbringing, including the influence of his father [pp. 23-24], a trip to England where he became fluent in English [p. 27] and early experiences at the University of Vienna from 1906 to 1910 [pp. 29-31]. All the same, the biographical account turns out to be disappointing in that Schrödinger expressly disclaims any talent at storytelling [p. 40] and doesn’t want to disclose very much about his interior or personal lives. For instance, he tells us of the great impression Hasenöhrl’s lectures made upon him as a young student attending the University of Vienna [p. 15] – but why does he refrain from describing what about Hasenörl’s lecturing style appealed to him or how it influenced his later work for which he became known?
With a lifetime to reflect upon a question such as this, why does Schrödinger have nothing significant to say about it? There appears to be no overarching theme to his life that he could discern in retrospect or want to share with us – Schrödinger is no Augustine, to be sure! A radically impoverished interior life such as here described is in all likelihood to be attributed to irreligiosity and adherence to pantheism. Compare with Max Planck (also pantheistically inclined): Planck shows how the innate drive to moral excellence cannot be entirely stifled, despite the supreme efforts of the magisterial Protestant Reformers, but could be diverted from its proper transcendent object into the service of the worldly idol of the secular power of the Prussian nation-state. An ethic of duty eclipses one of holiness. In Fichte, for instance, we can discern all the self-righteous pride of the man of the world who, no doubt, does succeed in observing his duty and in keeping his quarters spotlessly clean but for whom a religion involving a call to repentance is incredible.
Re. the theoretical part: starts out reprising some fairly conventional truisms, for instance on the role of metaphysics after Kant: overcome in principle but
zugleich aber doch [ist] sie [sc. Metaphysik] als unentbehrliche Stütze unserer allgemeinen und unserer Enzelerkenntnis beizubehalten. Der scheinbare Widerspruch, der hierin liegt, bildet eben das Problem [pp. 48-49]
for
Metaphysik verwandelt sich im Laufe der Entwicklung in Physik [p. 49].
More interesting because characteristic is his critique of the Occident:
Der Okzident hat im Laufe des letzten Jahrhunderts eine ganz gewaltige Entwicklung derchgemacht in einer ganz bestimmten Richtung, nämlich: sehr weitgehende Erkenntnis der Fundamente des räumlich-zeitlichen Natur-Geschehens (Physik und Chemie) und darauf gestützt: Ausbildung einer märchenhaften Fülle von ‘Mechanismen’ (im weitesten Sinne des Wortes), welche die Einflußsphäre des menschlichen Willens erweitern (Technik). Es drängt mich, hier ausdrücklich festzustellen: ich bin weit entfernt, dies, insbesondere das letztgenannte, die Technik, für das bedautsamste zu halten, was sich in dieser Zeit in Europa ereignet hat; ich halte es für wahrscheinlich, daß dieses Zeitalter, welches sich das technische zu nennen liebt, später einmal nach seinen hellsten Lichtern und tiefsten Schatten als das Zeitalter der Deszendenztheorie (bzw. das Entwicklungsgedankens) und all das des Kunstverfalles bezeichnen werden wird. Doch dies nur nebenbei, es handelt sich jetzt um das augenblicklich am stärksten Wirksame. Durch diese partielle ‘Elefantiasis’ sind andere Entwicklungsrichtungen der Kultur, der Erkenntnis, das okzidentalen Gehirns, oder wie man es nennen will, vernachläßigt, ja mehr, als es schon früher der Fall war, verwahrlost worden. Ja, fast scheint es, als sei ein ganz direkt schädingender, rückbildender Einfluß einen gewaltig sich entwickelden Organ auf jene anderen ausgeübt worden. Jahrhundertelang von der Kirche in der schändlichsten Weise geknechtnet, haben die Naturwissenschaften ihr Haupt erhoben und im Beswußtsein ihres heiligen Rechts, ihrer göttlichen Sendung wuchtige, haßerfüllte Hiebe gegen ihr alte Peinigerin geführt, nicht achtend, daß diese – wenn auch unzulängliche, ja pflichtvergessene – dennoch die einzige bestellte Hüterin des heiligsten Gutes der Väter war. Langsam und unbemerkt fast verglomm der Funke uralter indischer Weisheit, den der wunderbare Rabi am Jordan zu neuer Glut entfacht und der uns durch die finstre Nacht des Mittelalters geleuchtet hatte, verblich der Schein der wiedergenorenen Greichensonne, an der die Früchte, die wir heute genießen, gereift waren. [pp. 50-51]
After some pessimistic epistemological reflections in chapter three, our author offers this response:
Diese Phänomene des Werturteils, des Staunens, des Rätselfindens, welche nicht auf eine bestimmte Seite der Erscheinung, sondern auf die Erscheinung als Ganzes gehen und im übrigen niemals Flachköpfen, sondern höchst denkfähigen Männern sich aufgedrängt haben, scheinen mir darauf hinzudeuten, daß in dem, was wir erleben, Beziehungen angetroffen werden, welche jedenfalls bis heute weder durch die formale Logik und noch viel weniger durch die exakte Naturwissenschaft auch nur ihrer allgemeinen Form erfaßt werden; Beziehungen, welche immer aufs neue zur Metaphysik, d.h. zum Hinausgehen über das direkt Erfahrbare drängen werden, mögen wir deren Totenschein auch mit noch so gültiger Unterschrift in Händen [Kantens!] halten. [p. 58]
After quoting approvingly a minor writer of the day, Schrödinger unveils his core position:
Ich bein der Meinung, daß die Vorstellung schlechthin gemeinsamer Bewußtseinselemente mehrerer menschlicher Individuen an sich genommen noch durchaus nichts enthält, das mit sich selbst oder mit anderen bekannten Erfahrungen im Widerspruch stünde, daß durch sie vielmehr recht eigentlich diejenige Lage der Dinge restituiert wirdk die für den wirklich naiven Menschen in der Tat besteht; [p. 65]
The claim that modern science converges towards vedantic non-dualism is not convincingly argued in chapter six, entitled exoterische Einführung in das naturwissenschaftliches Denken:
Unter solchen Anschaun und Denken kann es geschehen, daß urplötzlich die tiefe Berechtigung jener vedândtischen Grundüberzeugung einleuchet: unmöglich kann die Einheit, dieses Erkennen, Fühlen und Wollen, das du das deine nennt, vor nicht allzulanger Zeit in einem angebbaren Augenblick aus dem Nichts entsprungen sein; vielmahr ist dieses Erkennen, Fühlen und Wollen wesentlich ewig und unveränderlich und ist numerisch nur eines in allen Menschen, ja in allen fühlenden Wesen. [pp. 70-71]
Roughly speaking, the contention is that biological evolution endows the species with an Ekphorie uralter ererbter Engramme and that individuality is unreal:
Man wolle sich, um das Folgende nicht eine kühne rhetorische Erschleichung zu finden, klar machen, daß die beiden Faktoren, von denen der Entwicklungsgang eines Individuums abhängt, nämlich a) die spezielle Beschaffenheit seiner Keimanlage und b) die spezielle Beschaffenheit der auf es einwirkende Umwelt – daß dies, sage ich, Faktoren von ganz der gleichen Art sind. [p. 78]
Kurz zusammengefaßt kann man das vermutete Gesetz so aussprechen: Bewußtsein ist mit dem Lernen der organischen Substanz verbunden; das organische Können ist unbewußt. Noch kurzer, freilich etwas dunkel und Mißverständnissen ausgesetzt: Bewußt wird das Werdende; das Seiende ist unbewußt. [p. 109]
Thus he acknowledges karma in a sense but downplays metempsychosis as implausible. Two mysteries remain. How does language originate given separate centers of consciousness and how do they reach agreement on an intersubjective reality?
Dann handelt es sich also wirklich um zwei erstaunliche Befunde. Der erste, scheint mir, läßt sich wissenschaftlich rational verstehen, wenn man dem Entstehen der sprachlichen Verständigung ontogenetisch und, so weit wie möglich, phylogenetisch nachgeht. Wenn hemand sagt, dabei sei aber der zweite Sachverhalt doch wohl schon vorausgesetzt, so will ich nicht widersprechen. Wesentlich ist mir, daß der zweite Sachverhalt nicht rational verfaßbar ist. Wir werden auf zwei irrationale, mystische Hypothesen zu seiner Erfassung geführt, nämlich entweder erstens die sogennante Hypothese der realen Außenwelt oder zweitens die Annahme, daß wir eigentlich bloß verschiedene Aspekte des Einen sind. [pp. 176-177]
The first he dismisses as an Ersatzethik, one that functions to make life all-around more bearable if one does good or at least is kind to others out of enlightened self-interest but that tends to a childish seeking after wonders, what for Schrödinger is to be rued as a tragic descent from die alte schöne und einfache Identitätslehre in Indien [p. 181].
How ought we to adjudge Schrödinger’s performance in this text? It evinces a failure of integration; his grounding in the spiritual traditions of the West (not to mention his stereotyped and jejune anticlericalism) overtly is too fleeting for him to have received any substantial formation from them and therefore when he flees to the East he can scarcely realize anything of much consequence from its wisdom, either. One is struck by how a dispassion originating in Schopenhauerian pessimism issues in an inability to perceive or acknowledge any dignity to the individual human being. Even what might have been a positive force, the sense of wonder to which he adverts, seems in the event pretty wan and has no driving virtue behind it, rather only resignation. Signally, for all his talk he fails to adduce any concrete instance of a wonder that might excite curiosity the way the burning bush does for Moses at Sinai [Exodus 3:1-4:17]. The reason why is apparent: the pantheistic God just doesn’t have anything life-altering to say to us! A contemplation of God that stops short of the higher things of the law: justice, mercy and good faith [Matthew 23:23] misses his holiness and the mysterium tremendum et fascinans altogether and peters out ultimately in idleness.
What is the problem with pantheism from the practical point of view? For the theoretical point of view, elliptical comments in the preceding paragraphs will have to suffice. Our pantheist advocate attempts no persuasive arguments but merely puts forward an ungrounded position take it or leave it (resembling Luther in this respect, who in his major works shows himself to be incapable of anything beyond the crudest level of argumentation much less scholastic erudition or humanistic finesse). One will here be transfixed by nothing like the sense of sheer wonder and transport that exudes from every sentence of Gregory Nazianzen’s theological orations – hardly a recommendation for the pantheistic God to be so bland! And since the sublime is the root of moral fervor, one can scarcely register surprise when our pantheist portentously announces the great ethical moment of pantheism only for its event to amount to nothing more than a silly advocacy of vegetarianism.
To what conclusion does pondering upon an autobiographical document such as the present one tend? In brief, pantheism amounts to an opium, not for the masses but for the educated elite, who enjoy the leisure to read up on far-out religious philosophies, teach themselves Sanskrit and the like. One might somewhat quizzically page through the New Testament and admire Jesus as a great moral teacher, but certainly would not treat him seriously when he calls on us to take up our cross daily and follow him – which goes to show the alleged admiration really is empty at bottom.
No doubt Schrödinger was a polished and entertaining conversationalist and a connoisseur of fine wine and classical music too, yet one has to wonder whether earthly passion can amount to anything very great in oblivion, inherent to pantheism, of a personal dimension, as demonstrated by the rakishness implied by the willingness to sleep with a woman without marrying her first. Could a relationship thus founded on disrespect of the woman deserve to be called a romance at all? The prophetess Diotima in Plato’s Symposium teaches that, at root, what animates earthly passion is a concealed longing for the transcendent and its beauty. All that was going on in Schrödinger’s case, however, is that he could indeed avail himself of his impressive professional credentials to impose upon the gullibility of young women, little more than girls, who were not sufficiently well formed and educated to know how to tell apart a man of quality from one who is merely a cad. Apparently the momentous ethical implications of pantheism do not extend as far as the categorical imperative! Another thing strikingly salient in this connection is that it would appear that, for all his many extramarital affairs, Schrödinger never once in his life sought the company of a woman close to being intellectually his equal. This makes sense. For why would a pantheist wish for a connection he had neither experienced nor so much as imagined possible, in that the interior depths in the psychology of the individual person bequeathed to the modern world by trinitarian theology are ex hypothesi absent in the pantheistic God? Thus, Schrödinger unwittingly witnesses through the emptiness of his personal life to the severe ramifications attendant on rejection of the personal God of theism.
The case of Schrödinger occasions the following reflection: would one want to be a lotus-eater, supposing one were furnished with a reliable guarantee that he could indulge himself and live out the remainder of a normal lifespan without ever being confronted with any great difficulty thereby? The historian Brian Gregory’s thesis in his Unintended Reformation states that this in effect is what western Europeans under the leadership of the Dutch and the Scandinavians decided upon in response to the devastation of the so-called seventeenth-century wars of religion: to secure a high and ever expanding material standard of life coupled with the dwindling of actual religious faith to the vanishing point. Isn’t there something more and higher worth striving for, at the very least the kalon [τὸ ϰαλόν] Pindar apostrophizes in his odes? Much more emphatically, Antigone or Prometheus!
What one finds objectionable about the Nietzschean last man who purchases a consumerist contentment at the price of clipping the wings of all longing for the transcendent is his entrapment in superficialities and utter lack of moral grandeur. A century and a half after Nietzsche’s time what he foresaw has indeed come to pass and even the memory that there once was something higher has been obliterated, not least among those who pretend to be religious – evangelicals with their prosperity gospel in the vanguard, but also among mainline Protestants and liberal Catholics who all but fall over themselves in the scramble to dispense with any age-old scriptural precept that might prove hard to put into practice and, therefore, whose observance would require ascetical discipline and self-mastery. As Luther pioneered, everyone knows it is much easier just to give up on trying to be virtuous and to invent a soteriology of imputed righteousness to excuse oneself. Human nature is constant after all and in all ages most everyone apart from the solitary desert hermit fails to live up to a passable, much less praise-worthy standard of conduct. The post-Reformation difference is that nowadays everyone not only accepts his moral slovenliness and contumacy but wants to put a positive spin on it.
Picture say the atheistic philosopher David Hume on his deathbed looking back over his career: one will be satisfied to have sampled all the worldly pleasures in abundance, to have bested one’s opponents in intellectual debate and written a few creditable books – but now the lights will go out and there is nothing more, nothing like the greatness and nobility the ancient Greek tragedians intimate and the Hebrew prophet and Christian martyr exhibit! Of course, one will not harbor regrets over having failed to achieve a moral excellence and holiness to which one never aspired in the first place (glance say at Richard Dawkins’ alternative list of ten commandments in his The God Delusion and marvel that a man could sink so low, become so pitiably little-minded) – yet can one really hold such a quotidian and ultimately pointless life as a model before idealistic youth, or want to?
But – the virtues are timeless and their own reward. As the adage goes, nothing ventured, nothing gained. For the moral impulse implanted in our hearts demands a response, which is why political agitation has become paramount in the modern world, in default of genuine religion which always starts in the first instance with repentance and reform of one’s own way of life, rather than with the woke urge to compel others into outward conformity with one’s own unexamined views of what is right and wrong through legal coercion in preference to the evidence of rational argument and persuasion, as respect for the dignity of the human being would demand (in other words, a modus operandi predicated upon the antithesis of love of neighbor) – in the long run, the moral witness of the early Christians and their way of life founded upon agape prevailed over the immense coercive legal apparatus of the Roman emperors.
Can we today hope for a remnant to remain faithful to the gospel against the allure of progressive liberalism? To continue to reverence the mystery preserved for all ages in the liturgy? Yes indeed, if Paul be right in 1 Corinthians 15:12-28 that our faith has substance, resting as it does upon the sound foundation of Christ’s death and resurrection.
The present work comprises two parts, an autobiographical essay and a philosophical testament. The former confines itself to a mere recounting of bare facts. We learn in passing about other incidents of Schrödinger’s upbringing, including the influence of his father [pp. 23-24], a trip to England where he became fluent in English [p. 27] and early experiences at the University of Vienna from 1906 to 1910 [pp. 29-31]. All the same, the biographical account turns out to be disappointing in that Schrödinger expressly disclaims any talent at storytelling [p. 40] and doesn’t want to disclose very much about his interior or personal lives. For instance, he tells us of the great impression Hasenöhrl’s lectures made upon him as a young student attending the University of Vienna [p. 15] – but why does he refrain from describing what about Hasenörl’s lecturing style appealed to him or how it influenced his later work for which he became known?
With a lifetime to reflect upon a question such as this, why does Schrödinger have nothing significant to say about it? There appears to be no overarching theme to his life that he could discern in retrospect or want to share with us – Schrödinger is no Augustine, to be sure! A radically impoverished interior life such as here described is in all likelihood to be attributed to irreligiosity and adherence to pantheism. Compare with Max Planck (also pantheistically inclined): Planck shows how the innate drive to moral excellence cannot be entirely stifled, despite the supreme efforts of the magisterial Protestant Reformers, but could be diverted from its proper transcendent object into the service of the worldly idol of the secular power of the Prussian nation-state. An ethic of duty eclipses one of holiness. In Fichte, for instance, we can discern all the self-righteous pride of the man of the world who, no doubt, does succeed in observing his duty and in keeping his quarters spotlessly clean but for whom a religion involving a call to repentance is incredible.
Re. the theoretical part: starts out reprising some fairly conventional truisms, for instance on the role of metaphysics after Kant: overcome in principle but
zugleich aber doch [ist] sie [sc. Metaphysik] als unentbehrliche Stütze unserer allgemeinen und unserer Enzelerkenntnis beizubehalten. Der scheinbare Widerspruch, der hierin liegt, bildet eben das Problem [pp. 48-49]
for
Metaphysik verwandelt sich im Laufe der Entwicklung in Physik [p. 49].
More interesting because characteristic is his critique of the Occident:
Der Okzident hat im Laufe des letzten Jahrhunderts eine ganz gewaltige Entwicklung derchgemacht in einer ganz bestimmten Richtung, nämlich: sehr weitgehende Erkenntnis der Fundamente des räumlich-zeitlichen Natur-Geschehens (Physik und Chemie) und darauf gestützt: Ausbildung einer märchenhaften Fülle von ‘Mechanismen’ (im weitesten Sinne des Wortes), welche die Einflußsphäre des menschlichen Willens erweitern (Technik). Es drängt mich, hier ausdrücklich festzustellen: ich bin weit entfernt, dies, insbesondere das letztgenannte, die Technik, für das bedautsamste zu halten, was sich in dieser Zeit in Europa ereignet hat; ich halte es für wahrscheinlich, daß dieses Zeitalter, welches sich das technische zu nennen liebt, später einmal nach seinen hellsten Lichtern und tiefsten Schatten als das Zeitalter der Deszendenztheorie (bzw. das Entwicklungsgedankens) und all das des Kunstverfalles bezeichnen werden wird. Doch dies nur nebenbei, es handelt sich jetzt um das augenblicklich am stärksten Wirksame. Durch diese partielle ‘Elefantiasis’ sind andere Entwicklungsrichtungen der Kultur, der Erkenntnis, das okzidentalen Gehirns, oder wie man es nennen will, vernachläßigt, ja mehr, als es schon früher der Fall war, verwahrlost worden. Ja, fast scheint es, als sei ein ganz direkt schädingender, rückbildender Einfluß einen gewaltig sich entwickelden Organ auf jene anderen ausgeübt worden. Jahrhundertelang von der Kirche in der schändlichsten Weise geknechtnet, haben die Naturwissenschaften ihr Haupt erhoben und im Beswußtsein ihres heiligen Rechts, ihrer göttlichen Sendung wuchtige, haßerfüllte Hiebe gegen ihr alte Peinigerin geführt, nicht achtend, daß diese – wenn auch unzulängliche, ja pflichtvergessene – dennoch die einzige bestellte Hüterin des heiligsten Gutes der Väter war. Langsam und unbemerkt fast verglomm der Funke uralter indischer Weisheit, den der wunderbare Rabi am Jordan zu neuer Glut entfacht und der uns durch die finstre Nacht des Mittelalters geleuchtet hatte, verblich der Schein der wiedergenorenen Greichensonne, an der die Früchte, die wir heute genießen, gereift waren. [pp. 50-51]
After some pessimistic epistemological reflections in chapter three, our author offers this response:
Diese Phänomene des Werturteils, des Staunens, des Rätselfindens, welche nicht auf eine bestimmte Seite der Erscheinung, sondern auf die Erscheinung als Ganzes gehen und im übrigen niemals Flachköpfen, sondern höchst denkfähigen Männern sich aufgedrängt haben, scheinen mir darauf hinzudeuten, daß in dem, was wir erleben, Beziehungen angetroffen werden, welche jedenfalls bis heute weder durch die formale Logik und noch viel weniger durch die exakte Naturwissenschaft auch nur ihrer allgemeinen Form erfaßt werden; Beziehungen, welche immer aufs neue zur Metaphysik, d.h. zum Hinausgehen über das direkt Erfahrbare drängen werden, mögen wir deren Totenschein auch mit noch so gültiger Unterschrift in Händen [Kantens!] halten. [p. 58]
After quoting approvingly a minor writer of the day, Schrödinger unveils his core position:
Ich bein der Meinung, daß die Vorstellung schlechthin gemeinsamer Bewußtseinselemente mehrerer menschlicher Individuen an sich genommen noch durchaus nichts enthält, das mit sich selbst oder mit anderen bekannten Erfahrungen im Widerspruch stünde, daß durch sie vielmehr recht eigentlich diejenige Lage der Dinge restituiert wirdk die für den wirklich naiven Menschen in der Tat besteht; [p. 65]
The claim that modern science converges towards vedantic non-dualism is not convincingly argued in chapter six, entitled exoterische Einführung in das naturwissenschaftliches Denken:
Unter solchen Anschaun und Denken kann es geschehen, daß urplötzlich die tiefe Berechtigung jener vedândtischen Grundüberzeugung einleuchet: unmöglich kann die Einheit, dieses Erkennen, Fühlen und Wollen, das du das deine nennt, vor nicht allzulanger Zeit in einem angebbaren Augenblick aus dem Nichts entsprungen sein; vielmahr ist dieses Erkennen, Fühlen und Wollen wesentlich ewig und unveränderlich und ist numerisch nur eines in allen Menschen, ja in allen fühlenden Wesen. [pp. 70-71]
Roughly speaking, the contention is that biological evolution endows the species with an Ekphorie uralter ererbter Engramme and that individuality is unreal:
Man wolle sich, um das Folgende nicht eine kühne rhetorische Erschleichung zu finden, klar machen, daß die beiden Faktoren, von denen der Entwicklungsgang eines Individuums abhängt, nämlich a) die spezielle Beschaffenheit seiner Keimanlage und b) die spezielle Beschaffenheit der auf es einwirkende Umwelt – daß dies, sage ich, Faktoren von ganz der gleichen Art sind. [p. 78]
Kurz zusammengefaßt kann man das vermutete Gesetz so aussprechen: Bewußtsein ist mit dem Lernen der organischen Substanz verbunden; das organische Können ist unbewußt. Noch kurzer, freilich etwas dunkel und Mißverständnissen ausgesetzt: Bewußt wird das Werdende; das Seiende ist unbewußt. [p. 109]
Thus he acknowledges karma in a sense but downplays metempsychosis as implausible. Two mysteries remain. How does language originate given separate centers of consciousness and how do they reach agreement on an intersubjective reality?
Dann handelt es sich also wirklich um zwei erstaunliche Befunde. Der erste, scheint mir, läßt sich wissenschaftlich rational verstehen, wenn man dem Entstehen der sprachlichen Verständigung ontogenetisch und, so weit wie möglich, phylogenetisch nachgeht. Wenn hemand sagt, dabei sei aber der zweite Sachverhalt doch wohl schon vorausgesetzt, so will ich nicht widersprechen. Wesentlich ist mir, daß der zweite Sachverhalt nicht rational verfaßbar ist. Wir werden auf zwei irrationale, mystische Hypothesen zu seiner Erfassung geführt, nämlich entweder erstens die sogennante Hypothese der realen Außenwelt oder zweitens die Annahme, daß wir eigentlich bloß verschiedene Aspekte des Einen sind. [pp. 176-177]
The first he dismisses as an Ersatzethik, one that functions to make life all-around more bearable if one does good or at least is kind to others out of enlightened self-interest but that tends to a childish seeking after wonders, what for Schrödinger is to be rued as a tragic descent from die alte schöne und einfache Identitätslehre in Indien [p. 181].
How ought we to adjudge Schrödinger’s performance in this text? It evinces a failure of integration; his grounding in the spiritual traditions of the West (not to mention his stereotyped and jejune anticlericalism) overtly is too fleeting for him to have received any substantial formation from them and therefore when he flees to the East he can scarcely realize anything of much consequence from its wisdom, either. One is struck by how a dispassion originating in Schopenhauerian pessimism issues in an inability to perceive or acknowledge any dignity to the individual human being. Even what might have been a positive force, the sense of wonder to which he adverts, seems in the event pretty wan and has no driving virtue behind it, rather only resignation. Signally, for all his talk he fails to adduce any concrete instance of a wonder that might excite curiosity the way the burning bush does for Moses at Sinai [Exodus 3:1-4:17]. The reason why is apparent: the pantheistic God just doesn’t have anything life-altering to say to us! A contemplation of God that stops short of the higher things of the law: justice, mercy and good faith [Matthew 23:23] misses his holiness and the mysterium tremendum et fascinans altogether and peters out ultimately in idleness.
What is the problem with pantheism from the practical point of view? For the theoretical point of view, elliptical comments in the preceding paragraphs will have to suffice. Our pantheist advocate attempts no persuasive arguments but merely puts forward an ungrounded position take it or leave it (resembling Luther in this respect, who in his major works shows himself to be incapable of anything beyond the crudest level of argumentation much less scholastic erudition or humanistic finesse). One will here be transfixed by nothing like the sense of sheer wonder and transport that exudes from every sentence of Gregory Nazianzen’s theological orations – hardly a recommendation for the pantheistic God to be so bland! And since the sublime is the root of moral fervor, one can scarcely register surprise when our pantheist portentously announces the great ethical moment of pantheism only for its event to amount to nothing more than a silly advocacy of vegetarianism.
To what conclusion does pondering upon an autobiographical document such as the present one tend? In brief, pantheism amounts to an opium, not for the masses but for the educated elite, who enjoy the leisure to read up on far-out religious philosophies, teach themselves Sanskrit and the like. One might somewhat quizzically page through the New Testament and admire Jesus as a great moral teacher, but certainly would not treat him seriously when he calls on us to take up our cross daily and follow him – which goes to show the alleged admiration really is empty at bottom.
No doubt Schrödinger was a polished and entertaining conversationalist and a connoisseur of fine wine and classical music too, yet one has to wonder whether earthly passion can amount to anything very great in oblivion, inherent to pantheism, of a personal dimension, as demonstrated by the rakishness implied by the willingness to sleep with a woman without marrying her first. Could a relationship thus founded on disrespect of the woman deserve to be called a romance at all? The prophetess Diotima in Plato’s Symposium teaches that, at root, what animates earthly passion is a concealed longing for the transcendent and its beauty. All that was going on in Schrödinger’s case, however, is that he could indeed avail himself of his impressive professional credentials to impose upon the gullibility of young women, little more than girls, who were not sufficiently well formed and educated to know how to tell apart a man of quality from one who is merely a cad. Apparently the momentous ethical implications of pantheism do not extend as far as the categorical imperative! Another thing strikingly salient in this connection is that it would appear that, for all his many extramarital affairs, Schrödinger never once in his life sought the company of a woman close to being intellectually his equal. This makes sense. For why would a pantheist wish for a connection he had neither experienced nor so much as imagined possible, in that the interior depths in the psychology of the individual person bequeathed to the modern world by trinitarian theology are ex hypothesi absent in the pantheistic God? Thus, Schrödinger unwittingly witnesses through the emptiness of his personal life to the severe ramifications attendant on rejection of the personal God of theism.
The case of Schrödinger occasions the following reflection: would one want to be a lotus-eater, supposing one were furnished with a reliable guarantee that he could indulge himself and live out the remainder of a normal lifespan without ever being confronted with any great difficulty thereby? The historian Brian Gregory’s thesis in his Unintended Reformation states that this in effect is what western Europeans under the leadership of the Dutch and the Scandinavians decided upon in response to the devastation of the so-called seventeenth-century wars of religion: to secure a high and ever expanding material standard of life coupled with the dwindling of actual religious faith to the vanishing point. Isn’t there something more and higher worth striving for, at the very least the kalon [τὸ ϰαλόν] Pindar apostrophizes in his odes? Much more emphatically, Antigone or Prometheus!
What one finds objectionable about the Nietzschean last man who purchases a consumerist contentment at the price of clipping the wings of all longing for the transcendent is his entrapment in superficialities and utter lack of moral grandeur. A century and a half after Nietzsche’s time what he foresaw has indeed come to pass and even the memory that there once was something higher has been obliterated, not least among those who pretend to be religious – evangelicals with their prosperity gospel in the vanguard, but also among mainline Protestants and liberal Catholics who all but fall over themselves in the scramble to dispense with any age-old scriptural precept that might prove hard to put into practice and, therefore, whose observance would require ascetical discipline and self-mastery. As Luther pioneered, everyone knows it is much easier just to give up on trying to be virtuous and to invent a soteriology of imputed righteousness to excuse oneself. Human nature is constant after all and in all ages most everyone apart from the solitary desert hermit fails to live up to a passable, much less praise-worthy standard of conduct. The post-Reformation difference is that nowadays everyone not only accepts his moral slovenliness and contumacy but wants to put a positive spin on it.
Picture say the atheistic philosopher David Hume on his deathbed looking back over his career: one will be satisfied to have sampled all the worldly pleasures in abundance, to have bested one’s opponents in intellectual debate and written a few creditable books – but now the lights will go out and there is nothing more, nothing like the greatness and nobility the ancient Greek tragedians intimate and the Hebrew prophet and Christian martyr exhibit! Of course, one will not harbor regrets over having failed to achieve a moral excellence and holiness to which one never aspired in the first place (glance say at Richard Dawkins’ alternative list of ten commandments in his The God Delusion and marvel that a man could sink so low, become so pitiably little-minded) – yet can one really hold such a quotidian and ultimately pointless life as a model before idealistic youth, or want to?
But – the virtues are timeless and their own reward. As the adage goes, nothing ventured, nothing gained. For the moral impulse implanted in our hearts demands a response, which is why political agitation has become paramount in the modern world, in default of genuine religion which always starts in the first instance with repentance and reform of one’s own way of life, rather than with the woke urge to compel others into outward conformity with one’s own unexamined views of what is right and wrong through legal coercion in preference to the evidence of rational argument and persuasion, as respect for the dignity of the human being would demand (in other words, a modus operandi predicated upon the antithesis of love of neighbor) – in the long run, the moral witness of the early Christians and their way of life founded upon agape prevailed over the immense coercive legal apparatus of the Roman emperors.
Can we today hope for a remnant to remain faithful to the gospel against the allure of progressive liberalism? To continue to reverence the mystery preserved for all ages in the liturgy? Yes indeed, if Paul be right in 1 Corinthians 15:12-28 that our faith has substance, resting as it does upon the sound foundation of Christ’s death and resurrection.
July 3, 2019
A short, but in depth, book into Erwin Schrödingers view of the world. Although some of the discussions require a light background or exposure to philosophical text, the writing is imaginative and essential concepts can be grasped by any reader. Erwin draws on existing Western and Eastern philosophies, mostly from Schopenhauer and the Vedas, to synthesize an amalgam of perspectives on subjects in metaphysics, ethics, consciousness, and identity. Although some of the book is dated, much of the text remains relevant. The book doesn't stray too far from what you might find in an introduction to philosophy text, practicing methods of logic, reasoning, and deduction. However, Erwin admits, some discussions explore concepts, particularly in identity, that lend too much trust to metaphysics and mysticism. Nonetheless, the exploration is done with good taste. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in philosophy, or in the perspectives and inner workings of a brilliant mind.
June 4, 2021
Very interesting; a physicist discovers zen, more or less. Very obvious however that good old Erwin was an author out of necessity, not penmanship. Worth a read though! But maybe start with the far more digestible Alan Watts before grabbing this one off the shelf.
November 19, 2023
In the first essay ‘Seek for the road’, Schrodinger expresses how conventional understandings of consciousness “leave a monstrous gap … unfilled in our picture of the world”. His attempt at exploring this is like any other person’s, a mostly introspective musing drawn from his direct experience, as well as the intellectual landscape within which he resides. In his quest to define the indefinable aspects of existence we see that he is human like the rest of us. The unifying theme of his essay is that conventional scientific-rational conception of the self, as a solitary unit operating in isolation, should be discarded in favour of a more beautiful perspective which acknowledges the arbitrariness of absolute categories and hints at the interconnectedness of everything.
Schrodinger draws more so from the lens of direct experience and biology than more contemporary scientists like Penrose who view consciousness as a quantum-computational property. He suggests that consciousness is “the instructor supervising the education of the living tissue, who is called on for help whenever new problems crop up but leaves the pupils to themselves to deal with those in which he knows they have had sufficient practice.” Summarising this, he states “consciousness is bound up with learning in organic substance; organic competence is unconscious”. Scattered throughout the essay, you will find more direct references to biology - unconscious activities residing in the ganglia - and processes like peristalsis.
Like many scientific minds, Schrodinger finds solace and beauty in eastern mysticism. Against the idea of a separated self, he declares: “No self stands alone. Behind it stretches an immense chain of physical and - as a special class within the whole - mental events to which it belongs as a reacting member and which it carries on.” Even more vividly, he writes “every individual life, indeed every day in the life of an individual, has to represent a part, however small, of this evolution, a chisel-stroke, however insignificant, on the eternally unfinished statue of our species.”
The second essay, 'What is real', written 25 years after the first, at the older age of 73. I'd initially expected perhaps a gentler type of wisdom, but Schrodinger's mind is still supple, child-like - pregnant with curiosity and questions. He is still full of these adolescent wonders that we have all experienced - questions like 'Do you see the green of this lawn exactly as I see it? Do we all live in the same world?'. It may well be that children pose these questions only in opposition to the mainstream scientific frameworks and modern conceptions of personhood to which they are exposed.
Whereas the first essay probes at the barriers of the self, diving through the biological layers of the cell, organ, organism, colony, society, and culture, the second essay proclaims that even our conventional view of the internal and external is still quite mystical and metaphysical when examined more closely. He explores linguistics (as many do) reflecting on our shared understanding of the world. This essay does draw to a climax when Schrodinger considers the ethical implications of his philosophy which goes beyond purely objective or truth-seeking motives 'I feel it necessary to declare in advance that the ideas considered in this section are not meant to have the same logical force as what has gone before, but that I regard their ethical importance as much greater'. He surveys the main religions of humanity, drawing parallels between them, ponders life after death, even venturing into the ethics of eating meat. It’s quite interesting that the same ideas that consume us in childhood can regain their importance later in life.
Schrodinger draws more so from the lens of direct experience and biology than more contemporary scientists like Penrose who view consciousness as a quantum-computational property. He suggests that consciousness is “the instructor supervising the education of the living tissue, who is called on for help whenever new problems crop up but leaves the pupils to themselves to deal with those in which he knows they have had sufficient practice.” Summarising this, he states “consciousness is bound up with learning in organic substance; organic competence is unconscious”. Scattered throughout the essay, you will find more direct references to biology - unconscious activities residing in the ganglia - and processes like peristalsis.
Like many scientific minds, Schrodinger finds solace and beauty in eastern mysticism. Against the idea of a separated self, he declares: “No self stands alone. Behind it stretches an immense chain of physical and - as a special class within the whole - mental events to which it belongs as a reacting member and which it carries on.” Even more vividly, he writes “every individual life, indeed every day in the life of an individual, has to represent a part, however small, of this evolution, a chisel-stroke, however insignificant, on the eternally unfinished statue of our species.”
The second essay, 'What is real', written 25 years after the first, at the older age of 73. I'd initially expected perhaps a gentler type of wisdom, but Schrodinger's mind is still supple, child-like - pregnant with curiosity and questions. He is still full of these adolescent wonders that we have all experienced - questions like 'Do you see the green of this lawn exactly as I see it? Do we all live in the same world?'. It may well be that children pose these questions only in opposition to the mainstream scientific frameworks and modern conceptions of personhood to which they are exposed.
Whereas the first essay probes at the barriers of the self, diving through the biological layers of the cell, organ, organism, colony, society, and culture, the second essay proclaims that even our conventional view of the internal and external is still quite mystical and metaphysical when examined more closely. He explores linguistics (as many do) reflecting on our shared understanding of the world. This essay does draw to a climax when Schrodinger considers the ethical implications of his philosophy which goes beyond purely objective or truth-seeking motives 'I feel it necessary to declare in advance that the ideas considered in this section are not meant to have the same logical force as what has gone before, but that I regard their ethical importance as much greater'. He surveys the main religions of humanity, drawing parallels between them, ponders life after death, even venturing into the ethics of eating meat. It’s quite interesting that the same ideas that consume us in childhood can regain their importance later in life.
December 11, 2017
O livro traz dois textos, um escrito em 1925 e o outro escrito em 1960.
No começo por ele tratar das teorias filosóficas que eram focadas em retóricas, epistemologia, argumentações complexas, é mais complicado de se tirar algo dela (Depois, no seu segundo texto traz os motivos que faz com que este tipo de filosofia seja mais difícil: O problema da linguagem e de sua interpretação).
(Um texto em que o ponto principal seria saudades, como que ficaria este texto traduzido em outras línguas ? É necessário um conhecimento muito específico para que uma tradução seja realmente o que o autor quis dizer)
E conforme a leitura vai passando, ele adentra nas filosofias mais "praticas" relacionadas a consciência; Chega a tocar no assunto de que a mente poderia ser a criadora do mundo exterior, seu ponto de vista sobre os sânscritos hindu das Vedas e Upanishads, percepções do mundo exterior, o interior, a moralidade humana se baseando bastante em Kant, nature/nurture, sempre com uma atenção para não misturar a metafísica com a física (apesar de muito tentadora).
E por fim, na segunda parte, uma visão geral das religiões e de certa forma, os limites dos seres humanos. Do dualismo cristão até o "um com o todo" dos textos hindus (explorando as teorias de transcendência, karma, Nirvana, etc.).
Mais um dos livros de físicos explorando a metafísica, o que me parece(*livre arbítrio/determinismo) um caminho bem comum e que acaba convergindo nos mistérios da mente e da consciência... A última barreira do conhecimento.
Feynman, por exemplo, se aventurou mais profundamente nesse mundo das percepções, consciência, mundo, mente, etc.
No começo por ele tratar das teorias filosóficas que eram focadas em retóricas, epistemologia, argumentações complexas, é mais complicado de se tirar algo dela (Depois, no seu segundo texto traz os motivos que faz com que este tipo de filosofia seja mais difícil: O problema da linguagem e de sua interpretação).
(Um texto em que o ponto principal seria saudades, como que ficaria este texto traduzido em outras línguas ? É necessário um conhecimento muito específico para que uma tradução seja realmente o que o autor quis dizer)
E conforme a leitura vai passando, ele adentra nas filosofias mais "praticas" relacionadas a consciência; Chega a tocar no assunto de que a mente poderia ser a criadora do mundo exterior, seu ponto de vista sobre os sânscritos hindu das Vedas e Upanishads, percepções do mundo exterior, o interior, a moralidade humana se baseando bastante em Kant, nature/nurture, sempre com uma atenção para não misturar a metafísica com a física (apesar de muito tentadora).
E por fim, na segunda parte, uma visão geral das religiões e de certa forma, os limites dos seres humanos. Do dualismo cristão até o "um com o todo" dos textos hindus (explorando as teorias de transcendência, karma, Nirvana, etc.).
Mais um dos livros de físicos explorando a metafísica, o que me parece(*livre arbítrio/determinismo) um caminho bem comum e que acaba convergindo nos mistérios da mente e da consciência... A última barreira do conhecimento.
Feynman, por exemplo, se aventurou mais profundamente nesse mundo das percepções, consciência, mundo, mente, etc.
December 16, 2022
Werner Heisenberg famously said that "The first gulp from the glass of the natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but, at the bottom of the glass, God is waiting for you." In this short but fascinating read, fellow Nobel Prize-winning physicist Erwin Schroedinger grapples with that same question.
Divided into two parts, the first an essay written in 1936, and the second an essay written in 1960, My View Of The World details Schroedinger's journey of insight into the nature of reality.
Along the way, Schroedinger presents some astonishing ideas. One is the possibility of viewing one's own physical body not as the internal world to which the material world is external, but as part of the external world to which consciousness is internal. Another is the insistence that the belief in an external, material "real world" requires just as much metaphysical assumption as any other belief.
Schroedinger's conclusion is that the ancient Hindus were correct when they said that each one of us is an aspect of God. Consciousness is, in fact, a single entity, made up of countless facets.
The negatives are that Schroedinger's writing style is often unnecessarily convoluted. In some ways the book seems more like a draft of notes rather than a polished and edited work. It is sometimes unclear and sometimes rambling.
Highly recommended to anyone interested in understanding spirituality from a Western non-Abrahamic perspective.
Divided into two parts, the first an essay written in 1936, and the second an essay written in 1960, My View Of The World details Schroedinger's journey of insight into the nature of reality.
Along the way, Schroedinger presents some astonishing ideas. One is the possibility of viewing one's own physical body not as the internal world to which the material world is external, but as part of the external world to which consciousness is internal. Another is the insistence that the belief in an external, material "real world" requires just as much metaphysical assumption as any other belief.
Schroedinger's conclusion is that the ancient Hindus were correct when they said that each one of us is an aspect of God. Consciousness is, in fact, a single entity, made up of countless facets.
The negatives are that Schroedinger's writing style is often unnecessarily convoluted. In some ways the book seems more like a draft of notes rather than a polished and edited work. It is sometimes unclear and sometimes rambling.
Highly recommended to anyone interested in understanding spirituality from a Western non-Abrahamic perspective.
Shelved as 'digital'
February 6, 2023A Nobel prize winner, a great man and a great scientist, Erwin Schrödinger has made his mark in physics, but his eye scans a far wider horizon: here are two stimulating and discursive essays which summarize his philosophical views on the nature of the world. Schrödinger's world view, derived from the Indian writings of the Vedanta, is that there is only a single consciousness of which we are all different aspects. He admits that this view is mystical and metaphysical and incapable of logical deduction. But he also insists that this is true of the belief in an external world capable of influencing the mind and of being influenced by it. Schrödinger's world view leads naturally to a philosophy of reverence for life.
Book DescriptionA Nobel prize winner, a great man and a great scientist, Erwin Schrödinger has made his mark in physics, but his eye scans a far wider horizon: here are two stimulating and discursive essays which summarize his philosophical views on the nature of the world.
February 19, 2018
Apasionante en muchos aspectos, pero difícil de leer por su elevado contenido en filosofía; nombres desconocidos, que probablemente pertenecieron a filosofos famosos de ese tiempo ahora sumisos en el olvido. Entré a este libro pensado que encontraría un punto medio entre ciencia y metafísica, pero me he encontrado con un severo ejercicio filosófico con el fin de exponer sus ideas y a la vez cubrirse de ataques.
La primera mitad del libro brilla completamente, aunque ese brillo se opaca conforme pasa la mitad y por seguridad elige posicionarse hacia un agnosticismo escéptico que chirría frente a su previa exposición Panteista. Visto a la distancia, creo que dio de hecho su mejor esfuerzo para codificar un mensaje que no era ni es socialmente aceptado en nuestra cultura profundamente occidentalizada.
https://hexagia.wordpress.com/2018/02...
La primera mitad del libro brilla completamente, aunque ese brillo se opaca conforme pasa la mitad y por seguridad elige posicionarse hacia un agnosticismo escéptico que chirría frente a su previa exposición Panteista. Visto a la distancia, creo que dio de hecho su mejor esfuerzo para codificar un mensaje que no era ni es socialmente aceptado en nuestra cultura profundamente occidentalizada.
https://hexagia.wordpress.com/2018/02...
May 21, 2021
Some interesting insights, I like how such an important figure in the history of (modern) physics dares to go into regions of mysticism and speculation on consciousness. In this sense Schrödinger is a refreshing thinker. That said, some of the philosophers referenced in this book I think are fairly mainstream and not that interesting. I also feel like Schrödinger isn't always able to explain his ideas very well (but maybe that is the translation). It goes from zero to full on in many instances which kind of makes it hard to follow at times. That said, I still think it's worth a read and it's refreshing to read such a nuanced take on certain topics. Despite Schrödinger being interested in some of the ideas of the Upanishads, he does not blindly subscribe to all their ideas and practices but maintains healthy skepticism and personal critical thought. Recommended, 3.75/5 stars.
August 23, 2023
One of the preeminent quantum physicists offer his vedantic worldview
It is interesting to see a world class intellect playing with ideas and reasoning with clarity. I think he's fundamentally right that science cannot be disengaged from metaphysics. As his contemporary Heisenberg said:
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you”
As someone who's read a bunch of Vedanta literature, this idea from Schrödinger stood out: Consciousness is bound up with learning in living organisms; organic competence is unconscious. Or put it in a more mystical way: Becoming is conscious, being unconscious.
It is interesting to see a world class intellect playing with ideas and reasoning with clarity. I think he's fundamentally right that science cannot be disengaged from metaphysics. As his contemporary Heisenberg said:
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you”
As someone who's read a bunch of Vedanta literature, this idea from Schrödinger stood out: Consciousness is bound up with learning in living organisms; organic competence is unconscious. Or put it in a more mystical way: Becoming is conscious, being unconscious.
May 14, 2020
This is a book to which I must return, pen in hand and a notebook open for pages of reflection. I appreciate his depth of thought and his notion that htere is more to consciousness than mere materiality and, if that nonetheless be the case, we share matter universally. That is, we are connected past, present and future... a kind of cosmic and eternal entanglement.
October 1, 2020
First essay was interesting and I really enjoyed it (4/5). However, the second one was kinda weird even though I got the whole idea, but still it felt like something is missing or Scchrödinger could have made way clearer by expanding more at some points (3/5).
November 14, 2020
3.5
Read ancient Indian texts on existence, metaphysics, consciousness instead. Because this is the derivation and personalised view of the same in a more complicated scientifically shaped verse, which is the thought voice of the author.
Read ancient Indian texts on existence, metaphysics, consciousness instead. Because this is the derivation and personalised view of the same in a more complicated scientifically shaped verse, which is the thought voice of the author.
February 1, 2021
He may have been a genius is physics but he’s a terrible author. The philosophical material itsself is far too basic for how unnecessarily complex his writing is. He babbles on for whole paragraphs about things that could have been condensed to only a few sentences. An absolute chore to read.
February 18, 2021
Some lovely little insights in his tour of metaphysics.
You can feel all his sneering 'rationalist' colleagues breathing down his neck as he writes, the poor bastard!
Quite dense and full of references to -ologies and -isms which make it hard to comprehend at times.
You can feel all his sneering 'rationalist' colleagues breathing down his neck as he writes, the poor bastard!
Quite dense and full of references to -ologies and -isms which make it hard to comprehend at times.
November 5, 2023
An interesting read. This is a scholarly work so at times I did have some trouble comprehending and was forced to reread certain paragraphs a few times to understand them but, as an armchair philosopher this is something I'm working on haha!
November 15, 2017
fabulous
May 1, 2019
Very interesting concepts but really hard to understand fully.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews