PREFACE
The world of David Bohm has long interested me. I have explored it and tried to understand it. I find it engaging and important for our modern world. Initially, I looked at Bohm's physics, but I found a person with a broad range of intuitions, developed ideas and systems. He spans physics to history, education to philosophy of science, biology to religion, art to linguistics.
In all these fields, Bohm opposes seeing the world as a machine. He particularly challenges physics, the champion of mechanistic thinking. Physics usually assumes that what makes up the world are machine-like bits of independent parts which behave the same in or out of something. It has had great success with this philosophy.
The organismic view opposes the mechanistic approach. It has a long history in various cultures. In his useful survey, Issues in Science and Religion, Ian Barbour says it contains three beliefs:
(1) the organism is a whole, an integral whole;
(
(
We are familiar with many of its slogans. "The whole is more
than the sum of its parts" is an example. An organism is an integrated
system of parts, each of which relates with the others in a constantly moving
way. Changes in one part affect the other parts. By being in the organism, the
parts gain properties that are absent when they are out of it. Which means properties emerge in the higher levels of an organism
that we cannot predict from its parts. Barbour quotes the ideas of C.D.
Broad: we cannot work out "the wetness of water or the smell of
ammonia...from the atoms of hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen." We could not
predict such properties even knowing in detail how each part behaves.<
There is, further, a type of realism in Broad's statement. There are three alternatives. The organismic approach could be a claim about the world itself. It could be about the method used in investigations. It could, thirdly, be about the mental processing of information coming through our senses from the world. Bohm assumes the first of these; I do too. The wetness of water has something to do with water itself and not merely with our appreciation of it. Wetness is more than in our minds.
Bohm champions organismic thinking within physics. He has mounted
successive and related offenses since the early
This book will survey the physical theories of Bohm
and reactions to them. I show how far Bohm has
developed organismic physical theories that
physicists could accept. The book will also examine his underlying metaphysical
and religious beliefs and explore the relation between science and theology. I
find Bohm's physics and metaphysics relate to and
mingle with each other. I conclude by looking at the theological potential of Bohm's beliefs.<
There is much popular interest in Bohm and
the new physics arising from quantum and the relativity theories. Often the
attention comes from those with a mystical or Eastern religious perspective. Fritjof Capra's book The Tao of Physics is a good
example.<
I wish to thank Robert Cohen, Harry Oliver (my advisers at
Two papers of mine contain early versions of portions of the text. I
acknowledge the permission of the Joint Publication Board of Zygon to reprint them here.<