Logical Fatalism and the Argument from Bivalence
Another famous argument for fatalism that goes back to antiquity is one that depends not on causation or physical circumstances but rather is based on presumed logical truths.
The key idea of logical fatalism is that there is a body of true propositions (statements) about what is going to happen, and these are true regardless of when they are made. So, for example, if it is true today that tomorrow there will be a sea battle, then there cannot fail to be a sea battle tomorrow, since otherwise it would not be true today that such a battle will take place tomorrow.
The argument relies heavily on the principle of bivalence: the idea that any proposition is either true or false. As a result of this principle, if it is not false that there will be a sea battle, then it is true; there is no in-between. However, rejecting the principle of bivalence—perhaps by saying that the truth of a proposition regarding the future is indeterminate—is a controversial view since the principle is an accepted part of classical logic.
— Wikipedia on Fatalism
Quantum superposition can solve logical fatalism:
Macroscopic time is due to quantum decoherence.
The future is a coherent (constant phase difference) superposition of eigenstates.
That’s why classical probability can be regarded as part of quantum theory.
Quantum decoherence gives classically consistent histories.
2015.03.27 Friday (c) All rights reserved by ACHK