Reflective Metaphysics: Understanding Quantum Mechanics from a Kantian Standpoint

Q4 Arts and Humanities
M. Bitbol
{"title":"Reflective Metaphysics: Understanding Quantum Mechanics from a Kantian Standpoint","authors":"M. Bitbol","doi":"10.21825/philosophica.82161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Instead of either formulating new metaphysical images (as realists would do) or rejecting any metaphysical attempt (as empiricists would do), the case of quantum mechanics might well require from us a complete redefinition of the nature and task of metaphysics. The sought redefinition can be performed in the spirit of Kant, according to whom metaphysics is the discipline of the boundaries of human knowledge. This can be called a “reflective” conception of metaphysics. In this paper, each one of the most popular “interpretations” of quantum mechanics is shown to be naturally associated with a variety of Kant-like reflective metaphysics. Then, the two major “paradoxes” of quantum mechanics (the measurement problem and the EPR correlations) are reformulated by way of this reflective attitude, and they are thereby “dissolved”. Along with this perspective, quantum mechanics becomes one of the most elegant and understandable theories of the history of physics in addition of being one of the most efficient. The only point that must be clarified is why it looks culturally so difficult to accept a reflective and non-ontological standpoint on physical theories.","PeriodicalId":36843,"journal":{"name":"Argumenta Philosophica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argumenta Philosophica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21825/philosophica.82161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

Instead of either formulating new metaphysical images (as realists would do) or rejecting any metaphysical attempt (as empiricists would do), the case of quantum mechanics might well require from us a complete redefinition of the nature and task of metaphysics. The sought redefinition can be performed in the spirit of Kant, according to whom metaphysics is the discipline of the boundaries of human knowledge. This can be called a “reflective” conception of metaphysics. In this paper, each one of the most popular “interpretations” of quantum mechanics is shown to be naturally associated with a variety of Kant-like reflective metaphysics. Then, the two major “paradoxes” of quantum mechanics (the measurement problem and the EPR correlations) are reformulated by way of this reflective attitude, and they are thereby “dissolved”. Along with this perspective, quantum mechanics becomes one of the most elegant and understandable theories of the history of physics in addition of being one of the most efficient. The only point that must be clarified is why it looks culturally so difficult to accept a reflective and non-ontological standpoint on physical theories.
反思的形而上学:从康德的立场理解量子力学
量子力学的情况很可能要求我们对形而上学的性质和任务进行彻底的重新定义,而不是形成新的形而上学形象(如现实主义者所做的那样)或拒绝任何形而上学的尝试(如经验主义者所做的那样)。这种重新定义可以在康德的精神中实现,康德认为形而上学是人类知识边界的学科。这可以称为形而上学的“反思性”概念。在这篇论文中,每一种最流行的量子力学“解释”都被证明与各种康德式的反思形而上学自然地联系在一起。然后,量子力学的两个主要“悖论”(测量问题和EPR相关性)通过这种反思的态度被重新表述,并因此被“溶解”。伴随着这种观点,量子力学成为物理学史上最优雅、最容易理解的理论之一,同时也是最有效的理论之一。唯一必须澄清的一点是,为什么在文化上很难接受物理理论的反思性和非本体论观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Argumenta Philosophica
Argumenta Philosophica Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信