{"title":"Quantum phenomenology: Measurement, reflection, correlation","authors":"Dan Zahavi","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.02.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.02.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In his book <em>A Phenomenological Approach to Quantum Mechanics: Cutting the Chain of Correlations</em> Steven French presents an interpretation of Fritz London’s and Edmond Bauer’s 1939 monograph <em>La théorie de l’observation en mécanique quantique</em> that acknowledges and engages with the phenomenological theorizing underlying their approach to the measurement problem. My aim in the following contribution is twofold. I will first offer some historical and systematic arguments for why it might indeed be worthwhile to explore the link between phenomenology and quantum mechanics. In the second part of the paper, I will then look closer at French’s interpretation, especially his understanding of reflection, and express some reservations about a central argument of his.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143783714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Resisting epistemic exploitation: From institutional remedies to community-based research","authors":"Kristina H. Rolin","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.005","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.005","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines epistemic exploitation in the context of social scientific and other research with human participants. Despite researchers' good intentions, attempts to engage members of marginalized social groups can involve elements of epistemic exploitation. Epistemic exploitation occurs when privileged persons compel marginalized persons to produce an education about the nature of the oppression they face. Epistemic exploitation is harmful not only to those who are exploited but also to research that depends on people's voluntary participation. It increases the risk that potential research participants systematically decline invitations to participate in research. To illustrate this, I discuss the phenomenon of research fatigue in studies of the Sámi, Indigenous people living in Northern Europe. While research fatigue can be interpreted as resistance to epistemic exploitation, it has a downside. It prevents people from enjoying the benefits of research that could improve their lives in many ways. I discuss four types of institutional remedies to epistemic exploitation: raising awareness, allocating resources for education, rewarding epistemic diversity work, and requiring ethical review. Acknowledging the limitations of institutional interventions, I argue that community-based research is a promising avenue for counteracting epistemic exploitation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 63-71"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144123141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"From dollars to Joules: Integrating energetics into economic theory","authors":"Oliver Schlaudt","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>For as long as ecological economics has existed, non-economic, physical quantities have played a crucial role in it, in particular the energy metric. However, the correct systematic place of these quantities in economic theory, in particular their relation to the metric of economic value, remains one of the unsolved problems of the ecological approach to economics. In this article, I aim to make progress on this issue by systematically exploring the possible roles of energy and related metrics in economics, drawing on both historical and current literature. Two applications stand out: energetics as a general framework for an evolutionary and historical approach in economics and energetics as an analytical tool for critiquing monetary metrics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 31-42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144084199","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Unity or disunity of the sciences? The German debate around 1900","authors":"Martin Kusch","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.04.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.04.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper gives an overview of the intense and prolonged debates concerning the relationships between the natural, social and historical sciences in German-speaking academia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In particular, the paper focuses on discussions over cultural history (Schäfer versus Gothein; Buckle and Du Bois-Raymond versus Droysen and Lorenz; von Below versus Lamprecht); the position of psychology (Steinthal, Lazarus, Wundt, Dilthey); the role of the social sciences (Mohl versusTreitschke and Dilthey); the goals of economics (Knies, Schmoller, Treitschke, Menger, Weber); neo-Kantian conceptions and their rivals (Lange, Cohen, Windelband, Rickert, Dilthey, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche); and the road from Marxism to sociology (Marx, Lassalle, Stammler, Tönnies, Sombart, Simmel). I conclude by gesturing at ways in which these debates were related to social-political controversies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 7-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143855088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Risk, Islam, and counter-experts: Analyzing the fatwa against the Muria nuclear power plant","authors":"Pratama Yudha Pradheksa , Ahmad Imron Rozuli","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.05.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article examines how the ulama (Islamic scholars) construct and categorize risk in relation to an Islamic fatwa that forbids the construction of a nuclear power plant in Muria, Indonesia. The primary objective of this article is not to ascertain the veracity of risk but rather to comprehensively analyze the multitude of assertions made by the ulama regarding risk within the fatwa. This article presents findings that indicate the risk associated with the Muria nuclear power plant is primarily shaped and being constructed by democratic principles of accountability and transparency, as analyzed through Science and Technology Studies (STS) concepts such as risk, expertise, and counter-experts. The possible contribution of Islamic values—<em>maslaha</em> (benefits) and <em>mafsadah</em> (harms)—in advancing technological advancements with ethical considerations to benefit the public at large is discussed in this article. It also promotes public participation in science and technology, emphasizing the importance of discussing decisions about nuclear power plants with the impacted communities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 56-62"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144098776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Disciplinary identity and the idea of a unified social science: A survey of British academics","authors":"Federico Brandmayr","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.04.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.04.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There is substantial philosophical disagreement over whether the social sciences are united by a set of fundamental epistemic and methodological principles, echoing broader debates about the unity and disunity of science more generally. This question does not merely concern philosophers but also social scientists themselves. Social scientists form beliefs about the unity or disunity of the social sciences which likely influence their research practices, such as their choices of specialty areas and whether they pursue interdisciplinary projects. To assess such beliefs, the article presents the results of a survey of 1188 British academics working in social science departments. It shows that researchers in core disciplines like economics, sociology, and political science are more likely to identify as social scientists, while those in peripheral fields such as history and psychology are less attached to the category. Despite widespread support for interdisciplinarity, results reveal deep epistemological divergences across disciplines and a greater proximity to the humanities rather than the natural sciences.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 18-30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143864112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Verisimilitude or Probability? The history and analysis of a recurring conflation","authors":"Jakob Süskind","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.03.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Verisimilitude and epistemic probability are two fundamentally different concepts, and yet they are often being closely associated. This article outlines the theoretical difference between the two concepts and examines how related concepts – concepts that express either a closeness to truth or a closeness to certainty – were intertwined throughout the history of philosophy. It identifies those related concepts in ancient authors such as Plato, Aristotle, Galen, Cicero and Augustine, as well as in modern authors like J.S. Mill and more recent developments in philosophy and logic. By analysing the two broad families of concepts both theoretically and historically, and by advancing possible explanations for the frequent lack of distinction between them, the article seeks to promote greater clarity in both historical studies and contemporary philosophical thought.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"111 ","pages":"Pages 43-55"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144098775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A French view of London","authors":"Steven French","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.02.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2025.02.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In 1939 London and Bauer published a ‘little book’ that shaped the debate over the role of consciousness in resolving the measurement problem in quantum mechanics. Mistakenly understood as merely summarising von Neumann’s account, both sides in the debate failed to appreciate its phenomenological underpinnings. London not only originally studied phenomenology but continued thinking about and discussing this approach in the years leading up to the publication of his work with Bauer, most notably with Gurwitsch, who likewise had a dual background in phenomenological philosophy and physics. In the book, <em>A Phenomenological Approach to Quantum Mechanics: Cutting the Chain of Correlations</em> (French, 2023), the historical background to London and Bauer’s work is set out prior to situating it within the context of Husserl’s philosophy as a whole. It is concluded that the London and Bauer phenomenological account offers a potentially fruitful way forward through various dichotomies, such as that between psi-ontic and psi-epistemic accounts and between interpretational and reconstructive approaches more generally, as well as with regard to understanding quantum physics more generally.</div><div>In this paper London and Bauer’s insistence that quantum mechanics should be seen as a theory of knowledge in its own right is emphasized, where this must be taken as phenomenologically grounded. Hopefully this work will be viewed as contributing to a revised phenomenological understanding of modern physics, standing alongside Ryckman’s <em>The Reign of Relativity</em> (Ryckman, 2005) and Berghofer and Wiltsche’s edited collection <em>Phenomenological Approaches to Physics</em> (Berghofer & Wiltsche, 2020).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"110 ","pages":"Pages 30-39"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143562953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"An Unpublished Article by David Bohm","authors":"Chris Talbot editor","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.11.001","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.11.001","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>David Bohm’s orginal abstract is given below.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"110 ","pages":"Pages 88-103"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143684435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The art of estimation and the mathematization of force in Leibniz","authors":"Jeffrey Elawani , Filippo Costantini","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.12.009","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.12.009","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>From 1686 onward, Leibniz is engaged in a dispute with Cartesian physicists on the correct expression for the quantity of force in moving bodies. In the 1690s, he puts forth an argument for his own expression that is allegedly based on the science of quantity in general (or the art of estimation). Leibniz states that the latter requires the quantity of force to be determined by the real repetitions of a measure. It would follow that his expression for force is the correct one. Now, commentators have not been sensitive to the ingenuity of the argument presented here. In this paper, focussing on the exchange between Johann Bernoulli and Leibniz, we want to show how this argument consists essentially in pushing for a certain conception of the mathematization of force based, in turn, on a serious conception of measurement of quantities. This conception exploits the conservative properties of physical systems in order to apply general principles of determination of quantity to the special case of the quantity of force. We conclude by confronting our interpretation with others which posit a stronger connection between measurement and metaphysics in Leibniz.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"110 ","pages":"Pages 65-75"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143674812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}