Kant, Quantum Physics and Transcendental Judgments

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسنده

پژوهشگر مستقل، آفریقای جنوبی

چکیده

Kant’s philosophy of science has been applied to quantum physics since the time when Niels Bohr formulated his interpretation of quantum physics. In recent years various Kantian interpretations of quantum physics have been put forward. One aspect that still needs further exploration is what a Kantian approach to the epistemic status of quantum entities would entail. In this paper a new kind of judgment consistent with Kant’s system, called a transcendental judgment, able to account for the real existence of quantum entities in the pre-measurement phase is discussed. The advantage of this kind of judgment is that it allows for a fine-tuning of the Kantian system to account for the discovery of quantum entities that are known to exist but whose existence can epistemologically not be accounted for in traditional Kantian philosophy. With this new kind of judgment, a wider range of possible judgments becomes available which can determine the epistemological status of concepts/ideas/theories quite carefully, discriminating between different kinds of knowledge claims. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Kant, Quantum Physics and Transcendental Judgments

نویسنده [English]

  • Willem McLoud
Independent Scholar, South Africa
چکیده [English]

Kant’s philosophy of science has been applied to quantum physics since the time when Niels Bohr formulated his interpretation of quantum physics. In recent years various Kantian interpretations of quantum physics have been put forward. One aspect that still needs further exploration is what a Kantian approach to the epistemic status of quantum entities would entail. In this paper a new kind of judgment consistent with Kant’s system, called a transcendental judgment, able to account for the real existence of quantum entities in the pre-measurement phase is discussed. The advantage of this kind of judgment is that it allows for a fine-tuning of the Kantian system to account for the discovery of quantum entities that are known to exist but whose existence can epistemologically not be accounted for in traditional Kantian philosophy. With this new kind of judgment, a wider range of possible judgments becomes available which can determine the epistemological status of concepts/ideas/theories quite carefully, discriminating between different kinds of knowledge claims. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Kant
  • Philosophy of Science
  • Quantum Physics
  • Epistemic Status of Quantum Entities
  • Transcendental Judgment

مراجع

Allais, L. (2004). Kant's One World: Interpreting “Transcendental Idealism”’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12(4): 655-684.
Allison, Henry E. (2004). Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense, Revised and Enlarged Edition, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Allison, H. E. (2010). Kant's Transcendental Idealism, in Graham Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Allison, H. E. (2012). Essays on Kant, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allori, Valia; Goldstein, Sheldon; Tumulka, Roderich; Zanghì, Nino. (2008) ‘On the Common Structure of Bohmian Mechanics and the Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber Theory’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59(3):353-389.
Auyang, S. Y. (1995). How is Quantum Field Theory Possible? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Bird, G. (2010). General Introduction, in Graham Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bitbol, M. (2007). Materialism, Stances, and Open-Mindedness, in Bradley Monton (ed.) Images of Empiricism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bitbol, M. (2008). Reflective Metaphysics: Understanding Quantum Mechanics from a Kantian Standpoint, Philosophica 83: 53-83.
Bitbol, Michel and Osnaghi, Stefano. (2013). Bohr's Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology’, Bohr, 1913-2013, Séminaire Poincaré XVIIP: 145-166
Butts, R. E. (1990). Teleology and the Scientific Method in Kant's Critique of Judgment, Nous 24:1-16.
Cartwright, N. (1999). The Dappled World. A Study of the Boundaries of Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donadi, S.; Piscicchia, K.; Curceanu, C.; Diósi, L.; Laubenstein M. & Bassi A. (2021) Underground test of gravity-related wave function collapse. Nature Physics 17:74–78.
Dorato, M. (2002). Kant, Gödel and Relativity, in P. Gardenfors, K. Kijania-Placek, J. Wolenski (eds.) Proceedings of the invited papers for the 11th International Congress of the Logic Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Friedman, M. (2001). Dynamics of Reason, Stanford: CSLI Publications. 93
Gardner, S. (1999). Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason, London: Routledge.
Goff, P. (2023). Why? The Purpose of the Universe, Oxford: Oxford University.
Kauark-Leite, P. (2010). Transcendental philosophy and quantum physics, Manuscrito – Rev. Int. Fil. 33: 243-267.
Keller, B. W., Munshi, F., Trebitsch, M. & Tremmel, M. (2023) ‘Can Cosmological Simulations Reproduce the Spectroscopically Confirmed Galaxies Seen at z≥10?’ arXiv:2212.12804 [astro-ph.GA]
McLaughlin, P. (1990). Kant's Critique of Teleology in Biological Explanation, Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press.
McLoud, W. (2018). Kant, Noumena and Quantum Physics, Contemporary Studies in Kantian Philosophy 3.
McLoud, W. (2024). Kant, Niels Bohr and Quantum Spontaneity, Journal of Philosophical Investigations, Special issue: Kant's Philosophy in the 21st Century.
Palmquist, Stephen R. (2015). Bohm's Quantum Causality and Its Parallels in Kant's Ideas of Reason, Sixty Years After Albert Einstein (1879-1955), Volume 13 of Death and Anti-Death, ed. Charles Tandy, Palo Alto: Ria University Press, 2015, Chapter Eight.
Pringe, H. (2007). Critique of the Quantum Power of Judgment. A Transcendental Foundation of Quantum Objectivity, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Pringe, H. (2023). Kant and Bohr on Quantum Objectivity, Roum. Philosophie, 67(2):247–265, Bucureşti.
Redhead, M. (1987). Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism: A Prolegomenon to the Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics, Oxford: Clarendon/Oxford University Press.
Ryckman, T. (2010). ‘The “Relativized A Priori”: An Appreciation and a Critique’, in M Domski and M Dickson (eds.) Discourse on a New Method: Reinvigorating the Marriage of History and Philosophy of Science, Chicago: Open Court.
Van Fraassen, B. (2008). Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image
مجله پژوهش های فلسفی
دوره 19، شماره 53 - شماره پیاپی 53
مقالات
شماره 53 زمستان 1404
دی 1404
صفحه 737-754

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار