David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1424-1436 (2003)
Hartry Field (1980) has developed an interesting nominalization strategy for Newtonian gravitation theory—a strategy that reformulates the theory without quantification over abstract entities. According to David Malament (1982), Field's strategy cannot be extended to quantum mechanics (QM), and so it only has a limited scope. In a recent work, Mark Balaguer has responded to Malament's challenge by indicating how QM can be nominalized, and by “doing much of the work needed to provide the nominalization” (Balaguer 1998, 114). In this paper, I critically assess Balaguer's proposal, and argue that it ultimately fails. Balaguer's strategy is incompatible with a number of interpretations of QM, in particular with Bas van Fraassen's version of the modal interpretation. And given that Balaguer's strategy invokes physically real propensities, it is unclear whether it is even compatible with nominalism. I conclude that the nominalization of QM remains a major problem for the nominalist.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Mark Balaguer (2009). Fictionalism, Theft, and the Story of Mathematics. Philosophia Mathematica 17 (2):131-162.
Frederick Kroon (2011). Fictionalism in Metaphysics. Philosophy Compass 6 (11):786-803.
Glen Meyer (2009). Extending Hartry Field's Instrumental Account of Applied Mathematics to Statistical Mechanics. Philosophia Mathematica 17 (3):273-312.
P. Dicken (2006). Can the Constructive Empiricist Be a Nominalist? Quasi-Truth, Commitment and Consistency. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (2):191-209.
Similar books and articles
Nicholas Maxwell (1975). Does the Minimal Statistical Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Resolve the Measurement Problem? Methodology and Science 8:84-101.
Sergio Martínez (1992). ¿Qué es una ley irreductiblemente estadística? Theoria 7 (1/2/3):715-727.
Paul Teller (1990). Prolegomenon to a Proper Interpretation of Quantum Field Theory. Philosophy of Science 57 (4):594-618.
Edward MacKinnon (2007). Schwinger and the Ontology of Quantum Field Theory. Foundations of Science 12 (4):295-323.
Pieter E. Vermaas (1999). A Philosopher's Understanding of Quantum Mechanics: Possibilities and Impossibilities of a Modal Interpretation. Cambridge University Press.
Nicholas Maxwell (1976). Towards a Micro Realistic Version of Quantum Mechanics, Part I. Foundations of Physics 6 (3):275-292.
Joseph Berkovitz & Meir Hemmo (2005). Modal Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity: A Reconsideration. [REVIEW] Foundations of Physics 35 (3):373-397.
Mark Balaguer (1996). Towards a Nominalization of Quantum Mechanics. Mind 105 (418):209-226.
Otávio Bueno (2003). Is It Possible to Nominalize Quantum Mechanics? Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1424-1436.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads32 ( #77,536 of 1,696,633 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #80,942 of 1,696,633 )
How can I increase my downloads?