David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 39 (2):321 - 349 (2008)
There is confusion among scholars of Bohr as to whether he should be categorized as an instrumentalist (see Faye 1991 ) or a realist (see Folse 1985 ). I argue that Bohr is a realist, and that the confusion is due to the fact that he holds a very special view of realism, which did not coincide with the philosophers’ views. His approach was sometimes labelled instrumentalist and other times realist, because he was an instrumentalist on the theoretical level, but a realist on the level of models. Such a realist position is what I call phenomenological realism. In this paper, and by taking Bohr’s debate with Einstein as a paradigm, I try to prove that Bohr was such a realist.
|Keywords||Instrumental Bohr The realist Bohr Phenomenological realism Quantum mechanics Bohr’s philosophical position Bohr–Einstein debate J. Faye H. Folse|
|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
J. S. Bell (2004 ). On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. In Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press 14--21.
Arthur Fine (1996). The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory. University of Chicago Press.
Niels Bohr (1958). Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. New York, Wiley.
Werner Heisenberg (1958). Physics and Philosophy;. New York,Harper.
Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky & Nathan Rosen (1935). Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review (47):777-780.
Citations of this work BETA
Tjerk Gauderis (2014). To Envision a New Particle or Change an Existing Law? Hypothesis Formation and Anomaly Resolution for the Curious Case of the Β Decay Spectrum. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 45 (1):27-45.
Similar books and articles
Matthew J. Brown (2014). Quantum Frames. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 45 (1):1-10.
Dugald Murdoch (1987). Niels Bohr's Philosophy of Physics. Cambridge University Press.
Antti Keskinen (2012). Quine on Objects: Realism or Anti-Realism? Theoria 78 (2):128-145.
Paul Teller (1980). The Projection Postulate and Bohr's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:201-223.
Henry J. Folse (1990). Laudan's Model of Axiological Change and the Bohr-Einstein Debate. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:77 - 88.
Janet Folina (1995). Putnam, Realism and Truth. Synthese 103 (2):141--52.
Christian Miller (2007). The Conditions of Realism. Journal of Philosophical Research 32:95-132.
Added to index2009-03-04
Total downloads37 ( #127,770 of 1,940,983 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #225,856 of 1,940,983 )
How can I increase my downloads?