The guiding idea of this work is that classical diffusion theory, being nonrelativistic, should be associated with nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. A study of classical diffusion leads to a generalization which should correspond to the relativistic domain. Actually, with a convenient choice of the basic constants, one sees the relativistic features (Lorentz contraction and covariant diffusion equation) emerge in the generalized process. This leads first to a derivation of the nonrelativistic and relativistic wave equations (and to a model of the Dirac (...) fluid); then to a better understanding of several relativistic aspects of quantum mechanics (spin connection with relativity and link of relativity with nonlocalization). No quantum mechanical forces are postulated: they arise as pseudo-forces in the course of the calculations. The physical significance of the stochastic model is examined and shown to give a pictorial description only in certain ideal situations, but to remove several conceptual difficulties. Remarks are presented on the role of idealization in microphysics. (shrink)
The stochastic approach worked out in earlier papers is applied to the Dirac fluid. It gives a model of the Schrödinger zitterbewegung, from which, by the spinor-vector correspondence, a model of the plane monochromatic wave in the rest frame is derived. The relation of the scheme with quantization is found to have the same character as in the previous papers. The link of spin with relativity is explained.
The stochastic scheme proposed in a previous paper as subjacent to quantum mechanics is analyzed in the light of the difficulties and criticisms encountered by similar attempts. It is shown that the limitation of the domain where the theory is valid gives a reply to the criticisms, but restricts its practical usefulness to the description of basic features. A stochastic approach of the hadron mass spectrum, allowing the scheme to emerge in the domain of experimental verification (to be worked out (...) in a later paper) is outlined. The model is found not to be in disagreement with Bell's argument opposed to hidden variables; a same origin is suggested for the difficulties encountered in both domains. The views proposed are compared with the Copenhagen interpretation: common points and divergences are analyzed. (shrink)
In a previous paper a stochastic foundation was proposed for microphysics: the nonrelativistic and relativistic domains were shown to be connected with two different approximations of diffusion theory; the relativistic features (Lorentz contraction for the coordinate standard deviation, covariant diffusion equation) were not derived from the relativistic formalism introduced at the start, but emerged from diffusion theory itself. In the present paper these results are given a new presentation, which aims at elucidating not the foundations of quantum mechanics, but those (...) of relativity. This leads to a discussion of points still controversial in the interpretation of relativity. In particular two problems appear in a new light: the character of time and length alterations, and the privileged role of the velocityc. Besides, the question of a possible limitation of relativity (and more generally of the laws of mechanics) in the domain of particle substructure is raised and supported by exemples drawn from the hydrodynamical model of a spinned particle. Suggestions are presented for the possibility of a deeper conceptual unification of special and general relativity. (shrink)
In this paper the squared mass of the hadron is defined as a random variable, whose average is the measured quantity. This leads to a mass formula, of a unique type for mesons and baryons, with a general law for the spin variation of the coefficients. The central squared masses form an overall geometrical scheme; in the baryon case it contains trajectories which are a fine structure of the Regge trajectories. For the accurately measured masses the difference between the computed (...) and experimental value lies within 5 MeV for mesons and baryons. The geometrical scheme will be the basis for the computation of the decay rates, to be developed in the next paper. (shrink)
The definition of mass as a random variable is applied to the study of the decay rates. A decay is assumed possible when the fluctuation of the Gaussian variables involved makes a definite relation satisfied. Computing the probability of this process leads to the determination of the decay amplitude. This calculation, unified for baryons and mesons, is worked out in the lower and medium spectrum (up to2000 MeV for baryons and mesons), and fits to≈20 MeV the accurate measurements of width (...) and branching ratios. (shrink)
The connection with the quarks of the stochastic model proposed in the two preceding papers is studied; the slopes of the baryon trajectories are calculated with reference to the quarks. Suggestions are made for the interpretation of the model (quadratic or linear addition of the contributions to the mass, dependence of the decay on the quantum numbers of the hadrons involved, etc.) and concerning its link with the quarkonium model, which describes the mesons with charm or beauty. The controversial question (...) of the “subquantum level” is examined. (shrink)
After addressing the question of whether Aron Gurwitsch (1901–1973) even had a theory of psychology, which is not obvious unless one collates the many dispersed remarks, a well-documented exposition of that theory is offered that clarifies the data, categories, field, methods, and topics of the versions of psychology he advocated.
Taking as its starting point recent claims that Jean-Paul Sartre's Critique de la Raison Dialectique was written as an attempt to overcome the historical relativism of Raymond Aron's Introduction à la philosophie de l'histoire , the present article traces this covert dialogue back to a fundamental disagreement between the two men over the interpretation of Wilhelm Dilthey's anti-positivist theory of Verstehen or 'understanding'. In so doing it counters a longstanding tendency to emphasise the convergence of Aron and Sartre's (...) philosophical interests prior to the break in their friendship occasioned by the onset of the Cold War, suggesting that the causes of their later, radical political divergence were pregnant within this earlier philosophical divergence. (shrink)
Aron Gurwitsch wants to introduce a theory of organization developed by Gestalt psychology into Husserlian phenomenology. The problem is to show how it is possible to introduce a theory developed within a positive science into philosophical phenomenology. His solution is to show that aspects of this theory already are or can be phenomenological through what he calls an incipient phenomenological reduction. Specifically, it is the dismissal of the constancy hypothesis in which he identifies the possibility moving from an explanatory (...) science to a descriptive one. If the temptation can be resisted of returning to an explanatory approach and description can be radicalized, Gurwitsch believes that this reduction can become phenomenological and even attain transcendental levels. This possibility of reduction makes it possible for scientists, especially psychologists, to have a firsthand understanding of phenomenology, perhaps to convince them of this approach and realize the continuity of philosophy and the sciences and the need to maintain cooperation via phenomenology. (shrink)
Raymond Aron (1905–1983) assumed many guises over a long and fruitful career: journalist, polemicist, philosopher of history, counselor to political leaders and officials, theorist of nuclear deterrence and international relations. He was also France’s most notable sociologist. While Aron had especially close ties with Britain, a result of his days in active exile there during the Second World War, he was widely appreciated in the United States too. His book Main Currents in Sociological Thought was hailed a masterpiece; (...) more generally, Aron’s books were extensively reviewed in the American Journal of Sociology, the American Sociological Review (in earlier days, it hosted a review section), Contemporary Sociology, and Social Forces. And he was admired and cited by sociologists of the stature of Daniel Bell, Edward Shils, and David Riesman. Yet despite appearing well poised to become a major force in international sociology, analogous to his younger collaborator, Pierre Bourdieu, Aron has almost vanished from the sociological landscape. This article explains why, offering in the process some observations on the conditions—conceptual and motivational—of reputational longevity in sociological theory and showing how Aron failed to meet them. Special attention is devoted to a confusing equivocation in Aron’s description of sociology and to the cultural basis of his ambivalence toward the discipline. (shrink)
This article reviews the influence of Edmund Husserl's phenomenology on Raymond Aron's philosophy of history. In trying to create an original synthesis of Husserl's phenomenology and Max Weber's neo-Kantianism, Aron fashioned a dialectical logic that ultimately proved to be unstable. This tension accounts for the ambiguity and inconsistencies in some areas of Aron's thinking.
Raymond Aron's vision of liberalism reflects the paradox that ideologies both fuel and restrict democratic debate. This may be related to the history of French liberalism developed by Albert Thibaudet in the inter-war period. This article considers Aron's use of Thibaudet's ideas in his wartime writings. It suggests that these represented a significant step forward from his pre-war approach to pluralism and set certain parameters for his post-war political thought. It is also suggested that Thibaudet's writings led (...) class='Hi'>Aron to study the ideas of the nineteenth-century intellectual Ernest Renan. These contributed to his understanding of international relations. While Aron was to lose interest in Renan and Thibaudet, his wartime debt to them represents an important stage in his intellectual evolution and ties him to a distinctively French (if little known) tradition of pluralist thought. (shrink)
This short article is an introduction to a collection of essays written to mark the 20th anniversary of the death of Raymond Aron in 1983. Having briefly examined the recent controversy associated with the publication of Daniel Lindenberg's Le Rappel à l'ordre, it discusses the development of political thinking in France over the last 20 years and the place occupied by the revival of interest in liberalism. It concludes by suggesting that the dominance sometimes attributed to liberalism in contemporary (...) France might be misplaced, citing in particular the manner in which the radical left has been able to transform itself and maintain the rhetoric of anti-capitalism. It cites recent opposition to the war in Iraq as an example of patterns of ideological continuity. To that extent, Aron might well have again found himself in the minority. (shrink)
Summary This article approaches post-war debates about the relationship between normative political theory and empirical political science from a French perspective. It does so by examining Raymond Aron's commentaries on a series of articles commissioned by him for a special issue of the Revue française de science politique on this theme as well as through an analysis of his wartime dialogue with the neo-Thomist philosopher, Jacques Maritain. Following a consideration of Aron's critique of contemporary approaches to this issue (...) in France, we discuss his own distinctive attempt to draw normative theory and empirical science into the same orbit by tracing the interaction of these two elements in his work from the late 1930s to the mid-1960s. (shrink)
Central to his own fruitful study of modern society and politics, of the stakes and twists-and-turns of the dramatic twentieth century, was Raymond Aron's fifty year engagement with `Marx and Marxism'. In a series of lecture courses (and elsewhere) Aron provided a comprehensive, balanced, and judicious exposition and appreciation of Marx's intellectual itinerary. On one hand, Marx helpfully highlighted various tensions in liberal-bourgeois society. On the other hand, however, his apolitical, materialistic explanations of them and, especially, his prediction (...) of capitalism's explosive self-overcoming proved grossly inadequate. In addition to being a special sort of social scientist, Marx was a Promethean humanist who rejected all natural and social limits and who claimed to scientifically predict the coming of the true and real City of Man. Aron's own `balanced social analysis' and his humane, sober, reformist thought stand in stark contrast. (shrink)
After a short introduction, this article contains the text of a previously unpublished interview with Raymond Aron in which he discusses what he takes to be the significance and continuing importance, if any, of the French Revolution. In the course of the interview Aron discusses different interpretations of the Revolution. The interview took place in February 1983.