Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T15:23:46.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Philosophical Arguments in Quantum Physics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

John Losee
John Losee*
Affiliation:
Lafayette College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two types of philosophical arguments are employed by the defenders and critics of the Copenhagen Interpretation. One type of argument is a confrontation of an opponent's interpretation with criteria of demarcation and criteria of acceptability. The purpose of such arguments is either to exclude an opponent's interpretation from the range of permissible discourse in quantum physics, or to establish the inadequacy of an opponent's interpretation. A second type of argument is a justification of the value, or utility, of the criteria selected.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , January 1964 , pp. 10 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © 1964 The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Bohm, David, Causality and Chance in Modern Physics, (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1957).Google Scholar
[2] Bohr, Niels, Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1958).Google Scholar
[3] Born, Max, Physics in My Generation, (London: Pergamon Press, 1956).Google Scholar
[4] Frank, Philipp, Philosophy of Science, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1957).Google Scholar
[5] Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and Philosophy, (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1960).Google Scholar
[6] Kemble, Edward C., “Reality, Measurement, and the State of the System in Quantum Mechanics,” Philosophy of Science, Vol. 18, No. 4 (October 1951).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Körner, S., “On Philosophical Arguments in Physics,” The Structure of Scientific Thought, ed. Madden, Edward H., (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960).Google Scholar
[8] Jordan, Pascual, Physics of the 20th Century, (New York: Philosophical Library, 1944).Google Scholar
[9] MacKay, D. M., comments in Observation and Interpretation, ed. Körner, S., (New York: Academic Press Inc., 1957).Google Scholar
[10] Margenau, Henry, “Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Interpretations of Quantum Theory,” Physics Today, No 10 (October 1954).10.1063/1.3061432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Margenau, Henry, “Reality in Quantum Mechanics,” Philosophy of Science, Vol. 16, No. 4 (October 1949).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Rosenfeld, Leon, “Misunderstandings about the Foundations of the Quantum Theory,” Observation and Interpretation.Google Scholar
[13] Schrödinger, Erwin, “Are There Quantum Jumps ?” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, IV (August and November 1952).Google Scholar
[14] Vigier, J-P., “The Concept of Probability in the Frame of the Probabilistic and Causal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics,” Observation and Interpretation.Google Scholar