In his paper titled ‘Against “measurement” ’ [Physics World 3(8), 33–40 [1990]], Bell criticised arguments that use the concept of measurement to justify the statistical interpretation of quantum theory. Among these was the text of Gottfried [Quantum Mechanics (Benjamin, New York, [1966])]. Gottfried has replied to this criticism, claiming to show that, for systems with both continuous and discrete degrees of freedom, the statistical interpretation for the discrete variables is implied by requiring that the continuous variables are described classically. In (...) the present paper, Gottfried’s argument is criticised. It is suggested that he takes over aspects of classical physics which are in conflict with the classical limit of the Schrödinger equation. He incorrectly assumes that, in the output from a Stern-Gerlach apparatus, the wave-function of any ion is restricted to one or another of the beams. (shrink)

J. Solomon [Journal de Physique 4, 34 (1933)] produced an argument of great generality claiming to demonstrate the impossibility of hidden variables in quantum theory, an argument which M. Jammer [The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics(Wiley, New York, 1974)] said raised a number of questions. For the first time, this argument is discussed, a simple hidden variable model violating the argument is analysed in detail, and the error in the proof is located.

This note comments on a recent paper by Reingold, itself a response to remarks by Gillispie at the 1981 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

M A B Degenhardt; Sartre, Imagination and Education1, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 9, Issue 1, 30 May 2006, Pages 72–92, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.

R. K. Elliott once commended R. S. Peters' work in philosophy of education for being an authentic expression of the self. Many philosophers, probably including Peters, might see this more as a weakness. In an attempt to resolve this difference various kinds of continuity between philosopher and philosophy are explored. These point to an ideal of a two-way, and ultimately ‘organic’, relationship whereby the philosophy expresses the self and the self is formed by the philosophy. Ways of teaching to favour (...) the development of such authenticity in novice philosophers are discussed. (shrink)

For many years after Bohr's response to the EPR argument, Bohr was considered to have provided an authoritative rebuttal of the ideas of the paper, and more generally of Einstein's stance on quantum theory. More recently, however, there has been great difficulty even in achieving general agreement on Bohr's meaning. Two recent papers, by Dickson, and by Clifton and Halvorson, have sought to establish the structure of Bohr's argument. In the present paper, the papers of EPR and Bohr are re-assessed (...) in the light of these recent papers, and also in light of the development and presentation of quantum information theory. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Philosophies and Philosophers Peters' Authenticity Why Value Authenicity? An Apparent Paradox: Peters' Expressed Disdain for Authenticity Conclusion References.

Many educators persist in opposing art to intellect. This is incompatible with modern understandings of the interdependence of cognition and feeling. It also causes neglect of the value of art as one medium for presenting and exploring ideas. Historical examples add weight to the point by showing the richness of thought that has often informed visual art. The educational waste and cultural damage consequent on neglecting this aspect of art is indicated and remedial approaches are suggested.

Immediately after the publication of Darwin's book on the origin of species, Engels, having familiarized himself with it, wrote to Marx on December 12, 1859: "All in all, Darwin, whom I am reading right now, is superb. Teleology had hitherto not yet been destroyed in one of its aspects, and now this has been done. Moreover, hitherto there has never been so sweeping an attempt to prove historical development in nature, especially with such success." Soon Marx enlarged upon the evaluation (...) of Darwinism. In his letter of December 19, 1860, he commented that this theory "provides a foundation in natural history for our views." It is therefore no accident that Engels, in developing the principles of dialectical materialism and problems of the dialectics of nature, interested himself so deeply and comprehensively in the theory of evolution. (shrink)

Inasmuch as a good many of the Australian philosophers one would like to see included are not represented, and some of the contributors are no longer teaching in Australia, the title of this volume is somewhat misleading. It contains an introduction by Alan Donagan and the following original essays: J. Passmore, "Russell and Bradley"; L. Goddard, "The Existence of Universals"; B. Ellis, "An Epistemological Concept of Truth"; P. Herbst, "Fact, Form, and Intentionality"; M. Deutscher, "A Causal Account of Inferring"; D. (...) M. Armstrong, "Colour-Realism and the Argument from Microscopes"; K. Campbell, "Colours"; C. B. Martin, "People"; M. C. Bradley, "Two Arguments Against the Identity Thesis"; D. H. Monro, "Mill's Third Howler"; G. Schlesinger, "The Passage of Time." Though the essays are original and admirable, there does not seem to be anything distinctively Australian, rather than American or British, about their contents. Perhaps the most enlightening fact about them is that neither the Andersonian tradition of Sydney nor the Wittgensteinian tradition of Melbourne which dominated the Australian philosophical scene in the early 1950's is pre-eminent any longer, or even in evidence.--A. B. M. (shrink)