THE (META)PHYSICS OF SCIENCE
THE CASE OF NON-RELATIVISTIC QUANTUM MECHANICS
Keywords:
Metametaphysics, Metaphysics and ontology, Quantum mechanics, Metaphysics of scienceAbstract
Traditionally, being a realist about something means
believing in the independent existence of that something. In this line of thought,
a scientific realist is someone who believes in the objective existence of the
entities postulated by our best scientific theories. In metaphysical terms, what
does that mean? In ontological terms, i.e., in terms of what exists, scientific
realism can be understood as involving the adoption of a scientifically informed
ontology. But according to some philosophers, a realistic attitude must go
beyond ontology. The way in which this requirement has been understood
involves providing a metaphysics for the entities postulated by science, that
is, answering questions about the nature of what ontology admits to exist. We
discuss how two fashionable approaches face the challenge of providing a
metaphysics for science: a form of naturalism and the Viking/Toolbox approach.
Finally, we present a third way, which adopts the best of both approaches: the
meta-Popperian method, which focuses on discarding the wrong alternatives,
or better saying, the metaphysical profiles incompatible with certain theories.
We present the meta-Popperian method, a metametaphysical method capable of
objectively assessing which metaphysical profiles are incompatible with certain scientific theories. For this, we will use quantum mechanics as a case study,
presenting some previously obtained results. As our focus is on methodological
questions about the relationship between metaphysics and science; with this
method, we can see how science can be used to avoid error in metaphysical
issues. In our opinion, this would be a way to develop a productive relationship
between science and metaphysics.
Downloads
References
ARENHART, J. R. B. “Bridging the Gap Between Science and Metaphysics, with a Little Help from Quantum Mechanics”. In: J. D. Dantas; E. Erickson; S. Molick (eds.), 2019, pp. 9–33.
______. “Ontological frameworks for scientific theories”. Foundations of science, 17/4, 2012, pp. 339–356.
______. “The received view on quantum non-individuality: formal and metaphysical analysis”. Synthese, 194/4, 2017, pp. 1323–1347.
ARENHART, J. R. B., ARROYO, R. W. A. “Back to the question of ontology (and metaphysics)”. Manuscrito, 44/2, 2021b, pp. 1–51.
______. “On physics, metaphysics, and metametaphysics”. Metaphilosophy, 52/2, 2021a, pp. 175–199.
______. “The spectrum of metametaphysics Mapping the state of art in scientific
metaphysics”. Veritas, 66/1, 2021c, pp. 1–21.
ARROYO, R. W. “Discussions on physics, metaphysics and metametaphysics: Interpreting quantum mechanics”. Tese de doutorado. Florianópolis: UFSC, 2020a.
______. “Is Coronavirus an object? Metametaphysics meets medical sciences”, Voluntas, 11/5, 2020b, pp. 1–8.
ARROYO, R. W., ARENHART, J. R. B. “Between physics and metaphysics: A discussion of the status of mind in quantum mechanics”. In: J. de Barros; C. Montemayor (eds.), 2019, pp. 31–42.
______. “Floating free from physics: The metaphysics of quantum mechanics”. Preprint,
a, [Online]. Disponível em: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/18477 (Acessado em 31 de maio de 2021).
______. “Realismo e metafísica na mecânica quântica”. In: G. Imaguire; R. Cid (eds.), 2020b, pp. 269–309.
ARROYO, R. W., DA SILVA, G. O. “Against ‘Interpretation’: Quantum Mechanics Beyond Syntax and Semantics”. Axiomathes, 2021 [Online]. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-021-09579-y (Acessado em 31 de maio de 2021).
ARROYO, R. W., NUNES FILHO, L. M. “On Quantum Mechanics, Phenomenology, and Metaphysical Underdetermination”. Principia, 22/2, 2018, pp. 321–337.
BENOVSKY, J. “Meta-metaphysics On Metaphysical Equivalence, Primitiveness, and Theory Choice”. Fribourg: Springer, 2016.
BIGAJ, T., WÜTHRICH. (eds.). “Metaphysics in Contemporary Physics”. Leiden: Brill/Rodopi, 2015.
BLATTI, S., LAPOINTE, S. (eds.). “Ontology after Carnap”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
BRANDING, K., SKILES, A. “Underdetermination as a Path to Structural Realism”. In: E. M. Landry; D. P. Rickles (eds.), 2012, pp. 99–116.
BRYANT, A. “Keep the chickens cooped: the epistemic inadequacy of free range metaphysics”. Synthese, 197/5, 2020a, pp. 1867–1887.
______. “Naturalisms”. Think, 19/5-6, 2020b, pp. 35–50.
BUENO, O. “Is There a Place for Consciousness in Quantum Mechanics?” In: J. de Barros; C. Montemayor (eds.), 2019, pp. 129–139.
CALLENDER, C. “Philosophy of Science and Metaphysics”. In: S. French; J. Saatsi (eds)., 2011, pp. 33–54.
CHAKRAVARTTY, A. “A metaphysics for scientific realism: Knowing the unobservable”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
______. “Scientific ontology: Integrating naturalized metaphysics and voluntarist epistemology”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
DANTAS, J. D., ERICKSON, E., MOLICK, S. (eds.). “Proceedings of the 3rd Filomena Workshop”. Natal: PPGFIL UFRN, 2019.
DE BARROS, J., MONTEMAYOR, C. “Quanta and Mind: Essays on the Connection between Quantum Mechanics and the Consciousness”. Cham: Springer, 2019.
______. “Where Does Quanta Meet Mind?” In: J. de Barros; C. Montemayor (eds.), 2019, pp. 55–66.
DE BARROS, J., OAS, G. “Can we falsify the consciousness-causes-collapse hypothesis in quantum mechanics?”. Foundations of Physics, 47/10, 2017, pp. 1294–1308.
DÜRR, D., LAZAROVICI, D. “Understanding Quantum Mechanics: The World According to Modern Quantum Foundations”. Cham: Springer, 2020.
FREIRE JUNIOR, O., PESSOA JUNIOR, O. F., BROMBERG, J. (eds.). “Teoria quântica: estudos históricos e implicações culturais”. São Paulo: Livraria da Física, 2011.
FRENCH, S. “Between Humeanism and Dispostionalism; or, How to Construct a Modal Framework for Modern Science by Appropriating Metaphysical Devices”. New Trends in the Metaphysics of Science. Paris: Metascience, 2015.
______. “Defending eliminative structuralism and a whole lot more (or less)”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 74, 2019, pp. 22–29.
______. “Hacking away at the identity of indiscernibles: Possible worlds and Einstein’s principle of equivalence”. The Journal of Philosophy, 92/9, 1995, pp. 455–466.
______. “Realism and Metaphysics”. In: J. Saatsi (ed.), 2018a, pp. 394–406.
______. “The structure of the world: Metaphysics and representation”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
______. “There Are No Such Things As Theories: Interview by Richard Marshall”. 3:16, End Times Series, 2020 [Online]. Disponível em: https://www.3-16am.co.uk/articles/there-are-no-such-things-as-theories?c=end-timesseries (Acessado em 31 de maio de 2021).
______. “Toying with the Toolbox: How Metaphysics Can Still Make a Contribution”. Journal for the General Philosophy of Science, 49, 2018b, pp. 211–230.
FRENCH, S., KRAUSE, D. Identity in physics: A historical, philosophical, and formal analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
FRENCH, S., MCKENZIE, K. “Rethinking Outside the Toolbox: Reflecting Again on the Relationship between Philosophy of Science and Metaphysics”. In: T. Bigaj; W. Wüthrich (eds.), 2015, pp. 25–54.
______. “Thinking outside the toolbox: Towards a more productive engagement between metaphysics and philosophy of physics”. European journal of analytic philosophy, 8/1, 2012, pp. 42–59.
FRENCH, S., SAATSI, J. (eds.). “The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Science”. London: Continuum, 2011.
GUAY, A., PRADEU, T. “Right out of the box: How to situate metaphysics of science in relation to other metaphysical approaches”. Synthese, 197/5, 2020, pp. 1–20.
HOFWEBER, T. “Carnap’s Big Idea”. In: S. Blatti; S. Lapointe (eds.), 2016, pp. 13–30.
IMAGUIRE, G., CID, R. “Problemas de Metafísica Analítica”. Pelotas: NEPFIL Online, 2020.
LADYMAN, J., ROSS, D. “Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
LANDRY, E. M., RICKLES, D. P. “Structural Realism: Structure, Object, and Causality.” Dordrecht: Springer, 2012.
LOWE, J. E. “The possibility of metaphysics: Substance, identity, and time”. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
MAGNUS, P. D. “Scientific Enquiry and Natural Kinds: From Planets to Mallards”. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2012.
MAUDLIN, T. “Philosophy of physics: Quantum theory”. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.
MAUDLIN, T. “The metaphysics within physics”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
MCKENZIE, K. “A curse on both houses: Naturalistic versus A Priori metaphysics and the problem of progress”. Res Philosophica, 97/1, 2020, pp. 1–29.
MORGANTI, M., TAHKO, T. E. “Moderately naturalistic metaphysics”. Synthese, 194/7, 2017, pp. 2557–2580.
PESSOA JUNIOR, O. F. “O fenômeno cultural do misticismo quântico”. In: O. Freire Junior; O. Pessoa Junior e J. Bromberg (eds.), 2011, pp. 281–302.
QUINE, W. v. O. “On Carnap’s Views on Ontology”. Philosophical Studies, 2/5, 1951. pp. 65–72.
RODRIGUES, J. G. “There are no good objections to substance dualism”. Philosophy, 89/2, 2014, pp. 199–222.
ROSS, D., SPURRETT, D. “What to say to a skeptical metaphysician: A defense manual for cognitive and behavioral scientists”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27/5, pp. 603–627, 2004.
SAATSI, J. (ed.). “The Routledge Handbook of Scientific Realism”. New York: Routledge, 2018a.
SCHLOSSHAUER, M., KOFLER, J., ZEILINGER, A. “A snapshot of foundational attitudes toward quantum mechanics”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44/3, 2013, pp. 222–230.
SLATER, M., YUDELL, Z. (eds.). “Metaphysics in the Philosophy of Science”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
STAPP, H. P. “Mind, matter and quantum mechanics”. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 2009.
TAHKO, T. E. “An introduction to metametaphysics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
THOMSON-JONES, M. “Against Bracketing and Complacency: Metaphysics and the Methodology of the Sciences”. In: M. Slater; Z. Yudell (eds.), 2017, pp. 229–250.
WALLACE, D. “The emergent multiverse: Quantum theory according to the Everett interpretation”. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Kriterion
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
