Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Physics-Based Metaphysics is a Metaphysics-Based Metaphysics

  • Published:
Acta Analytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The common practice of advancing arguments based on current physics in support of metaphysical conclusions has been criticized on the grounds that current physics may well be wrong. A further criticism is leveled here: current physics itself depends on metaphysical assumptions, so arguing from current physics is in fact arguing from yet more metaphysics. It is shown that the metaphysical assumptions underlying current physics are often deeply embedded in the formalism in which theories are presented, and hence impossible to dismiss as mere motivational or interpretative speculation. It is then shown that such assumptions, when made explicit, can wreck havoc on otherwise-sensible philosophical arguments. It is argued in conclusion that this situation is both unlikely to be reparable just by being more careful, and unlikely to go away as further, presumably more subtle physical theories are developed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Wheeler was a student of Niels Bohr and a close colleague of Albert Einstein; his work stands at a confluence between Einstein's Spinozan inclination to view the world sub specie aeternitatis and Bohr's emphasis, following Ernst Mach, on physical observables as the only reality that can be discussed.

  2. Zurek was one of Wheeler's postdocs. That quantum Darwinism is an essentially Wheelerian doctrine is made clear by Zurek's (2002) use of Wheeler's iconic image of the universe observing itself, first published in Patton and Wheeler (1975).

  3. This is known among physicists as the “shut up and calculate” approach to quantum theory (Mermin 1989).

  4. A possible example of the former can be found in de Boer and Fields (2011).

References

  • Adam, T. et al. (OPERA Collaboration) (2012). Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam. Journal of High-Energy Physics, 10, 093. 37 pages.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics, 1, 195–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bičák, J. (2009). The art of science: interview with Professor John Archibald Wheeler. General Relativity and Gravitation, 41, 679–689.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume-Kohout, R., & Zurek, W. H. (2006). Quantum Darwinism: entanglement, branches, and the emergent classicality of redundantly stored quantum information. Physical Review A, 73, 062310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, N. (1928). The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory. Nature, 121, 580–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N. (1999). The dappled world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • de Boer, F. W. N., & Fields, C. (2011). A re-evaluation of evidence for light neutral bosons in nuclear emulsions. International Journal of Modern Physics E: Nuclear Physics, 20, 1787–1803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. (1971). Intentional systems. Journal of Philosophy, 68, 87–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, D. (2010). A part from universes. In Saunders et al. (2010), pp. 542–552.

  • Everett, H., III. (1957). 'Relative state' formulation of quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 454–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, C. (2010). Quantum Darwinism requires an extra-theoretical assumption of encoding redundancy. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 49, 2523–2527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, C. (2011). Classical system boundaries cannot be determined within quantum Darwinism. Physics Essays, 24, 518–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, C. (2012a). Autonomy all the way down: Systems and dynamics in quantum Bayesianism. Physics & Philosophy 2012.

  • Fields, C. (2012b). A model-theoretic interpretation of environment-induced superselection. International Journal of General Systems, 41, 847–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, C. (2012c). Implementation of classical communication in a quantum world. Information, 3, 809–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, C. (2013). Consistent quantum mechanics admits no mereotopology. Axiomathes (in press). DOI: 10.1007/s10516-012-9202-3.

  • Floridi, L. (2008). A defense of informational structural realism. Synthese, 161, 219–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, C. (2010). QBism: The perimeter of quantum Bayesianism. Preprint arXiv:1003.5209v1 [quant-ph].

  • Halvorson, H., & Clifton, R. (2002). No place for particles in relativistic quantum theories? Philosophy of Science, 69, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartle, J. (2010). Quasiclassical realms. In Saunders et al. (2010), pp. 73–98.

  • Joos, E., Zeh, D., Kiefer, C., Giulini, D., Kupsch, J., & Stamatescu, I.-O. (2003). Decoherence and the appearance of a classical world in quantum theory (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kochen, S., & Specker, E. P. (1967). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 17, 59–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landsman, N. P. (2007). Between classical and quantum. In J. Butterfield & J. Earman (Eds.), Handbook of the philosophy of science: philosophy of physics (pp. 417–553). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mermin, N. D. (1981). Quantum mysteries for anyone. Journal of Philosophy, 78, 397–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mermin, N. D. (1989). What's wrong with this pillow? Physics Today, 42(4), 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monton, B. (2011). Prolegomena to any future physics-based metaphysics. In J. L. Kvanvig (Ed.), Oxford studies in philosophy of religion III (pp. 142–165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollivier, H., Poulin, D., & Zurek, W. H. (2004). Objective properties from subjective quantum states: environment as a witness. Physical Review Letters, 93, 220401. 5 pages.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ollivier, H., Poulin, D., & Zurek, W. H. (2005). Environment as a witness: Selective proliferation of information and emergence of objectivity in a quantum universe. Physical Review A, 72, 042113 [21 pages].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, C. M., & Wheeler, J. A. (1975). Is physics legislated by cosmogony? In C. J. Isham, R. Penrose, & D. W. Sciama (Eds.), Quantum gravity (pp. 538–605). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, S., Barrett, J., Kent, A., & Wallace, D. (2010). Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory and reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer, J. (2009). Spacetime the one substance. Philosophical Studies, 145, 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaffer, J. (2010). Monism: the priority of the whole. Philosophical Review, 119, 31–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosshauer, M. (2006). Experimental motivation and empirical consistency of minimal no-collapse quantum mechanics. Annals of Physics, 321, 112–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosshauer, M. (2007). Decoherence and the quantum to classical transition. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosshauer, M. (2011). Elegance and enigma: the quantum interviews. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. (1996). Mereotopology: a theory of parts and boundaries. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 20, 287–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tegmark, M. (2008). The mathematical universe. Foundations of Physics, 38, 101–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tegmark, M. (2010). Many worlds in context. In Saunders et al. (2010), pp. 553–581.

  • von Neumann, J. (1932). Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (2008). Philosophy of quantum mechanics. In D. Rickles (Ed.), The aldershot companion to contemporary philosophy of physics (pp. 16–98). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (2010). Decoherence and ontology. In Saunders et al. (2010), pp. 53–72.

  • Wheeler, J. A. (1989). Information, physics, quantum: the search for links. In W. Zurek (Ed.), Complexity, entropy and the physics of information (pp. 3–28). New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, J. A. (1992). Recent thinking about the nature of the physical world: It from bit. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 655, 349–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigner, E. P. (1960). The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences. Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics, 13, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeh, D. (1970). On the interpretation of measurement in quantum theory. Foundations of Physics, 1, 69–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeh, D. (2000). The problem of conscious observation in quantum mechanical description. Foundations of Physics Letters, 13, 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurek, W. H. (1998). Decoherence, einselection and the existential interpretation (the rough guide). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 356, 1793–1821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurek, W. H. (2002). Decoherence and the transition from quantum to classical – revisited. Los Alamos Science, 27, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurek, W. H. (2003). Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical. Reviews of Modern Physics, 75, 715–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurek, W. H. (2009). Quantum Darwinism. Nature Physics, 5, 181–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 528 Zinnia Court, Sonoma, CA, 95476, USA

    Chris Fields

Authors
  1. Chris Fields
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Fields.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fields, C. A Physics-Based Metaphysics is a Metaphysics-Based Metaphysics. Acta Anal 29, 131–148 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-013-0204-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-013-0204-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation