, Volume 65, Issue 1, pp 117–142 | Cite as

Quantum Interactive Dualism, II: The Libet and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen Causal Anomalies



Replacing faulty nineteenth century physics by its orthodox quantum successor converts the earlier materialist conception of nature to a structure that does not enforce the principle of the causal closure of the physical. The quantum laws possess causal gaps, and these gaps are filled in actual scientific practice by inputs from our streams of consciousness. The form of the quantum laws permits and suggests the existence of an underlying reality that is built not on substances, but on psychophysical events, and on objective tendencies for these events to occur. These events constitute intrinsic mind-brain connections. They are fundamental links between brain processes described in physical terms and events in our streams of consciousness. This quantum ontology confers upon our conscious intentions the causal efficacy assigned to them in actual scientific practice, and creates a substance-free interactive dualism. This putative quantum ontology has previously been shown to have impressive explanatory power in both psychology and neuroscience. Here it is used to reconcile the existence of physically efficacious conscious free will with causal anomalies of both the Libet and Einstein–Rosen–Podolsky types. This article is a sequel to Stapp [2005, Journal of Consciousness Studies 12(11), 43–58] but strives to be largely self-contained.


Classical Physic Readiness Potential Conscious Choice Conscious Intention Causal Closure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



I thank the editor, Wolfram Hinzen, and Jeff Barrett, Peter Molenaar and one anonymous referee for their comments on this article. This work was supported by the Director, Office of Science, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, of the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC02-05CH11231.


  1. Bohr N. (1935). Can Quantum Mechanical Description of Physical Be Considered Complete?. Physical Review 48:696–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohr N. (1958). Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. (1935). Can quantum mechanical description of physical be considered complete?. Physical Review 47:777–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Einstein A. (1951). Remarks to the Essays Appearing in this Collected Volume. In: Schilpp P. A. (eds) Albert Einstein: Philosopher–Physicist. Tudor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Libet B. (1985). Unconscious Cerebral Initiative and the Role of Conscious will in Voluntary Action. Behavioural & Brain Sciences 8:529–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Libet B. (2003). Cerebral physiology of conscious experience: Experimental Studies. In: Osaka N. (eds) Neural Basis of Consciousness. [Advances in Consciousness Research Series 49]. John Benjamins, Amsterdam New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. James W. (1892). Psychology: The Briefer Course, in William James: Writings 1879–1899. Library of America, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. James W. (1911). Some Problems in Philosophy. in William James: Writings 1902–1910. Library of America, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Rosenfeld, L.: 1967, ‘Bohr's Reply: Commentary of Rosenfeld’, in Wheeler and Zurek (eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  10. Schwartz J., Stapp H. and Beauregard M. (2005). Quantum Physics in Neuroscience and Psychology: A Neurophysical Model of Mind/brain Interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B 360(1458):1308–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schwinger J. (1951). Theory of Quantized Fields I. Physical Review 82:914–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Stapp, H. P.: 1999, ‘Attention, Intention, and Will in Quantum Physics’, Journal of Consciousness Studies 6, 143–164Google Scholar
  13. Stapp H. P. (2002). The Basis Problem in Many-worlds Theories. Canadian Journal of Physics 80:1043–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stapp H. P. (2004a). Mind, Matter, and Quantum Mechanics (Second Edition). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Stapp H.P. (2004b). A Bell-type Theorem without Hidden Variables. American Journal of Physics 72:30–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stapp H. P. (2005). Quantum Interactive Dualism: An Alternative to Materialism. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12(11):43–58Google Scholar
  17. Stapp H. P. (2006a). Quantum Approaches to Consciousness. In: Moskovitch M. and Zelago P. (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Stapp H. P. (2006b). Quantum Mechanical Theories of Consciousness. In: Velmans M. and Schneider S. (eds) Blackwell Companion to Consciousness. Blackwell Publishers, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Stapp H. P., 2006c, ‘The Quest for Consciousness: A Quantum Neurobiological Approach’, see Scholar
  20. Stapp H. P., 2006d, ‘Mindful Universe’, see∼stapp/MU.pdfGoogle Scholar
  21. Tomonaga S. (1946). On a Relativistically Invariant Formulation of the Quantum Theory of Wave Fields. Progress of Theoretical Physics 1: 27–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Von Neumann J.: 1955/1932, ‘Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics’. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Translated by Robert T. Beyer from the 1932 German original, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik., Springer, Berlin).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Theoretical Physics Group Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations