A Critic Looks at QBism

  • Guido Bacciagaluppi
Part of the The Philosophy of Science in a European Perspective book series (PSEP, volume 5)


This chapter comments on that by Chris Fuchs on qBism. It presents some mild criticisms of this view, some based on the EPR and Wigner’s friend scenarios, and some based on the quantum theory of measurement. A few alternative suggestions for implementing a subjectivist interpretation of probability in quantum mechanics conclude the chapter.


Quantum State Subjective Probability Past Performance Probability Assignment Quantum Probability 
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.


  1. Allori, V., S. Goldstein, R. Tumulka, and N. Zanghì. 2008. On the common structure of Bohmian mechanics and the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber theory. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59: 353–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bacciagaluppi, G. 2008. The statistical interpretation according to Born and Heisenberg. In HQ-1: conference on the history of quantum physics. Vol. 350/II of MPIWG preprint series, ed. C. Joas, C. Lehner and J. Renn, 269–288. Berlin: MPIWG.
  3. Bacciagaluppi, G. 2010. Collapse theories as Beable theories. Manuscrito 33(1): 19–54, philSci-8876.Google Scholar
  4. Bacciagaluppi, G. 2012. The role of decoherence in quantum mechanics. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta. Winter 2012 edn.
  5. Bacciagaluppi, G. 2013, in press. The many facets of Everett’s many worlds. Metascience. doi:10.1007/s11016-013-9747-9; Saunders, S., J. Barrett, A. Kent, and D. Wallace, eds. 2010. Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory, and reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bacciagaluppi, G. and A. Valentini. 2009. Quantum theory at the crossroads: reconsidering the 1927 solvay conference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barrett, J.A. and P. Byrne, eds. 2012. The Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics: Collected works 1955–1980 with commentary, by Hugh Everett III. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bohm, D. and B.J. Hiley. 1993. The undivided universe: An ontological interpretation of quantum theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Deutsch, D. 1999. Quantum theory of probability and decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 455: 3129–3137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dürr, D., S. Goldstein, and N. Zanghì. 1992. Quantum equilibrium and the origin of absolute uncertainty. Journal of Statistical Physics 67: 843–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frigg, R. and C. Hoefer. 2007. Probability in GRW theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38: 371–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fuchs, C. 2010. QBism, the perimeter of quantum bayesianism, arXiv:1003.5209.Google Scholar
  13. Ghirardi, G.C. 2000. Local measurements of nonlocal observables and the relativistic reduction process. Foundations of Physics 30: 1337–1385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ghirardi G.C. 2011. Collapse theories. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta, Winter 2011 edn.
  15. Ghirardi, G.C., A. Rimini, and T. Weber. 1986. Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. Physical Review D 34: 470–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gleason, A. 1957. Measures on the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 6: 885–893.Google Scholar
  17. Goldstein, S. 2013. Bohmian mechanics. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta, Spring 2013 edn.
  18. Greaves, H. 2004. Understanding Deutsch’s probability in a deterministic multiverse. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35: 423–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greaves, H. and W. Myrvold. 2010. Everett and evidence. In ed. S. Saunders et al., 264–304.Google Scholar
  20. Hoefer, C. 2007. The third way on objective probability: A Sceptic’s guide to objective chance. Mind 116: 549–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holland, P.R. 1993. The quantum theory of motion: An account of the de Broglie-Bohm causal interpretation of quantum mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lewis, D. 1971. A subjectivist guide to objective chance. In Philosophical papers, D. Lewis, Vol. II, 159–213, Repr.Google Scholar
  23. Pearle, P. 1976. Reduction of the state vector by a nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Physical Review D 13: 857–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pearle, P. 1989. Combining stochastic dynamical state-vector reduction with spontaneous localization. Physical Review A 39: 2277–2289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Price, H. 2010. Decisions, decisions, decisions: Can savage salvage everettian probability? In ed. S. Saunders et al., 369–390.Google Scholar
  26. Saunders, S., J. Barrett, A. Kent, and D. Wallace, eds. 2010. Many worlds? Everett, quantum theory, and reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Timpson, C.G. 2008. Quantum Bayesianism: A study. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39: 579–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Towler, M.D., N.J. Russell, and A. Valentini. 2011. Timescales for dynamical relaxation to the born rule. arXiv:1103.1589.Google Scholar
  29. Vaidman, L. 1996. On Schizophrenic experiences of the neutron or why we should believe in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory. arXiv:quant-ph/9609006.Google Scholar
  30. Valentini, A. 1991. Signal-locality, uncertainty, and the subquantum H-theorem, I. and II. Physics Letters A 156: 5–11; 158: 1–8.Google Scholar
  31. Valentini, A. 2010. Inflationary cosmology as a probe of primordial quantum mechanics. Physical Review D 82: 063513. arXiv:0805.0163.Google Scholar
  32. Vauxcelles, L. 1908. Exposition braque. Gil Blas 14 November 1908. Quoted and reproduced In ed. N. Worms de Romilly and J. Laude (1982) Braque: le cubisme, fin 1907–1914. Paris: Galerie Maeght, 11, 13.Google Scholar
  33. Wallace, D. 2007. Quantum probability from subjective likelihood: Improving on Deutsch’s proof of the probability rule. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38: 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wallace, D. 2010a. Decoherence and ontology. In S. Saunders et al. (2010), 53–72.Google Scholar
  35. Wallace, D. 2010b. How to prove the Born rule. In S. Saunders et al. (2010), 227–263.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenScotland, UK
  2. 2.Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des TechniquesCNRSParis 1, ENSFrance

Personalised recommendations