Abstract
This paper develops an updated transcendentalist perspective concerning the epistemological status of objectivity. The main point is that objectivity is neither an ontology nor a mere description of a phenomenal state of affairs. It is instead a principled (categorial) “legalization” and a mathematical reconstruction of the phenomena. As the very concept of a phenomenon is relational (relative to a receptive stance such as perception in classical mechanics or measure devices in quantum mechanics), the conditions for accessing them must be included in the very concept of objectivity. This paper emphasizes the transcendental content of symmetries in modern physical theories, from general relativity to gauge invariance. A great deal of the discussion focuses on epistemological key points in quantum mechanics.
See “Important Note” on p. xviii.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
R. Abraham and J. Marsden, 1978, Foundations of Mechanics (Benjamin Cummings, New-York).
H. E. Allison, 1983, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. An Interpretation and Defense (Yale University Press, New-Haven).
V. Arnold, 1976, Méthodes mathématiques de la mécanique classique (Mir, Moscow).
D. Bailin and A. Love, 1994, Supersymmetric Gauge Field Theory and String Theory (Institute of Physics, London).
D. Bennequin, 1994. “Questions de physique galoisienne,” in Passion des Formes, à René Thom, M. Porte, ed. (E.N.S. Editions, Fontenay-Saint Cloud), pp. 311–410.
M. Bitbol, 1996, Mécanique quantique: Une introduction philosophique (Paris, Flammarion).
N. Bohr, 1935, Phys. Rev. 48, 696.
G. Brittan, 1978, Kant’s Theory of Science (University Press, Princeton).
E. Cassirer, 1918, Kants Leben und Lehre; translation by J. Haden, 1981, Kant’s Life and Thought (Yale University Press, New Haven).
G. Cohen-Tannoudji and M. Spiro, 1986, La Matière-Espace-Temps (Fayard, Paris).
H. Duncan, 1984, “Inertia, the communication of motion, and Kant’s third law of mechanics,” Phil. Sci. 51, 93–119.
B. ďEspagnat, 1985, Une incertaine réalité (Gauthier-Villars, Paris).
B. ďEspagnat, 1994, Le réel voilé (Fayard, Paris).
H. J. Folse, 1978, “Kantian aspects of complementarity,” Kant-Studien 69, 58–66.
R. J. Gomez, 1986, “Beltrami’s Kantian view of non-Euclidean geometry,” Kant-Studien 77 (1), 102–107.
J. Honner, 1982, “The transcendental philosophy of Niels Bohr,” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 13, 1, 1–29.
C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber, 1985, Quantum Field Theory (McGraw-Hill, New York).
M. Jammer, 1974, The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (Wiley, New York).
M. Kaku, 1988, Introduction to Superstrings (Springer, New York).
I. Kant, 1781–1787, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Kants gesammelte Schriften, Band III, Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Georg Reimer, Berlin, 1911).
I. Kant, 1786, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft (Kants gesammelte Schriften, Band IV, Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Georg Reimer, Berlin, 1911); translation by J. Gibelin, 1971, Premiers Pincipes métaphysiques de la Science de la Nature (Vrin, Paris).
I. Kant, 1796–1803, Opus Postumum, translation by F. Marty (Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1986).
Y. Manin, 1988, Gauge Field Theory and Complex Geometry (Springer, New York).
J. Marsden, 1974, Applications of Global Analysis in Mathematical Physics (Publishor Perish, Berkeley).
C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler, 1973, Gravitation (Freeman, San Francisco).
R. Omnès, 1994, Philosophie de la science contemporaine (Gallimard, Paris).
J. Petitot, 1991, La Philosophie transcendantale et le problème de ľObjectivité (Entretiens du Centre Sèvres), F. Marty, ed. (Osiris, Paris).
J. Petitot, 1992a, Physique du Sens (Editions du CNRS, Paris).
J. Petitot, 1992b, “Actuality of transcendental aesthetics for modern physics,” 1830–1930, in A Century of Geometry, L. Boi, D. Flament, and J.-M. Salanskis, eds. (Springer, New-York).
J. Petitot, 1994b, “Esthétique transcendantale et physique mathématique,” Neukantianismus: Perspektiven und Probleme, E. W. Orth and H. Holzhey, eds. (Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg), pp. 187–213.
A. Philonenko, 1972, Ľoeuvre de Kant (Vrin, Paris).
C. Quigg, 1983, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Electromagnetic Interactions (Benjamin-Cummings, Reading, MA).
J. M. Souriau, 1975, Géométrie symplectique et physique mathématique (Collection Internationale du CNRS 237, Paris).
B. C. Van Fraassen, 1991, Quantum Mechanics: An Empirist View (Clarendon, Oxford).
J. Vuillemin, 1955, Physique et Métaphysique kantiennes (Presses Universitaires de France, Paris).
A. Weinstein, 1977, Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds (Conference Series, American Mathematical Society 29, Providence, RI).
C. F. von Weizaäcker, 1979, Die Einheit der Natur (Hauser, Munich).
H. Weyl, 1922, Space-Time-Matter (Dover, New-York).
J. E. Wiredu, 1970, “Kant’s synthetic a priori in geometry and the rise of non-euclidean geometries,” Kant-Studien 61 (1) 5–27.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Petitot, J. (2003). Mathematical Physics and Formalized Epistermology: Debate with Jean Petitot. In: Mugur-Schächter, M., van der Merwe, A. (eds) Quantum Mechanics, Mathematics, Cognition and Action. Fundamental Theories of Physics, vol 129. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48144-8_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48144-8_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1120-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-48144-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive