Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bohr’s Complementarity and Kant’s Epistemology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Niels Bohr, 1913-2013

Part of the book series: Progress in Mathematical Physics ((PMP,volume 68))

Abstract

We point out and analyze some striking analogies between Kant’s transcendental method in philosophy and Bohr’s approach of the fundamental issues raised by quantum mechanics. We argue in particular that some of the most controversial aspects of Bohr’s views, as well as the philosophical concerns that led him to endorse such views, can naturally be understood along the lines of Kant’s celebrated ‘Copernican’ revolution in epistemology.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, e.g., [Holton 1978, p. 162], [Osnaghi 2009, pp. 101–2].

  2. 2.

    [Bunge 1955]. See also the discussion in [Howard 2004] and [Faye 2009].

  3. 3.

    [Hooker 1972], [Honner 1982], [Murdoch 1987], [Chevalley 1991], [Kaiser 1992], [Brock 2003].

  4. 4.

    [Folse 1978, 1985], [Pais 1991].

  5. 5.

    [Held 1995], [Pringe 2007], [Cuffaro 2010], [Kauark-Leite 2012].

  6. 6.

    Niels Bohr, letter to Albert Einstein, 13 April 1927, quoted in [Honner 1982, p. 7].

  7. 7.

    [Hintikka 1991]. See also the discussion in [Allison 2004, Ch. 3].

  8. 8.

    See [Murdoch 1987, Ch. 7]. For a discussion of the analogy between Bohr’s and Kant’s respective notions of phenomenon, see Kaiser [1991].

  9. 9.

    [Friedman 1992], [Bitbo l1998], [Pradelle 2013].

  10. 10.

    Erwin Schrödinger, letter to Niels Bohr, 5 May 1928, and Bohr’s reply, 23 May 1928, both quoted in [Murdoch 1987, p. 101].

  11. 11.

    This point is often overlooked. [Rovelli 1996, p. 1671] remarks for example that ‘the disturbing aspect of Bohr’s view is the inapplicability of quantum theory to macrophysics’, and he understands such a view as implying that ‘the classical world is physically distinct from the microsystems’. See also, e.g., [Zurek 2003], [Weinberg 2005], as well as Hugh Everett’s analysis of Bohr’s position in [Osnaghi 2009].

  12. 12.

    In a manuscript of 1955, Everett calls it ‘repugnant’ [Osnaghi 2009, p. 105].

  13. 13.

    John Wheeler, letter to Alexander Stern, 25 May 1956, quoted in [Osnaghi 2009, p. 118].

  14. 14.

    Léon Rosenfeld, letter to Saul Bergmann, 21 December 1959, quoted in [Osnaghi 2009, p. 117].

  15. 15.

    [Faye 1991], [Held 1994], [Murdoch 1987], [Bitbo l1996a].

  16. 16.

    [Kant 1987, §59, p. 227], [Chevalley 1995], [Pringe 2007].

  17. 17.

    Here is for example a passage from the Como lecture [Bohr 1934, p. 54]: ‘…if in order to make observation possible we permit certain interactions with suitable agencies of measurement, not belonging to the system, an unambiguous definition of the state of the system is naturally no longer possible, and there can be no question of causality in the ordinary sense of the word. The very nature of the quantum theory thus forces us to regard the space-time co-ordination and the claim of causality, the union of which characterizes the classical theories, as complementary but exclusive features of the description, symbolizing the idealization of observation and definition respectively.’

  18. 18.

    Quoted in [Darrigol 1992, p. 276].

  19. 19.

    [Petersen 1985]. See [Murdoch 1987, Ch. 7] for a discussion of the pragmatist features in Bohr’s views on meaning, particularly in so far as his partial endorsement of verificationist criteria is concerned.

References

  1. Allison, H.: Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. Revised and Enlarged Edition. Yale University Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beck, L. W.: A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason. The University of Chicago Press, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bell, J.: Against ‘measurement’. Physics World 8, 33–40 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bell, J.: Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bitbol, M.: Schrödinger’s Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics. Kluwer, 1996.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Bitbol, M.: Mécanique quantique, une introduction philosophique. Flammarion, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bitbol, M.: Some steps towards a transcendental deduction of quantum mechanics. Philosophia naturalis 35, 253–280 (1998).

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Bitbol, M.: Reflective Metaphysics: Understanding Quantum Mechanics from a Kantian Standpoint. Philosophica 83, 53–83, (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bohm, D.: A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden Variables’, I and II. Physical Review 85, 166–193 (1952).

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Bohm, D.: & Hiley, B.: The undivided universe. Routledge, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bohr, N.: On the constitution of atoms and molecules. Philosophical Magazine 26, 1–25 (1913).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Bohr, N.: The Theory of Spectra and Atomic Constitution. Cambridge University Press, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bohr, N.: Kramers, H., & Slater, J.C.: The quantum theory of radiation. Philosophical Magazine 47, 785–822 (1924).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bohr, N.: Atomic theory and mechanics. Supplement to Nature 116, 845–852 (1925).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Bohr, N.: Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature. Cambridge University Press, 1934.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Bohr, N.: Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. John Wiley, 1958.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Bohr, N.: Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. John Wiley, 1963.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Bohr, N.: Causality and Complementarity. The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, Volume 4. Ox Bow Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Born, M.: Über Quantenmechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik 26, 379–395 (1924).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Brock, S.: Niels Bohr’s Philosophy of Quantum Physics. Logos Verlag, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bunge, M.: Strife about Complementarity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 6(21), 1–12 (1955).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Camilleri, K.: Constructing the Myth of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Perspectives on Science 17(1), 26–57 (2009).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Cassirer, E.: Determinism and Indeterminism in Modern Physics. Yale University Press, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cassirer, E.: Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Yale University Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chevalley, C.: Le dessin et la couleur. In: N. Bohr. Physique atomique et connaissance humaine. Gallimard, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Chevalley, C.: On objectivity as Intersubjective Agreement. In: L. Krüger & B. Falkenburg (eds.). Physik, Philosophie und die Einheit der Wissenschaften. Für Erhard Scheibe (pp. 332–346). Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cuffaro, M.: The Kantian Framework of Complementarity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 41, 309–317 (2010).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Daneri, A., Loinger, A., & Prosperi, G. M.: Quantum theory of measurement and ergodicity conditions. Nuclear physics 33, 297–319 (1962). Reprinted in: J. A. Wheeler & W. H. Zurek (eds.). Quantum theory and measurement (pp. 657–679). Princeton University Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Darrigol, O.: From c-Numbers to q-Numbers. University of California Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Everett III, H.: ‘Relative State’ formulation of quantum mechanics. Review of Modern Physics 29, 454–462 (1957). Reprinted in: J. A. Wheeler & W. H. Zurek (eds.). Quantum theory and measurement (pp. 315–323). Princeton University Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Faye, J.: Niels Bohr, his Heritage and Legacy. Kluwer, 1991.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  32. Folse, H.: Kantian aspects of complementarity. Kant-Studien 69, 58–66 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Folse, H.: The Philosophy of Niels Bohr: The Framework of Complementarity. North-Holland, 1985.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Friedman, M.: Kant and the Exact Sciences. Harvard University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fuchs, C., & Peres, A.: Quantum theory needs no ‘interpretation’. Physics Today 53, 70–71 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jammer, M.: The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics. John Wiley, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Joos, E., Zeh, H. D., Kiefer, C., Giulini, D., Kupsch, J., & Stamatescu, I.-O.: Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory. Springer, 2003.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Kaiser, D.: More roots of complementarity: Kantian aspects and influences. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 23, 213–239 (1992).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Kant, I.: Critique of Judgment. Hackett, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kant, I.: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Pearson, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kant, I.: Critique of Pure Reason. Hackett, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kauark-Leite, P.: Théorie quantique et philosophie transcendantale : dialogues possibles. Hermann, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kuhn, T. S.: The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Heisenberg, W.: Über die Quantentheoretische Umdeutung kinematischer und mechanischer Beziehunge. Zeitschrift für Physik 33, 879–893 (1925).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Heisenberg, W.: Die Entwicklung der Quantentheorie, 1918–1928. Die Naturwissenschaften 17, 490–496 (1929).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Heisenberg, W.: The physical principles of the quantum theory. Dover, 1949.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Heisenberg, W.: Physics and Beyond. Harper and Row, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Heisenberg, W.: Physics and philosophy. Penguin, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Held, C.: The meaning of complementarity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25, 871–893 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Held, C.: Bohr and Kantian idealism. In: H. Robinson & G. Brittan (eds.). Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress (pp. 397–403). Marquette University Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hermann, G.: Les fondements philosophiques de la mécanique quantique. Vrin, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Hintikka, J.: Dinge an sich revisited. In: J. Hintikka. Knowledge and the Known (pp. 197–211). Springer, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Holton, G. J.: The Scientific Imagination: Case Studies. Cambridge University Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Honner, J.: The transcendental philosophy of Niels Bohr. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Sciences 13, 1–30 (1982).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  55. Hooker, C. A.: The nature of quantum mechanical reality. In: R. G. Colodny (ed.). Paradigms and Paradoxes (pp. 135–172). University of Pittsburgh Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Howard, D.: Who invented the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’? A study in mythology. Philosophy of Science 71, 669–682 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Mittelstaedt, P.: Philosophical problems of modern physics. Reidel, 1976.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  58. Mittelstaedt, P.: The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and the Measurement Process. Cambridge University Press, 1998.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Murdoch, D.: Niels Bohr’s Philosophy of Physics. Cambridge University Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Omnès, R.: Consistent interpretations of quantum mechanics. Reviews of Modern Physics 64, 339–382 (1992).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  61. Osnaghi, S., Freitas, F., & Freire, O.: The origin of the Everettian heresy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 17, 97–123 (2009).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  62. Pais, A.: Niels Bohr Time in Physics, Philosophy, and Polity. Oxford University Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Peres, A. & Zurek, W.: Is quantum theory universally valid? American Journal of Physics 50, 807–810 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Petersen, A.: The Philosophy of Niels Bohr. In: A. P. French & P. J. Kennedy (eds.). Niels Bohr. A centenary volume (pp. 299–310). Harvard University Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Pradelle, D.: Généalogie de la raison. P.U.F., 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Pringe, H.: Critique of the Quantum Power of Judgment. A Transcendental Foundation of Quantum Objectivity. De Gruyter, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Pringe, H.: A transcendental account of correspondence and complementarity. In: M. Bitbol, J. Petitot & P. Kerszberg (eds.). Constituting Objectivity, Transcendental Perspectives in Modern Physics (pp. 317–327). Springer, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Putnam, H.: Pragmatism. Blackwell, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Reichenbach, H.: The Theory of Relativity and a priori Knowledge. University of California Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Rosenfeld, L.: The measuring process in quantum mechanics. Supplement of the Progress of Theoretical Physics. 222–231 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Rovelli, C.: Relational quantum mechanics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35, 1637–1678 (1996).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  72. Schlosshauer, M., & Camilleri, K.: What classicality? Decoherence and Bohr’s classical concepts. Advances in Quantum Theory, AIP Conference Proceedings 1327, 26–35 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Stapp, H. P.: The Copenhagen Interpretation. American Journal of Physics 40, 1098–1116 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Vickers, P.: Bohr’s Theory of the Atom: Content, Closure and Consistency. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/4005/ (2007).

  75. Weinberg, S.: Einstein’s mistakes. Physics Today 58 (11), 31–35 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. von Weizsäcker, C. F.: Aufbau der physik. Hanser, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Archives Husserl, ENS – CNRS, 45, rue d’Ulm, 75005, Paris, France

    Michel Bitbol

  2. ICI – Berlin, Christinenstraße 18–19, 10119, Berlin, Germany

    Stefano Osnaghi

Authors
  1. Michel Bitbol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefano Osnaghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Bitbol .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire Sphere, CNRS/Université Paris 7, Paris, cedex 13, Paris, France

    Olivier Darrigol

  2. Institut de Physique Théorique, CEA /Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France

    Bertrand Duplantier

  3. Département de Physique de l´ENS, Laboratoire Kastler-Brossel, Paris cedex 05, Paris, France

    Jean-Michel Raimond

  4. Laboratoire de Physique Théorique, Université Paris-Sud, Orsay, France

    Vincent Rivasseau

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bitbol, M., Osnaghi, S. (2016). Bohr’s Complementarity and Kant’s Epistemology. In: Darrigol, O., Duplantier, B., Raimond, JM., Rivasseau, V. (eds) Niels Bohr, 1913-2013. Progress in Mathematical Physics, vol 68. Birkhäuser, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14316-3_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation