The Kantian framework of complementarity

Citation data:

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, ISSN: 1355-2198, Vol: 41, Issue: 4, Page: 309-317

Publication Year:
2010
Usage 768
Downloads 667
Abstract Views 97
Link-outs 4
Captures 29
Readers 23
Exports-Saves 6
Social Media 9
Tweets 9
Citations 2
Citation Indexes 2
Repository URL:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/8937
DOI:
10.1016/j.shpsb.2010.04.003
Author(s):
Michael Cuffaro
Publisher(s):
Elsevier BV, Elsevier
Tags:
Arts and Humanities, Physics and Astronomy
Most Recent Tweet View All Tweets
article description
A growing number of commentators have, in recent years, noted the important affinities in the views of Immanuel Kant and Niels Bohr. While these commentators are correct, the picture they present of the connections between Bohr and Kant is painted in broad strokes; it is open to the criticism that these affinities are merely superficial. In this essay, I provide a closer, structural, analysis of both Bohr's and Kant's views that makes these connections more explicit. In particular, I demonstrate the similarities between Bohr's argument, on the one hand, that neither the wave nor the particle description of atomic phenomena pick out an object in the ordinary sense of the word, and Kant's requirement, on the other hand, that both ‘mathematical’ (having to do with magnitude) and ‘dynamical’ (having to do with an object's interaction with other objects) principles must be applicable to appearances in order for us to determine them as objects of experience. I argue that Bohr's ‘complementarity interpretation’ of quantum mechanics, which views atomic objects as idealizations, and which licenses the repeal of the principle of causality for the domain of atomic physics, is perfectly compatible with, and indeed follows naturally from a broadly Kantian epistemological framework.

This article has 0 Wikipedia mention.