A Potentiality and Conceptuality Interpretation of Quantum Physics

We elaborate on a new interpretation of quantum mechanics which we introduced recently. The main hypothesis of this new interpretation is that quantum particles are entities interacting with matter conceptually, which means that pieces of matter function as interfaces for the conceptual content carried by the quantum particles. We explain how our interpretation was inspired by our earlier analysis of non-locality as non-spatiality and a specific interpretation of quantum potentiality, which we illustrate by means of the example of two interconnected vessels of water. We show by means of this example that philosophical realism is not in contradiction with the recent findings with respect to Leggett's inequalities and their violations. We explain our recent work on using the quantum formalism to model human concepts and their combinations and how this has given rise to the foundational ideas of our new quantum interpretation. We analyze the equivalence of meaning in the realm of human concepts and coherence in the realm of quantum particles, and how the duality of abstract and concrete leads naturally to a Heisenberg uncertainty relation. We illustrate the role played by interference and entanglement and show how the new interpretation explains the problems related to identity and individuality in quantum mechanics. We put forward a possible scenario for the emergence of the reality of macroscopic objects.Comment: 20 pages, 1 figur

Quantum Machine and SR Approach: a Unified Model

The Geneva-Brussels approach to quantum mechanics (QM) and the semantic realism (SR) nonstandard interpretation of QM exhibit some common features and some deep conceptual differences. We discuss in this paper two elementary models provided in the two approaches as intuitive supports to general reasonings and as a proof of consistency of general assumptions, and show that Aerts' quantum machine can be embodied into a macroscopic version of the microscopic SR model, overcoming the seeming incompatibility between the two models. This result provides some hints for the construction of a unified perspective in which the two approaches can be properly placed.Comment: 21 pages, 5 figures. Introduction and Conclusions improved, minor corrections in several sections. Accepted for publication in Foundations of Physic

Oscillations, metastability and phase transitions in brain and models of cognition

Neuroscience is being practiced in many different forms and at many different organizational levels of the Nervous System. Which of these levels and associated conceptual frameworks is most informative for elucidating the association of neural processes with processes of Cognition is an empirical question and subject to pragmatic validation. In this essay, I select the framework of Dynamic System Theory. Several investigators have applied in recent years tools and concepts of this theory to interpretation of observational data, and for designing neuronal models of cognitive functions. I will first trace the essentials of conceptual development and hypotheses separately for discerning observational tests and criteria for functional realism and conceptual plausibility of the alternatives they offer. I will then show that the statistical mechanics of phase transitions in brain activity, and some of its models, provides a new and possibly revealing perspective on brain events in cognition

Realism and the wave-function

Realism -- the idea that the concepts in physical theories refer to 'things' existing in the real world -- is introduced as a tool to analyze the status of the wave-function. Although the physical entities are recognized by the existence of invariant quantities, examples from classical and quantum physics suggest that not all the theoretical terms refer to the entities: some terms refer to properties of the entities, and some terms have only an epistemic function. In particular, it is argued that the wave-function may be written in terms of classical non-referring and epistemic terms. The implications for realist interpretations of quantum mechanics and on the teaching of quantum physics are examined.Comment: No figure

Between Naturalism and Theism: Johnston and Putnam on the Reality of God

The essay compares mark Johnston’s and Hilary Putnam’s approaches to the philosophy of religion in the framework of Charles Taylor’s claim that in modernity ”intermediate positions’ between theism and naturalism become increasingly attractive for a growing amount of people. both authors show that intermediate positions between naturalism and theism are conceptually plausible without having to deny that the conflicting worldviews are about a mind-independent reality. Johnston bridges the gap between naturalism and theism by developing a panentheistic worldview, Putnam denies the necessity of bridging it by choosing an attitude toward the world that allows for the coexistence of at least partly incommensurable conceptualizations of what there is. In both cases the conceptual exploration of intermediate positions is fed by the authors’ commitment to intellectual integrity in coming to terms with the tension between scientific explanation and religious interpretation in the age of applied sciences

Fitch's Paradox and the Problem of Shared Content

According to the “paradox of knowability”, the moderate thesis that all truths are knowable – ... – implies the seemingly preposterous claim that all truths are actually known – ... –, i.e. that we are omniscient. If Fitch’s argument were successful, it would amount to a knockdown rebuttal of anti-realism by reductio. In the paper I defend the nowadays rather neglected strategy of intuitionistic revisionism. Employing only intuitionistically acceptable rules of inference, the conclusion of the argument is, firstly, not ..., but .... Secondly, even if there were an intuitionistically acceptable proof of ..., i.e. an argument based on a different set of premises, the conclusion would have to be interpreted in accordance with Heyting semantics, and read in this way, the apparently preposterous conclusion would be true on conceptual grounds and acceptable even from a realist point of view. Fitch’s argument, understood as an immanent critique of verificationism, fails because in a debate dealing with the justification of deduction there can be no interpreted formal language on which realists and anti-realists could agree. Thus, the underlying problem is that a satisfactory solution to the “problem of shared content” is not available. I conclude with some remarks on the proposals by J. Salerno and N. Tennant to reconstruct certain arguments in the debate on anti-realism by establishing aporias

Critiques of Minimal Realism

Saatsi’s minimal realism holds that science makes theoretical progress. It is designed to get around the pessimistic induction, to fall between scientific realism and instrumentalism, and to explain the success of scientific theories. I raise the following two objections to it. First, it is not clear whether minimal realism lies between realism and instrumentalism, given that minimal realism does not entail instrumentalism. Second, it is not clear whether minimal realism can explain the success of scientific theories, given that it is doubtful that theoretical progress makes success likely. In addition to raising these two objections, I develop and criticize a new position that truly falls between realism and instrumentalism

Phenomenology, Empiricism, and Constructivism in Paolo Parrini's Positive Philosophy

In this work, I discuss the role of Husserl’s phenomenology in Paolo Parrini’s positive philosophy. In the first section, I highlight the presence of both empiricist and constructivist elements in Parrini’s anti-foundationalist and anti-absolutist conception of knowledge. In the second section, I stress Parrini’s acknowledgement of the crucial role of phenomenology in investigating the empirical basis of knowledge, thanks to its analysis of the relationship between form and matter of cognition. In the third section, I point out some lines of development of the phenomenological form of empirical realism as revealed in Parrini’s reflection, through a comparison of Husserl’s genetic phenomenology, Mary Hesse’s network model and the tradition of neutral monism