Distinguishing two (unsound) arguments for quantum social science
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Documents
- Fulltext
Final published version, 694 KB, PDF document
Quantum mechanics supersedes classical mechanics, and social science, some argue, should be responsive to this change. This paper finds that two rather different arguments are currently being used to argue that quantum mechanics is epistemically relevant in social science. One, attributed to Alexander Wendt, appeals to the presence of quantum physical effects in the social world. The other, attributed to Karen Barad, insists on the importance of quantum metaphysics even when quantum effects are negligible. Neither argument, however, is sound. Consequently, the paper concludes that neither of them offers compelling arguments for the view that quantum mechanics has epistemic relevance for social science.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 34 |
Journal | European Journal for Philosophy of Science |
Volume | 13 |
Number of pages | 21 |
ISSN | 1879-4912 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Number of downloads are based on statistics from Google Scholar and www.ku.dk
No data available
ID: 361153333