Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:53:24.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On a Recent Critique of Complementarity: Part II

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Paul K. Feyerabend
Paul K. Feyerabend*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“Bohr was primarily a philosopher, not a physicist, but he understood that natural philosophy ... carries weight only if its every detail can be subjected to the ... test of experiment” (Heisenberg in [59], p. 95). As a result his approach differed from that of the school-philosophers whom he regarded with a somewhat “sceptical attitude, to say the least” ([59], p. 129) and whose lack of interest in “the important viewpoint which had emerged during the development of atomic physics” he noticed with regret ([59], p. 183). But it also differed, and to a considerable degree, from the spirit of what Professor T. S. Kuhn has called a “normal science.” Looking at Bohr's method of research we see that technical problems, however remote, are always related to a philosophical point of view; they are never treated as “tiny puzzles” whose solution is valuable in itself, even if one has not the faintest idea what it means, and where it leads: “For me” Bohr writes to Sommerfeld in 1922 ([59], p. 71) “[the quantum theory] is not a matter for petty didactic details, but a serious attempt to reach ... an inner coherence.” Emphasis is put on matters of principle ([59], p. 36) and minor discrepancies, or “puzzles” in the sense of Kuhn, instead of being deemphasized, and assimilated to the older paradigm, are turned into fundamental difficulties by looking at them from a new direction, and by testing their background “in its furthest consequences by exaggeration” ([59], p. 329). A noteworthy example of Bohr's “non-normal” and rather metaphysical approach to physics is his scepticism in the face of the success of his own atomic model.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 1969 , pp. 82 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 by The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Part I of this essay appeared in Philosophy of Science, vol. XXXV, No.4 (December, 1968), the immediately preceding issue of this journal.

References

[1] Bohm, D., Quantum Theory, Princeton, 1952.10.1063/1.3067480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Bohm, D., Physical Review, vol. 85, 1952, pp. 166–179, 180–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Bohm, D., and Bub, J., Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 38, 1966, pp. 453–469.10.1103/RevModPhys.38.453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Bohr, N., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 13, 1923, pp. 117–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Bohr, N., Ueber die Quantentheorie der Linienspektren, Braunschweig, 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Bohr, N., Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature, Cambridge, 1932.Google Scholar
[7] Bohr, N., Physical Review, vol. 48, 1935, pp. 696–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Bohr, N., Dialectica, vols. 7/8, 1948, pp. 312–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Bohr, N., Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, New York, 1958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Bohr, N., Kramers, H. A., and Slater, J. C., Philosophical Magazine, vol. 47, 1924, pp. 785–802.Google Scholar
[11] Bohr, N., and Rosenfeld, L., Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Mathematisk-fysiske Meddelelser, vol. 12, 1933, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar
[12] Bopp, E. (ed.), Werner Heisenberg und die Physik unserer Zeit, Braunschweig, 1961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Born, M., Vorlesungen ueber Atommechanik, Berlin, 1925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Bothe, W., and Geiger, H., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 26, 1924, p. 44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Bothe, W., and Geiger, H., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 32, 1925, 639–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Bunge, M. (ed.), The Critical Approach, Essays in Honour of Karl Popper, New York, 1964.Google Scholar
[17] Bunge, M. (ed.), Quantum Theory and Reality, New York, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18] Caldirola, P. (ed.), Ergodic Theories, New York, 1961.Google Scholar
[19] Colodny, R. (ed.), Frontiers of Science and Philosophy, Pittsburgh, 1962.Google Scholar
[20] Colodny, R. (ed.), Mind and Cosmos, Pittsburgh, 1966.Google Scholar
[21] Compton, A. H., Naturwissenschaften, vol. 17, 1929, pp. 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22] Compton, A. H., and Simon, A. W., Physical Review, vol. 26, 1925, 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23] Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. M., Nuclear Physics, vol. 33, 1962, p. 297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[24] Daneri, A., Loinger, A., and Prosperi, G. M., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 44B, 1966, p. 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25] Dirac, P. A. M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Oxford, 1947.Google Scholar
[26] Einstein, A., Physikalische Zeitschrift, vol. 28, 1917, pp. 121–136.Google Scholar
[27] Einstein, A., Physical Review, vol. 47, 1935, pp. 777–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[28] Einstein, A., and Ehrenfest, P., Zeitschrift für Physik., vol. 11, 1922, pp. 31–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[29] Epstein, P. S., Annalen der Physik, vol. 50, 1916, pp. 489–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[30] Feyerabend, P. K., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 145, 1956, pp. 421–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[31] Feyerabend, P. K., Philosophical Review, vol. 69, 1960, pp. 247–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[32] Feyerabend, P. K., and Maxwell, G. (eds.), Mind, Matter and Method, Essays in Honor of Herbert Feigl, Minneapolis, 1966.Google Scholar
[33] Fock, W. A., Philosophische Probleme der Modernen Naturwissenschaft, Berlin, 1962.Google Scholar
[34] Hanson, N. R., Patterns of Discovery, Cambridge, 1961.Google Scholar
[35] Hegel, G. W. F., Philosophie der Geschichte (ed. Brunstaedt), Leipzig, 1908.Google Scholar
[36] Heisenberg, W., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 43, 1927, pp. 172–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[37] Heisenberg, W., Naturwissenschaften, vol. 17, 1929, pp. 490–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[38] Heisenberg, W., The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, Chicago, 1930.Google Scholar
[39] Heitler, W., The Quantum Theory of Radiation, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar
[40] Mammer, M., The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
[41] Jauch, J. M., Helvetica Physika Acta, vol. 37, 1964, p. 193.Google Scholar
[42] Jauch, J. M., Wigner, E. P., and Yanase, M. M., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 48, 1967, pp. 144–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[43] Koerner, S. (ed.), Observation and Interpretation, London, 1957.Google Scholar
[44] Kramers, H. A., Naturwissenschaften, vol. 11, 1923, pp. 550–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[45] Kuhn, T. S., Heilbronn, J. L., and Forman, P. L., Sources for History of Quantum Theory. Am. Phil. Soc., 1967.Google Scholar
[46] Lakatos, I., and Musgrave, A., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Amsterdam, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[47] Landau, L., and Lifshitz, S., Quantum Mechanics, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
[48] Landé, A., Die Neuere Entwicklung der Quantentheorie, Leipzig, 1926.Google Scholar
[49] Landé, A., Foundations of Quantum Theory, New Haven, 1955.Google Scholar
[50] Margenau, H., Physics Today, vol. 7, 1954, pp. 6–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[51] Margenau, H., Philosophy of Science, vol. 30, 1963, pp. 1–16, 138–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[52] Meyer-Abich, K. M., Korrespondenz, Individualitaet, und Komplementaritaet, Wiesbaden, 1965.Google Scholar
[53] McKnight, J. L., Philosophy of Science, vol. 24, 1957, pp. 321–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[54] Neumann, J. von, Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik, Berlin, 1932.Google Scholar
[55] Pauli, W. (ed.), Niels Bohr and the Development of Physics, London, 1955.Google Scholar
[56] Popper, K. R., The Logic of Scientific Discovery, New York, 1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[57] Popper, K. R., Conjectures and Refutations, New York, 1962.Google Scholar
[58] Rosen, N., American Journal of Physics, vol. 32, 1964, pp. 597–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[59] Rozenthal, S. (ed.), Niels Bohr, His Life and Work as Seen by His Friends and Colleagues, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
[60] Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, Evanston, 1948.Google Scholar
[61] Schroedinger, E., Naturwissenschaften, vol. 23, 1935, pp. 807–812, 823–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[62] Schroedinger, E., Nature, vol. 173, 1954, p. 442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[63] Schroedinger, E., Nuovo Cimento, vol. 36, 1955, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
[64] Scientific Papers Presented to Max Born, Edinburgh, 1953.Google Scholar
[65] Slater, J. C., Nature, vol. 113, 1924, pp. 307–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[66] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of Vth, Paris, 1928.Google Scholar
[67] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of VIth, Paris, 1930.Google Scholar
[68] Solvay Conference, Proceedings of XIIth, New York, 1962.Google Scholar
[69] Sommerfeld, A., Atombau Und Spektrallinien, Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar
[70] Stern, O., and Gerlach, W., Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 11, 1922, pp. 31–57.Google Scholar
[71] Van der Waerden, B. L., Sources of Quantum Mechanics, Amsterdam, 1967.Google Scholar
[72] Wigner, E. P., American Journal of Physics, vol. 31, 1963, pp. 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar