Distinguishing two (unsound) arguments for quantum social science

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-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 languageEnglish
Article number34
JournalEuropean Journal for Philosophy of Science
Volume13
Number of pages21
ISSN1879-4912
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2023

Number of downloads are based on statistics from Google Scholar and www.ku.dk


No data available

ID: 361153333