According to a particular interpretation of quantum mechanics, the causal role of human consciousness in the measuring process is called upon to solve a foundational problem called the "measurement problem."Traditionally, this interpretation is tied up with the metaphysics of substance dualism.As such, this interpretation of quantum mechanics inherits the dualist's mind-body problem.Our working hypothesis is that a process-based approach to the consciousness causes collapse interpretation (CCCI) -leaning on Whitehead's solution to the mind-body problem-offers a better metaphysical understanding of consciousness and its role in interpreting quantum mechanics.This article is the kickoff for such a research program in the metaphysics of science.
According to a particular interpretation of quantum mechanics, the causal role of human consciousness in the measuring process is called upon to solve a foundational problem called the "measurement problem."Traditionally, this interpretation is tied up with the metaphysics of substance dualism.As such, this interpretation of quantum mechanics inherits the dualist's mind-body problem.Our working hypothesis is that a process-based approach to the consciousness causes collapse interpretation (CCCI) -leaning on Whitehead's solution to the mind-body problem-offers a better metaphysical understanding of consciousness and its role in interpreting quantum mechanics.This article is the kickoff for such a research program in the metaphysics of science.
One of the most serious challenges (if not the most serious challenge) for interactive psycho-physical dualism (henceforth interactive dualism or ID) is the so-called ‘interaction problem’. It has two facets, one of which this article focuses on, namely the apparent tension between interactions of non-physical minds in the physical world and physical laws of nature. One family of approaches to alleviate or even dissolve this tension is based on a collapse solution (‘consciousness collapse/CC) of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics (QM). The idea is that the mind brings about the collapse of a superposed wave function onto one of its eigenstates. Thus, it is claimed, can the mind change the course of things without violating any law figuring in physical theory. I will first show that this hope is premature because energy and momentum are probably not conserved in collapse processes, and that even if this can be dealt with, the violations are either severe or produce further ontological problems. Second, I point out several conceptual difficulties for interactionist CC. I will also present solutions for those problems, but it will become clear that those solutions come at a high cost. Third, I shall briefly list some empirical problems which make life even harder for interactionist CC. I conclude with remarks about why no- collapse interpretations of QM don’t help either and what the present study has shown is the real issue for ID: namely to find a plausible integrative view of dualistic mental causation and laws of nature.
Metaphysical underdetermination arises when we are not able to decide, by purely theoretical criteria, between competing interpretations of scientific theories with different metaphysical commitments. This is the case in which non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM) founds itself in. Among several available interpretations, there is the interpretation which states that the interaction with the conscious mind of a human observer causes a change in the dynamics of quantum objects undergoing from indefinite to definite states. This is, in a nutshell, the received view of the consciousness causes the collapse hypothesis (CCCH), which is the basis for a set of interpretations known as subjectivistic interpretations of QM. Here we propose a further distinction between three levels of metaphysical underdetermination within the discussion related to the interpretations of QM: the first level, described above, concerns the general framework of interpretations of QM (where CCCH is a option among several others, and which is not addressed here); the second one emerges within a particular set of interpretations (namely, CCCH), and the third one from two possible approaches to a particular branch of this set of interpretations. We suggest breaking the last two using metaphysical arguments. As a general result, we have been able to rule out the dualist approach of CCCH (though we cannot rule it out empirically) and to realize that the only viable phenomenological approach to CCCH is the eidetic one.
Abstract Consciousness and quantum mechanics are two mysteries in our times. A careful and thorough examination of possible connections between them may help unravel these two mysteries. On the one hand, an analysis of the conscious mind and psychophysical connection seems indispensable in understanding quantum mechanics and solving the notorious measurement problem. On the other hand, it seems that in the end quantum mechanics, the most fundamental theory of the physical world, will be relevant to understanding consciousness and even solving the mind-body problem when assuming a naturalist view. This book is the first volume which provides a comprehensive review and thorough analysis of intriguing conjectures about the connection between consciousness and quantum mechanics. Written by leading experts in this research field, this book will be of value to students and researchers working on the foundations of quantum mechanics and philosophy of mind.
The measurement problem — the question of why quantum superpositions appear to collapse to definite outcomes upon measurement — remains one of the most consequential unresolved questions in the foundations of physics. Despite the extraordinary empirical success of quantum mechanics, the field has for decades operated under an unofficial norm of interpretive silence, a posture Sean Carroll and others have identified as both intellectually dishonest and scientifically costly. This paper argues that the experimental evidence, properly understood through the framework of quantum entanglement and decoherence, provides strong grounds for rejecting the hypothesis that consciousness plays a causal role in wavefunction collapse. Three tiers of experimental evidence are examined: the double slit experiment with which-path detection, Bell inequality tests confirming non-local entanglement, and the LIGO gravitational wave detections demonstrating macroscopic quantum coherence at cosmological scales without any role for conscious observation. The paper concludes that the consciousness hypothesis is not supported by experimental physics and that Carroll's call for serious investment in foundational research is scientifically justified and philosophically urgent.
This paper presents a conceptual and philosophical interpretation of quantum measurement, focusing on the role of human intention as a metaphysical variable in the process commonly described as wave-function collapse. Rather than proposing a physical mechanism or experimentally testable claim, the work examines how intention, observation, and meaning-making may be understood within the broader limits of scientific epistemology. The paper argues that science functions as a powerful methodological tool for modeling observable phenomena, but that its scope is necessarily bounded by empirical measurement and repeatability. Within this framework, the study explores how trans-empirical aspects of experience—such as intention, consciousness, and belief—can be discussed without being reduced to physical causation. The emphasis is not on rejecting scientific inquiry, but on clarifying its domain of applicability. Using concepts from quantum mechanics (superposition, collapse, observer-dependence) as interpretive structures, the paper develops a metaphysical model in which collapse is understood as a process of selection aligned with intention, rather than as a solely mechanical outcome of measurement. Behavioral and cognitive examples are presented as illustrative analogies, not as quantum experiments. This work is situated at the intersection of philosophy of science, consciousness studies, and conceptual interpretations of quantum mechanics. It contributes to the ongoing development of Javed’s Quantum Thought, a framework that seeks to integrate scientific reasoning with broader ontological reflection while maintaining clear distinctions between empirical science and metaphysical interpretation.
This paper presents a conceptual and philosophical interpretation of quantum measurement, focusing on the role of human intention as a metaphysical variable in the process commonly described as wave-function collapse. Rather than proposing a physical mechanism or experimentally testable claim, the work examines how intention, observation, and meaning-making may be understood within the broader limits of scientific epistemology. The paper argues that science functions as a powerful methodological tool for modeling observable phenomena, but that its scope is necessarily bounded by empirical measurement and repeatability. Within this framework, the study explores how trans-empirical aspects of experience—such as intention, consciousness, and belief—can be discussed without being reduced to physical causation. The emphasis is not on rejecting scientific inquiry, but on clarifying its domain of applicability. Using concepts from quantum mechanics (superposition, collapse, observer-dependence) as interpretive structures, the paper develops a metaphysical model in which collapse is understood as a process of selection aligned with intention, rather than as a solely mechanical outcome of measurement. Behavioral and cognitive examples are presented as illustrative analogies, not as quantum experiments. This work is situated at the intersection of philosophy of science, consciousness studies, and conceptual interpretations of quantum mechanics. It contributes to the ongoing development of Javed’s Quantum Thought, a framework that seeks to integrate scientific reasoning with broader ontological reflection while maintaining clear distinctions between empirical science and metaphysical interpret ation.