Human Behavior Paradox and a Social Science Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

James J. Wayne

Jan Faye, Rasmus Jaksland

Abstract The last decade has seen an increasing number of references to quantum mechanics in the humanities and social sciences. This development has in particular been driven by Karen Barad’s agential realism: a theoretical framework that, based on Niels Bohr’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, aims to inform social theorizing. In dealing with notions such as agency, power, and embodiment as well as the relation between the material and the discursive level, the influence of agential realism in fields such as feminist science studies and posthumanism has been profound. However, no one has hitherto paused to assess agential realism’s proclaimed quantum mechanical origin including its relation to the writings of Niels Bohr. This is the task taken up here. We find that many of the implications that agential realism allegedly derives from a Bohrian interpretation of quantum mechanics dissent from Bohr’s own views and are in conflict with those of other interpretations of quantum mechanics. Agential realism is at best consistent with quantum mechanics and consequently, it does not capture what quantum mechanics in any strict sense implies for social science or any other domain of inquiry. Agential realism may be interesting and thought provoking from the perspective of social theorizing, but it is neither sanctioned by quantum mechanics nor by Bohr’s authority. This conclusion not only holds for agential realism in particular, it also serves as a general warning against the other attempts to use quantum mechanics in social theorizing.

Edward J. Green

Thomas Holtfort, Andreas Horsch

Abstract The social and economic sciences are grounded on the basic assumption that social life, decision-making behavior, and consciousness are classical physical and therefore material phenomena. Quantum social science, a new research area, which refers to the knowledge and interpretations of quantum physics, is challenging this assumption. This paper gives an overview of quantum social science and explains quantum decision theory on the one hand with a focus on the cognitive biases first elaborated by Kahneman & Tversky, and on the other hand by Darwin´s theory of evolution.

Bentley B. Allan

Emmanuel E. Haven, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

What is quantum social science? After a short discursion into the field of “econophysics” we now arrive at a much more exotic stop. However, readers who have perused Chapter 1, will possibly be less astonished to find that instead of making reference to social science within a statistical mechanics environment, we now make reference to social science as it could be embedded in a quantum mechanical context. Or is “quantum social science” denoting something altogether different? The term is certainly fraught with a huge potential for misinterpretation. A common, but maybe not so erroneous, interpretation of the term often made by newcomers to this “field” can be expressed via the following question: “is quantum social science about reformulating social science with quantum mechanical tools?” Such a question brings us closer to the goal of attempting to explain quantum social science, but right here and now, i.e. at this very point in this book, we have the opportunity to make a serious attempt to be really precise on what is meant with this new term. Therefore, let us from the outset indicate what it is not . Quantum social science is not about reformulating social science on a quantum size scale. The macroscopic world does not operate at the Planck scale. On prima facie, this obvious statement does not need any further explanation. However, if the human experience is centered around consciousness and the functioning of the brain, then we are much less sure to claim there is a total absence of quantum processes.