Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Journal of Social and Biological Systems

The complementarity principle in biological and social structures

Howard Hunt Pattee

Published Apr 1, 1978• 107 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1016/s0140-1750(78)80007-4

Related papers

The Complementarity Principle in Biological and Social Structures

Howard Hunt Pattee

Biosemiotics/Biosemiotics. Bookseries•Jan 1, 2012•2 citations

Niels Bohr’ Complementarity Principle and Methodology of Social Science

Irina V. Frolova

Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy•Jan 1, 2018•0 citations

Biological Complementarity of the Molecular and Functional

Arun Bala

Springer eBooks•Dec 3, 2016•0 citations

The Logic of Nature: Complementarity and the New Biology

Menas C. Kafatos, Robert L. Nadeau

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2000•0 citations

Physics, Biological Computation and Complementarity

J. J. Hopfield

•Jan 1, 1986•3 citations

Complementarity Beyond Physics: Niels Bohr's Parallels

Arun Bala

In this study Arun Bala examines the implications that Niels Bohr’s principle of complementarity holds for fields beyond physics. Bohr, one of the founding figures of modern quantum physics, argued that the principle of complementarity he proposed for understanding atomic processes has parallels in psychology, biology, and social science, as well as in Buddhist and Taoist thought. But Bohr failed to offer any explanation for why complementarity might extend beyond physics, and his claims have been widely rejected by scientists as empty speculation. Scientific scepticism has only been reinforced by the naïve enthusiasm of postmodern relativists and New Age intuitionists, who seize upon Bohr’s ideas to justify anti-realist and mystical positions. Arun Bala offers a detailed defence of Bohr’s claim that complementarity has far-reaching implications for the biological and social sciences, as well as for comparative philosophies of science, by explaining Bohr’s parallels as responses to the omnipresence of grown properties in nature.

•Dec 23, 2016•4 citations
In this study Arun Bala examines the implications that Niels Bohr’s principle of complementarity holds for fields beyond physics. Bohr, one of the founding figures of modern quantum physics, argued that the principle of complementarity he proposed for understanding atomic processes has parallels in psychology, biology, and social science, as well as in Buddhist and Taoist thought. But Bohr failed to offer any explanation for why complementarity might extend beyond physics, and his claims have been widely rejected by scientists as empty speculation. Scientific scepticism has only been reinforced by the naïve enthusiasm of postmodern relativists and New Age intuitionists, who seize upon Bohr’s ideas to justify anti-realist and mystical positions. Arun Bala offers a detailed defence of Bohr’s claim that complementarity has far-reaching implications for the biological and social sciences, as well as for comparative philosophies of science, by explaining Bohr’s parallels as responses to the omnipresence of grown properties in nature.