Describing Wolfgang Pauli's philosophical views is a delicate matter. In addition to his extensive study of Kepler, Pauli published only short epistemological articles (not available in English translation). His extraordinarily wide correspondence is the best source for understanding Pauli's philosophical thought. Forming a coherent picture of Pauli's philosophy on the basis of his correspondence is, however, like doing a puzzle where half of the pieces are missing. The author has been doing this puzzle for more than ten years, inspired by the exceptionally profound ideas presented in the available documents, and wish to draw more general attention to Pauli's philosophy. The article aims at describing the conception of reality which Pauli shaped on the basis of quantum theory. It points out in particular that philosophical and psychological viewpoints which Pauli has emphasised, are inconsistent with important trends in basic research today. Characteristic quotations from Pauli's writings, related to the questions discussed, are given in the appendix.
Describing Wolfgang Pauli's philosophical views is a delicate matter. In addition to his extensive study of Kepler, Pauli published only short epistemological articles (not available in English translation). His extraordinarily wide correspondence is the best source for understanding Pauli's philosophical thought. Forming a coherent picture of Pauli's philosophy on the basis of his correspondence is, however, like doing a puzzle where half of the pieces are missing. The author has been doing this puzzle for more than ten years, inspired by the exceptionally profound ideas presented in the available documents, and wish to draw more general attention to Pauli's philosophy. The article aims at describing the conception of reality which Pauli shaped on the basis of quantum theory. It points out in particular that philosophical and psychological viewpoints which Pauli has emphasised, are inconsistent with important trends in basic research today. Characteristic quotations from Pauli's writings, related to the questions discussed, are given in the appendix.
Abstract. Nobel Laureate in physics Wolfgang Pauli studied philosophy and the history of ideas intensively, especially in his later years, to form an accurate ontology vis‐à‐vis quantum theory. Pauli's close contacts with the Swiss psychiatrist C.G. Jung gave him special qualifications for also understanding the basic problems of empirical knowledge. After Pauli's sudden death in 1958, this work was maintained mainly in his posthumously published correspondence, which so far extends only to 1939. Because Pauli's view differs essentially from the direction physics research took after the deaths of the founding fathers of quantum theory, this article attempts to describe the main features in Pauli's revolutionary thought, which is based on nature's “epistemological lesson” as revealed by Pauli's atomic research. Pauli's conclusions have important implications for various issues in Western culture, not least with the limits of science and the relation of science to religion.
Related to the key areas of Pauli''s and Jung''s joint interests, the book covers overlapping issues from the perspectives of physics, philosophy, and psychology. Of primary significance are epistemological questions connected to issues such as realism, measurement, observation, consciousness, and the unconscious. The contributions assess the extensive material that we have about Pauli''s and Jung''s ideas today, with particular respect to concrete research questions and projects based on and re...
Copenhagen is the perfect setting for our discussion of matter and information. We have been charged ‘to explore the current concept of matter from scientific, philosophical, and theological perspectives’. The essential foundation for this work is the output of the intense intellectual struggles that took place here in Copenhagen during the twenties, principally between Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Wolfgang Pauli. Those struggles replaced the then-prevailing Newtonian idea of matter as ‘solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable particles’ with a new concept that allowed, and in fact demanded, entry into the laws governing the motion of matter of the consequences of decisions made by human subjects. This change in the laws swept away the meaningless billiard-ball universe, and replaced it with a universe in which we human beings, by means of our intentional effort, can make a difference in how the ‘matter’ in our bodies behaves. The role of mind in nature Unfortunately, most of the prevailing descriptions of quantum theory tend to emphasize puzzles and paradoxes in a way that makes philosophers, theologians, and even non-physicist scientists leery of actually using in any deep way the profound changes in our understanding of human beings in nature wrought by the quantum revolution. Yet, properly presented, quantum mechanics is thoroughly in line with our deep human intuitions. It is the 300 years of indoctrination with basically false ideas about how nature works that now makes puzzling a process that is completely in line with normal human intuition. I therefore begin with a non-paradox-laden description of the quantum universe and the place of our minds within it.
Copenhagen is the perfect setting for our discussion of matter and information. We have been charged ‘to explore the current concept of matter from scientific, philosophical, and theological perspectives’. The essential foundation for this work is the output of the intense intellectual struggles that took place here in Copenhagen during the twenties, principally between Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Wolfgang Pauli. Those struggles replaced the then-prevailing Newtonian idea of matter as ‘solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable particles’ with a new concept that allowed, and in fact demanded, entry into the laws governing the motion of matter of the consequences of decisions made by human subjects. This change in the laws swept away the meaningless billiard-ball universe, and replaced it with a universe in which we human beings, by means of our intentional effort, can make a difference in how the ‘matter’ in our bodies behaves. THE ROLE OF MIND IN NATURE Unfortunately, most of the prevailing descriptions of quantum theory tend to emphasize puzzles and paradoxes in a way that makes philosophers, theologians, and even non-physicist scientists leery of actually using in any deep way the profound changes in our understanding of human beings in nature wrought by the quantum revolution. Yet, properly presented, quantum mechanics is thoroughly in line with our deep human intuitions. It is the 300 years of indoctrination with basically false ideas about how nature works that now makes puzzling a process that is completely in line with normal human intuition.
Open realism, B. d'Espagnat quantum mechanics and objectivity - an analysis of some paradoxes, A. Peres non-locality and wave-packet reduction in optical experiments - physical and philosophical issues in the Bohr-Einstein debate, A. Shimony actualization perception and reality - an epistemological approach based on psychological analysis - a draft, K. Rainio do we need an introvert physics?, E. Huhmar quantum theory of measurement - a review, P. Lahti the archetypal hypothesis of Wolfgang Pauli and C.G. Junge - origins, development and implications, C.R. Card Wolfgang Pauli between quantum reality and the royal path of dreams, C.P. Enz Einstein, Bohr, Pauli and the principle of individuation, H. van Erkelens the role of the Copenhagen interpretation today - quantum mechanics and realism, remarks on physics and the psyche, K.V. Laurikainen the Cartesian cut, the Heisenberg cut, dressed objects, and detached observers, H. Primas mind, matter, and Pauli, H. Stapp a possible explanation for the quantum structure, D. Aerts the observer in the age of man - from Laplace's demon to Wigner's friend, F. Borg universal gravitational interaction and the (non)-measurability of physical field quantities, on a new type of uncertainty relations in quantum general relativity, H-H. v. Borzeskowski non-detachability of language and the Pauli-Bohr dialogue, L. Lofgren quantum mechanics as a continuous theory of discrete processes, P. Sibelius.
“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 theschool-philosopherswhom 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 difficultiesby 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.