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

International Studies in the Philosophy of Science

Pragmatism, Bohr, and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Reza Maleeh, Parisa Amani

Published Dec 1, 2013• 7 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In this article, we argue that although Bohr's version of the Copenhagen interpretation is in line with several key elements of logical positivism, pragmatism is the closest approximation to a classification of the Copenhagen interpretation, whether or not pragmatists directly influenced the key figures of the interpretation. Pragmatism already encompasses important elements of operationalism and logical positivism, especially the liberalized Carnapian reading of logical positivism. We suggest that some elements of the Copenhagen interpretation, which are in line with logical positivism, are also supported by pragmatism. Some of these elements are empirical realism, fallibilism, holism, and instrumentalism. However, pragmatism goes beyond logical positivism in espousing some other key elements of the Copenhagen interpretation, though imperfectly, such as the correspondence principle, complementarity, and indeterminism.

DOI
10.1080/02698595.2013.868182

Related papers

The Copenhagen interpretation, and pragmatism

Willem M. de Muynck

In the past both instrumentalism and empiricism have inspired certain pragmatic elements into the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The relation of such pragmatisms with the correspondence principle is discussed. It is argued that neither Bohr nor Heisenberg did take `correspondence' in one of these forms, and that it, in particular, was Bohr's classical attitude which caused him to apply in an inconsistent way his correspondence principle to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment, thus causing much confusion. It is demonstrated that an empiricist pragmatism is conducive to an explanation of violation of the Bell inequalities as a consequence of `complementarity' in the sense of `mutual disturbance in a joint nonideal measurement of incompatible observables' rather than as being caused by `nonlocal influences'.

arXiv:0705.2144•May 15, 2007•0 citations

The Copenhagen interpretation, and pragmatism 1

de Wm Willem Muynck, Michel Willem

In the past both instrumentalism and empiricism have inspired certain pragmatic elements into the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The relation of such pragmatisms with the correspondence principle is discussed. It is argued that neither Bohr nor Heisenberg did take ‘correspondence’ in one of these forms, and that it, in particular, was Bohr’s classical attitude which caused him to apply in an inconsistent way his correspondence principle to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment, thus causing much confusion. It is demonstrated that an empiricist pragmatism is conducive to an explanation of violation of the Bell inequalities as a consequence of ‘complementarity’ in the sense of ‘mutual disturbance in a joint nonideal measurement of incompatible observables’ rather than as being caused by ‘nonlocal influences’.

•May 15, 2007•0 citations

Did Logical Positivism Influence the Early Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics?

Jan Faye, Rasmus Jaksland

This chapter explores the relation between logical positivism and the early development and interpretation of quantum mechanics. Despite frequent claims to the contrary, we find that logical positivism did not influence physicists’ view of quantum mechanics until well into the 1930s, if at all. Special emphasis is given to Niels Bohr due to his central role in the understanding of the new physics. While Bohr was in contact with several central figures of logical positivism and on several occasions expressed his agreement with them, we find that Bohr developed his main ideas concerning quantum mechanics well before this contact was made. Instead, this chapter speculates that it was Bohr who tried to influence logical positivism: Bohr believed that understanding quantum mechanics provided us with a general philosophical lesson to which the logical positivist would be responsive. Because of similarities in viewpoints, Bohr apparently had hoped that this might compel the logical positivists to join him in the attempt to extend his ideas of complementarity and contextualism beyond quantum mechanics.

Routledge eBooks•Mar 2, 2021•2 citations

What Bohr wanted Carnap to learn from quantum mechanics

Jan Faye, Rasmus Jaksland

Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics is often cast as positivist and sometimes explicitly claimed to be influenced by logical positivists due to some similarities in their thinking. While it is certainly the case that some logical positivists attempted to recruit Bohr, this paper argues that Bohr had interests of his own in the logical positivists. Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics focuses on observation, the use of classical concepts in quantum mechanics, and indeterminacy of quantum processes as opposed to uncertainty of measurement. His view thereby shares some common ground with the logical positivists' views on verification, the observation language, and anti-metaphysics. But Bohr also emphasized complementarity: that certain pairs of concepts - such as position and momentum - are mutually exclusive in quantum mechanics since they, according to Bohr, are only meaningful relative to different experimental arrangements. Bohr believed that complementary brought a general epistemological lesson for all of science that an objective description of nature is not separable from the observational and experimental conditions under which we explore nature. Motivated by the common ground between himself and logical positivism, Bohr tried to persuade the logical positivists and Carnap in particular to adopt and champion complementarity as well as part of their unity of science program. Though his efforts ultimately proved in vain, Bohr's attempts to influence logical positivism disprove the claim that his engagement with them was reluctant and purposefully limited.

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A•Jun 17, 2021•23 citations

Darwinism in disguise? A comparison between Bohr's view on quantum mechanics and QBism

Jan Faye

The Copenhagen interpretation is first and foremost associated with Niels Bohr's philosophy of quantum mechanics. In this paper, I attempt to lay out what I see as Bohr's pragmatic approach to science in general and to quantum physics in particular. A part of this approach is his claim that the classical concepts are indispensable for our understanding of all physical phenomena, and it seems as if the claim is grounded in his reflection upon how the evolution of language is adapted to experience. Another, recent interpretation, QBism, has also found support in Darwin's theory. It may therefore not be surprising that sometimes QBism is said to be of the same breed as the Copenhagen interpretation. By comparing the two interpretations, I conclude, nevertheless, that there are important differences.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Apr 19, 2016•4 citations

Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Physics

Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Physics: Twenty-First-Century Perspectives examines the philosophical views, influences and legacy of the Nobel Prize physicist and philosophical spokesman of the quantum revolution, Niels Bohr. The sixteen contributions in this collection by some of the best contemporary philosophers and physicists writing on Bohr’s philosophy today all carefully distinguish his subtle and unique interpretation of quantum mechanics from views often imputed to him under the banner of the “Copenhagen Interpretation.” With respect to philosophical influences on Bohr’s outlook, the contributors analyse prominent similarities between his viewpoint and Kantian ways of thinking, the views of the Danish philosopher Harald Høffding, and themes characteristic of American pragmatism. In recognizing the importance of Bohr’s epistemological naturalism they examine his defence of the indispensability of classical concepts from a variety of different perspectives. This collection shows us that Bohr’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, now nearly a century old, still has

Bloomsbury Academic eBooks•Jan 1, 2017•15 citations
In this article, we argue that although Bohr's version of the Copenhagen interpretation is in line with several key elements of logical positivism, pragmatism is the closest approximation to a classification of the Copenhagen interpretation, whether or not pragmatists directly influenced the key figures of the interpretation. Pragmatism already encompasses important elements of operationalism and logical positivism, especially the liberalized Carnapian reading of logical positivism. We suggest that some elements of the Copenhagen interpretation, which are in line with logical positivism, are also supported by pragmatism. Some of these elements are empirical realism, fallibilism, holism, and instrumentalism. However, pragmatism goes beyond logical positivism in espousing some other key elements of the Copenhagen interpretation, though imperfectly, such as the correspondence principle, complementarity, and indeterminism.
In the past both instrumentalism and empiricism have inspired certain pragmatic elements into the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The relation of such pragmatisms with the correspondence principle is discussed. It is argued that neither Bohr nor Heisenberg did take `correspondence' in one of these forms, and that it, in particular, was Bohr's classical attitude which caused him to apply in an inconsistent way his correspondence principle to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment, thus causing much confusion. It is demonstrated that an empiricist pragmatism is conducive to an explanation of violation of the Bell inequalities as a consequence of `complementarity' in the sense of `mutual disturbance in a joint nonideal measurement of incompatible observables' rather than as being caused by `nonlocal influences'.
In the past both instrumentalism and empiricism have inspired certain pragmatic elements into the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The relation of such pragmatisms with the correspondence principle is discussed. It is argued that neither Bohr nor Heisenberg did take ‘correspondence’ in one of these forms, and that it, in particular, was Bohr’s classical attitude which caused him to apply in an inconsistent way his correspondence principle to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment, thus causing much confusion. It is demonstrated that an empiricist pragmatism is conducive to an explanation of violation of the Bell inequalities as a consequence of ‘complementarity’ in the sense of ‘mutual disturbance in a joint nonideal measurement of incompatible observables’ rather than as being caused by ‘nonlocal influences’.
This chapter explores the relation between logical positivism and the early development and interpretation of quantum mechanics. Despite frequent claims to the contrary, we find that logical positivism did not influence physicists’ view of quantum mechanics until well into the 1930s, if at all. Special emphasis is given to Niels Bohr due to his central role in the understanding of the new physics. While Bohr was in contact with several central figures of logical positivism and on several occasions expressed his agreement with them, we find that Bohr developed his main ideas concerning quantum mechanics well before this contact was made. Instead, this chapter speculates that it was Bohr who tried to influence logical positivism: Bohr believed that understanding quantum mechanics provided us with a general philosophical lesson to which the logical positivist would be responsive. Because of similarities in viewpoints, Bohr apparently had hoped that this might compel the logical positivists to join him in the attempt to extend his ideas of complementarity and contextualism beyond quantum mechanics.
Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics is often cast as positivist and sometimes explicitly claimed to be influenced by logical positivists due to some similarities in their thinking. While it is certainly the case that some logical positivists attempted to recruit Bohr, this paper argues that Bohr had interests of his own in the logical positivists. Bohr's interpretation of quantum mechanics focuses on observation, the use of classical concepts in quantum mechanics, and indeterminacy of quantum processes as opposed to uncertainty of measurement. His view thereby shares some common ground with the logical positivists' views on verification, the observation language, and anti-metaphysics. But Bohr also emphasized complementarity: that certain pairs of concepts - such as position and momentum - are mutually exclusive in quantum mechanics since they, according to Bohr, are only meaningful relative to different experimental arrangements. Bohr believed that complementary brought a general epistemological lesson for all of science that an objective description of nature is not separable from the observational and experimental conditions under which we explore nature. Motivated by the common ground between himself and logical positivism, Bohr tried to persuade the logical positivists and Carnap in particular to adopt and champion complementarity as well as part of their unity of science program. Though his efforts ultimately proved in vain, Bohr's attempts to influence logical positivism disprove the claim that his engagement with them was reluctant and purposefully limited.
The Copenhagen interpretation is first and foremost associated with Niels Bohr's philosophy of quantum mechanics. In this paper, I attempt to lay out what I see as Bohr's pragmatic approach to science in general and to quantum physics in particular. A part of this approach is his claim that the classical concepts are indispensable for our understanding of all physical phenomena, and it seems as if the claim is grounded in his reflection upon how the evolution of language is adapted to experience. Another, recent interpretation, QBism, has also found support in Darwin's theory. It may therefore not be surprising that sometimes QBism is said to be of the same breed as the Copenhagen interpretation. By comparing the two interpretations, I conclude, nevertheless, that there are important differences.
Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Physics: Twenty-First-Century Perspectives examines the philosophical views, influences and legacy of the Nobel Prize physicist and philosophical spokesman of the quantum revolution, Niels Bohr. The sixteen contributions in this collection by some of the best contemporary philosophers and physicists writing on Bohr’s philosophy today all carefully distinguish his subtle and unique interpretation of quantum mechanics from views often imputed to him under the banner of the “Copenhagen Interpretation.” With respect to philosophical influences on Bohr’s outlook, the contributors analyse prominent similarities between his viewpoint and Kantian ways of thinking, the views of the Danish philosopher Harald Høffding, and themes characteristic of American pragmatism. In recognizing the importance of Bohr’s epistemological naturalism they examine his defence of the indispensability of classical concepts from a variety of different perspectives. This collection shows us that Bohr’s interpretation of quantum mechanics, now nearly a century old, still has