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

The Monist

Uncertain Decisions and the Many-Minds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

David Papineau

Published Jan 1, 1997• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

David Papineau; Uncertain Decisions and The Many-Minds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, The Monist, Volume 80, Issue 1, 1 January 1997, Pages 97–117, https:
DOI
10.5840/monist19978019

Related papers

Uncertain Decisions and the Many-Minds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

David Papineau

Abstract Imagine you are faced with a quantum-mechanical device which will display either H or T (‘heads’, ‘tails’) when it is operated (‘spun’). You know that the single-case probability, or chance, of H is 0.8, and the chance of T is 0.2. (I could have taken a biased coin, but I wanted to make it clear that we are dealing with chances.)

•Jan 16, 2003•1 citation

The Ontological Interpretation of the Wave Function of the Universe

Quentin Smith

Quentin Smith; The Ontological Interpretation of the Wave Function of the Universe, The Monist, Volume 80, Issue 1, 1 January 1997, Pages 160–185, https://doi.o

The Monist•Jan 1, 1997•12 citations

The many−worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. By Bryce S. DeWitt and Neill Graham

Robert V. Krotkov

American Journal of Physics•Jan 1, 1975•1 citation

The single-mind and many-minds versions of quantum mechanics

Jeffrey Alan Barrett

Erkenntnis•Jan 1, 1995•30 citations

The ins and outs of Schrodinger's cat box: a response to Papineau

Paul Tappenden

The so-called many-worlds or many-minds interpretations of quantum mechancis, derived from the work of Hugh Everett III (1957), continue to have a very mixed reception among the well-informed, partly because of the theories' weirdness. Peter Lewis (2000) has argued that an important class of these interpretations have the extraordinary implication that a subject confronted by apparently life-threatening situations involving quantum measurement should be fully confident of having future experience. David Papineau (2003) has attempted to block Lewis's argument and I shall argue that the attempt fails.

Analysis•Mar 16, 2004•6 citations

One mind or many ? A note on the everett interpretation of quantum theory

Euan J. Squires

Synthese•Nov 1, 1991•56 citations
The so-called many-worlds or many-minds interpretations of quantum mechancis, derived from the work of Hugh Everett III (1957), continue to have a very mixed reception among the well-informed, partly because of the theories' weirdness. Peter Lewis (2000) has argued that an important class of these interpretations have the extraordinary implication that a subject confronted by apparently life-threatening situations involving quantum measurement should be fully confident of having future experience. David Papineau (2003) has attempted to block Lewis's argument and I shall argue that the attempt fails.