Abstract Quantum physics is being positioned as a new archive for addressing major theoretical problems in the field of international relations. Two of the major proponents of engaging quantum thinking within international relations, James Der Derian and Alexander Wendt, have argued that quantum thinking offers the possibility of a major paradigm shift in the field. Before we determine quantum’s revolutionary potential, the persistent and most pressing question for me is how to position quantum thinking among other kinds of and claims to knowledge. I want to horizontalize where different kinds of knowledge sit within the renewed attention to quantum theory. Rather than just horizontalize or flatten ontology, I want to see what happens when we place scientific and philosophical inquiry in dialogue, and what that conversation does to the authority and value of quantum thinking for the social sciences. The article reconstructs the dialogue between the first generation of quantum physicists and the philosophers who informed them. Rather than make an explicit argument about the philosophical debt of physics, I argue that a broad and highly interdisciplinary set of questions drove both fields well beyond the specific areas of expertise of any of these thinkers. I believe this adventure of ideas followed by physicists, philosophers, and social theorists alike offers us a way forward as the complexity of our contemporary global challenges confront us now with the necessity to think well beyond our disciplinary expertise.
Abstract Quantum physics is being positioned as a new archive for addressing major theoretical problems in the field of international relations. Two of the major proponents of engaging quantum thinking within international relations, James Der Derian and Alexander Wendt, have argued that quantum thinking offers the possibility of a major paradigm shift in the field. Before we determine quantum’s revolutionary potential, the persistent and most pressing question for me is how to position quantum thinking among other kinds of and claims to knowledge. I want to horizontalize where different kinds of knowledge sit within the renewed attention to quantum theory. Rather than just horizontalize or flatten ontology, I want to see what happens when we place scientific and philosophical inquiry in dialogue, and what that conversation does to the authority and value of quantum thinking for the social sciences. The article reconstructs the dialogue between the first generation of quantum physicists and the philosophers who informed them. Rather than make an explicit argument about the philosophical debt of physics, I argue that a broad and highly interdisciplinary set of questions drove both fields well beyond the specific areas of expertise of any of these thinkers. I believe this adventure of ideas followed by physicists, philosophers, and social theorists alike offers us a way forward as the complexity of our contemporary global challenges confront us now with the necessity to think well beyond our disciplinary expertise.
Recently, the dominant philosophical paradigm in Western social and political sciences has been criticized by a number of researchers and the necessity of transition to a new – quantum – transdisciplinary paradigm using ideas, concepts and formalism of quantum mechanics has been justified. The author argues that the need for such a transition is due to the fact that the dominant paradigm is based on outdated assumptions and premises of Modern philosophy, which really should be abandoned. It is quantum mechanics that contains the potential for a new philosophy. Classical mechanics had a significant impact on the development of philosophy, particularly on Kant’s critical philosophy, for which it served as the ideal of scientific knowledge. Today, a similar influence is exerted by quantum mechanics. Quantum ideas have also begun to be applied in the field of socio-political thought, particularly in the study of international relations, global politics, and global security. At the same time, the author argues that what many researchers take to be the “quantum paradigm” in the social and political sciences is in fact in many ways not so much an overcoming of the Modern paradigm as a postmodernist radicalization of it. In other words, the alternative they propose turns out to be a pseudo-quantum alternative. It is proposed the conceptual scheme of a contextual quantum realism as a genuine quantum alternative.
This chapter reconstructs the conversations and debates between philosophers and physicists before and during the first generation of quantum thinking. Rather than making an abstract case for epistemological or interdivisional pluralism, the chapter presents a set of intersecting and parallel lines of thought that perform the radical pluralism that was demanded of cosmological thinking in philosophy and physics. The hope is that such a reflection can disarm some of the anxiety regarding the superiority or inferiority of scientific and philosophical inquiry as if such a determination were a zero-sum game. Ultimately, this chapter argues that while singular in their mode of inquiry, philosophy and physics are inseparable once the meaning of each discourse’s findings enters the fray of human experience. Therefore, engagements with and against any quantum turn ought to prefer a kind of epistemological generosity rather than seek discrete territorial claims to intellectual labor.
Quantum physics can be understood as an epistemological rupture that transforms the foundations of modern scientific rationality. In contrast to the Newtonian mechanistic worldview that underpinned universalist notions of progress, objectivity, and control, quantum mechanics introduces uncertainty, contextuality, non-locality, and the constitutive role of observation into scientific knowledge. These features destabilize the image of reality as a unified, hierarchically structured, and fully transparent domain, thereby challenging the epistemic premises of Western universalism. At the cultural level, this rupture finds expression in forms of scientific magical realism, where the quantum world appears as strange, paradoxical, elusive and fundamentally ungraspable. Such representations allow the quantum revolution to be interpreted not only as a theoretical breakthrough in physics but as an internal epistemological transformation of modern rationality itself. The issue is not the abandonment of rationality, but the reconfiguration of its foundations: the acknowledgment of uncertainty, contextuality, and the participatory role of the observer as structural features of knowledge. This shift is comparable to the epistemological tensions identified by postcolonial theory in situations where hegemonic discourses encounter forms of knowledge that cannot be reduced to their universalist logic. In this sense, quantum physics emerges as a form of internal epistemological alterity within Western science: while remaining part of its canon, it simultaneously rearticulates its ontological assumptions and limits its claim to constitute the sole normative regime of rationality. Extending quantum logic into social theory enables a shift from mechanistic social ontology toward a quantum social ontology, in which relationality, co-constitution, and process take precedence over fixed entities and linear causality. This transformation unfolds as a form of passive revolution, in the Gramscian sense: a profound ontological reorientation achieved not through the destruction of disciplinary institutions, but through their gradual conceptual reconfiguration. The epistemological outcome of this shift is the pluralization of knowledge and the emergence of a pluriversal onto-epistemological horizon, where scientific rationality becomes compatible with multiple cosmologies and situated ways of knowing. In this sense, the quantum turn opens a pathway toward the decolonization of knowledge and the rethinking of global order beyond universalist epistemic hierarchies.
This paper examines the deep and enduring relationship between physics and philosophy, a connection that has shaped the trajectory of human inquiry from antiquity to the present. By tracing their shared historical roots, the paper emphasizes how early philosophical speculations laid the groundwork for scientific reasoning. Despite the modern institutional separation of these two disciplines, physics continues to grapple with questions that are fundamentally philosophical in nature, questions concerning the essence of time, space, causality, determinism, and the very nature of reality. The paper explores the epistemological structures that underpin scientific knowledge, such as the criteria for theory confirmation and falsifiability, and investigates the ontological assumptions embedded in classical and modern physics. Special attention is devoted to paradigm shifts in the history of science, including the contributions of figures such as Aristotle, Newton, Popper, and Kuhn, as well as the radical implications of quantum mechanics and general relativity. Through an analysis of contemporary debates, such as those surrounding interpretations of quantum mechanics, the multiverse, and the conceptual validity of string theory, the paper argues that philosophy remains indispensable for critically examining and contextualizing scientific thought. Far from being obsolete, philosophical reflection serves as a compass for navigating the conceptual challenges of physics. Ultimately, the dialogue between philosophy and physics is presented as a dynamic and reciprocal exchange, one that not only enriches both fields but is also necessary for advancing our understanding of the universe.
This paper examines the deep and enduring relationship between physics and philosophy, a connection that has shaped the trajectory of human inquiry from antiquity to the present. By tracing their shared historical roots, the paper emphasizes how early philosophical speculations laid the groundwork for scientific reasoning. Despite the modern institutional separation of these two disciplines, physics continues to grapple with questions that are fundamentally philosophical in nature, questions concerning the essence of time, space, causality, determinism, and the very nature of reality. The paper explores the epistemological structures that underpin scientific knowledge, such as the criteria for theory confirmation and falsifiability, and investigates the ontological assumptions embedded in classical and modern physics. Special attention is devoted to paradigm shifts in the history of science, including the contributions of figures such as Aristotle, Newton, Popper, and Kuhn, as well as the radical implications of quantum mechanics and general relativity. Through an analysis of contemporary debates, such as those surrounding interpretations of quantum mechanics, the multiverse, and the conceptual validity of string theory, the paper argues that philosophy remains indispensable for critically examining and contextualizing scientific thought. Far from being obsolete, philosophical reflection serves as a compass for navigating the conceptual challenges of physics. Ultimately, the dialogue between philosophy and physics is presented as a dynamic and reciprocal exchange, one that not only enriches both fields but is also necessary for advancing our understanding of the universe.
Despite scholarly consensus on the empirical facts, ever since its inception in the 1920s there has been deep disagreement about how to interpret quantum theory. “To interpret a physical theory is to say what the world would be like, if the theory were true.” All scientific theories require interpretation, since strictly speaking what they describe are our experiences of the world rather than the world itself. Thus, whether we are trying to explain or merely describe the world, we are always engaged in inference. To make inferences we need a context for interpretation. For any given claim this context is provided locally by related theories, more broadly by disciplinary paradigms, and ultimately by worldview claims about the nature of reality. The challenge in interpreting scientific theories is to integrate them into this hierarchy of knowledge. Usually this is not too difficult. New theories often require adjustments to nearby theories, but in doing so we can rely on paradigms to make them cohere. More rarely paradigmatic assumptions are themselves challenged, but in that case scientists can fall back on their worldview to make sense of the needed changes. By implication, the most difficult interpretive problems arise when our worldview is called into question, which leaves us without any frame of reference on which to fall back. Quantum theory poses a worldview problem. Prior to the quantum revolution the classical worldview could not be tested scientifically and so it was essentially metaphysical. Even though it corresponded to our experience of material objects, we lacked proof that it adequately represented the deep structure of reality. By giving us access to that deep structure for the first time, quantum mechanics made it possible to do such a test, or “experimental metaphysics.” Unfortunately, the results seemed to contradict classical assumptions, at least on the sub-atomic level.