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

Routledge eBooks

QBism

Michel Bitbol, Laura de la Tremblaye

Published Nov 20, 2023• 5 citations
Publisher

Abstract

A discrepancy between the instrumentalist and realist inclinations of QBism, or between its experiential and interactional concepts of measurement, has been repeatedly noticed. Here, we show that this discrepancy can be resolved by adopting a phenomenological approach throughout. In other terms, the difficulty can be overcome by unambiguously choosing the first-person standpoint as a radical origin of knowledge, and by ascending from the situated lived experience of a knowing and acting subject, to the structure and use of the quantum formalism. To reconstruct some crucial features of the objectivity promised by science, and to accommodate the soundest aspect of the realist intuitions of QBist authors, a phenomenological reinterpretation of what is commonly called “the world” is proposed. This reinterpretation is based on Bruce Bégout's “Eco-Phenomenology”, that replaces the concept of a somehow extrinsic relation between subject and world, with the immersive experience of a subject partaking of the world.

DOI
10.4324/9781003259008-10

Related papers

TOWARDS A PHENOMENOLOGICAL CONSTITUTION OF QUANTUM MECHANICS: A QBIST APPROACH

Laura de la Tremblaye, Michel Bitbol

In this programmatic article, our aim is to sketch the outlines of a phenomenological constitution of quantum mechanics, thus drawing the ultimate consequence of previous phenomenological approaches to this theory. In other terms, we wish to show a way to ascend from the situated lived experience of a knowing and acting subject, to the structure and use of the quantum formalism. QBism (Quantum Bayesianism), with its motivated focus on lived experience, and its decision to take the elementary epistemic attitudes of agents as primitives of its axiomatics, will prove a decisive step to progress in this direction.

•Jan 1, 2022•4 citations

Unobservable Entities in QBism and Phenomenology

Jacques Pienaar

The interpretation of quantum theory known as QBism argues that many elements of the formalism have a subjective interpretation. At the same time, QBism claims to be a broadly realist programme. This implies that reality in QBism must be somehow founded upon an agent's subjective experiences (measurement outcomes). To make this idea more precise, we propose to interpret QBism's “experiences” as synonymous with the concept of “perceived phenomena” in phenomenology. This suggests an approach to ontology in which objects can only be physically real if they are in principle observable. But what does “observable” mean? Are atoms, electromagnetic fields, quantum states, or probabilities observable? Here we discuss the different answers to this question given by QBists and phenomenologists, and attempt to reconcile them.

arXiv:2112.14302•Routledge eBooks•Nov 20, 2023•6 citations

Is QBism a Possible Solution to the Conceptual Problems of Quantum Mechanics?

Hervé Zwirn C

QBism is a recently developed version of Quantum Bayesianism. QBists think that the primitive concept of experience is the central subject of science. QBism refuses the idea that the quantum state of a system is an objective description of this system. It is a tool for assigning a subjective probability to the agent's future experience. So quantum mechanics does not directly say something about the "external world". A measurement (in the usual sense) is just a special case of what QBism calls experience and this is any action done by any agent on her external world. The result of the measurement is the experience that the agent gets from her action on her personal world. For Qbists, this way of seeing the measurement helps rejecting any non-local influences. We will examine if these claims are robust and will show that a certain number of issues needs to be clarified in order to get a coherent picture. Depending on the way these necessary clarifications are made, the global image given by Qbism can vary from pure instrumentalism to interpretations making the observer play a radical role.

arXiv:1912.11636•Dec 25, 2019•2 citations

QBism, phenomenology, and contextual quantum realism

Igor Evgenievich Pris

A critique of phenomenological interpretation of quantum Bayesianism (QBism) is offered, in particular, the position of M. Bitbol and L. de La Tremblay, which removes remnants of scientific realism from QBism and adopts a radically phenomenological first person point of view. It is shown that phenomenological view of quantum mechanics cannot explain cognition of quantum reality and behavior of real quantum systems, because the ultimate reality for phenomenology is autonomous phenomena, which, in fact, do not exist. Our proposed contextual quantum realism (CQR) does not invert, as the mentioned authors do, but rejects, the traditional relation between experience and reality. By reinterpreting QBism, our CQR removes remnants of phenomenology from it, but in such a way as not to fall into the other extreme – metaphysical realism.

Siberian Journal of Philosophy•May 12, 2023•1 citation

QBism

Thomas A. Ryckman

Critics have pointed to conflicting currents in QBism's philosophical self-conception insofar as QBist professions of realism sit uneasily with its Ansatz of personal experience. Rather than dropping the former and turning to phenomenology or to William James’ “radical empiricism”, I suggest that – if QBism is to be considered an interpretation of quantum mechanics – reconciliation may be found by following Bohr in drawing out and applying the non-representational consequences of the quantum postulate. While similarities to a position Rorty termed “epistemological behaviorism” are apparent, QBism can avoid Rorty's anti-representational deconstruction of epistemology by adopting, as did Bohr, a moderate empirical realism about the quantum world.

Routledge eBooks•Nov 20, 2023•1 citation

QBism and the Subjective Stance

Steven French

Abstract Phenomenology has also been brought to bear on QM in the context of recent discussions over the approach known as ‘QBism’. This takes the theoretical formalism to be simply a device for predicting an agent’s future experiences, rather than as representing the world. Such a first-person perspective has been widely taken to mesh with the phenomenological stance, as usually understood. However, although advocates of QBism maintain that any slide into solipsism can be resisted, they struggle to accommodate what has been called the ‘kicks from the world’. Here it is argued that in order do so while remaining within a phenomenological framework, the correlationist feature identified by London and Bauer should be incorporated. Interestingly, one of the phenomenologist philosophers who is often cited in this specific context, Merleau-Ponty, took classes with Gurwitsch and drew on London and Bauer’s ‘little book’ in his own analysis of quantum physics.

•Nov 23, 2023•0 citations
A discrepancy between the instrumentalist and realist inclinations of QBism, or between its experiential and interactional concepts of measurement, has been repeatedly noticed. Here, we show that this discrepancy can be resolved by adopting a phenomenological approach throughout. In other terms, the difficulty can be overcome by unambiguously choosing the first-person standpoint as a radical origin of knowledge, and by ascending from the situated lived experience of a knowing and acting subject, to the structure and use of the quantum formalism. To reconstruct some crucial features of the objectivity promised by science, and to accommodate the soundest aspect of the realist intuitions of QBist authors, a phenomenological reinterpretation of what is commonly called “the world” is proposed. This reinterpretation is based on Bruce Bégout's “Eco-Phenomenology”, that replaces the concept of a somehow extrinsic relation between subject and world, with the immersive experience of a subject partaking of the world.
In this programmatic article, our aim is to sketch the outlines of a phenomenological constitution of quantum mechanics, thus drawing the ultimate consequence of previous phenomenological approaches to this theory. In other terms, we wish to show a way to ascend from the situated lived experience of a knowing and acting subject, to the structure and use of the quantum formalism. QBism (Quantum Bayesianism), with its motivated focus on lived experience, and its decision to take the elementary epistemic attitudes of agents as primitives of its axiomatics, will prove a decisive step to progress in this direction.
The interpretation of quantum theory known as QBism argues that many elements of the formalism have a subjective interpretation. At the same time, QBism claims to be a broadly realist programme. This implies that reality in QBism must be somehow founded upon an agent's subjective experiences (measurement outcomes). To make this idea more precise, we propose to interpret QBism's “experiences” as synonymous with the concept of “perceived phenomena” in phenomenology. This suggests an approach to ontology in which objects can only be physically real if they are in principle observable. But what does “observable” mean? Are atoms, electromagnetic fields, quantum states, or probabilities observable? Here we discuss the different answers to this question given by QBists and phenomenologists, and attempt to reconcile them.
QBism is a recently developed version of Quantum Bayesianism. QBists think that the primitive concept of experience is the central subject of science. QBism refuses the idea that the quantum state of a system is an objective description of this system. It is a tool for assigning a subjective probability to the agent's future experience. So quantum mechanics does not directly say something about the "external world". A measurement (in the usual sense) is just a special case of what QBism calls experience and this is any action done by any agent on her external world. The result of the measurement is the experience that the agent gets from her action on her personal world. For Qbists, this way of seeing the measurement helps rejecting any non-local influences. We will examine if these claims are robust and will show that a certain number of issues needs to be clarified in order to get a coherent picture. Depending on the way these necessary clarifications are made, the global image given by Qbism can vary from pure instrumentalism to interpretations making the observer play a radical role.
A critique of phenomenological interpretation of quantum Bayesianism (QBism) is offered, in particular, the position of M. Bitbol and L. de La Tremblay, which removes remnants of scientific realism from QBism and adopts a radically phenomenological first person point of view. It is shown that phenomenological view of quantum mechanics cannot explain cognition of quantum reality and behavior of real quantum systems, because the ultimate reality for phenomenology is autonomous phenomena, which, in fact, do not exist. Our proposed contextual quantum realism (CQR) does not invert, as the mentioned authors do, but rejects, the traditional relation between experience and reality. By reinterpreting QBism, our CQR removes remnants of phenomenology from it, but in such a way as not to fall into the other extreme – metaphysical realism.
Critics have pointed to conflicting currents in QBism's philosophical self-conception insofar as QBist professions of realism sit uneasily with its Ansatz of personal experience. Rather than dropping the former and turning to phenomenology or to William James’ “radical empiricism”, I suggest that – if QBism is to be considered an interpretation of quantum mechanics – reconciliation may be found by following Bohr in drawing out and applying the non-representational consequences of the quantum postulate. While similarities to a position Rorty termed “epistemological behaviorism” are apparent, QBism can avoid Rorty's anti-representational deconstruction of epistemology by adopting, as did Bohr, a moderate empirical realism about the quantum world.
Abstract Phenomenology has also been brought to bear on QM in the context of recent discussions over the approach known as ‘QBism’. This takes the theoretical formalism to be simply a device for predicting an agent’s future experiences, rather than as representing the world. Such a first-person perspective has been widely taken to mesh with the phenomenological stance, as usually understood. However, although advocates of QBism maintain that any slide into solipsism can be resisted, they struggle to accommodate what has been called the ‘kicks from the world’. Here it is argued that in order do so while remaining within a phenomenological framework, the correlationist feature identified by London and Bauer should be incorporated. Interestingly, one of the phenomenologist philosophers who is often cited in this specific context, Merleau-Ponty, took classes with Gurwitsch and drew on London and Bauer’s ‘little book’ in his own analysis of quantum physics.