A number of modern scientists adheres to the point of view that, despite the fact that quantum mechanics does not allow to explain the existence of mental phenomena in the physical world, with the help of its inherent ontological principles and mathematical formalism, it is possible to understand the functioning of consciousness and the unconscious. Based on the analogy between quantum and mental processes, the unconscious can be represented as a superposition of mental states, and consciousness — in the form of decoherence of unconscious experiences. From an evolutionary point of view, consciousness can be considered as a consequence of the accumulation of a sufficient amount of information during the interaction of the organism with the surrounding environment, when the transition from the quantum state of the unconscious to the classical state of consciousness is carried out at the psychic level of being, by analogy with the accumulation of a sufficient amount of information by a quantum system during interaction with the environment, when at the physical level of being the collapse of the wave function. In psychotherapy and psychodiagnostics, one can see an analogy with the measurement process in quantum mechanics and a quantum leap from one mental state to another. However, the analysis of this point of view carried out in the article shows that the parallels between quantum mechanics and psychology today look insufficiently substantiated, since the mathematical model of the psyche, which allows describing human behavior on the basis of the laws of quantum mechanics, has not yet been built, which is why, firstly, the use of quantum-physical terminology in the understanding of mental experience does not rise to the level of scientific theory, remaining a metaphor, and, secondly, quantum psychology has a predictive potential, in contrast to the psychology of the classical type.
A number of modern scientists adheres to the point of view that, despite the fact that quantum mechanics does not allow to explain the existence of mental phenomena in the physical world, with the help of its inherent ontological principles and mathematical formalism, it is possible to understand the functioning of consciousness and the unconscious. Based on the analogy between quantum and mental processes, the unconscious can be represented as a superposition of mental states, and consciousness — in the form of decoherence of unconscious experiences. From an evolutionary point of view, consciousness can be considered as a consequence of the accumulation of a sufficient amount of information during the interaction of the organism with the surrounding environment, when the transition from the quantum state of the unconscious to the classical state of consciousness is carried out at the psychic level of being, by analogy with the accumulation of a sufficient amount of information by a quantum system during interaction with the environment, when at the physical level of being the collapse of the wave function. In psychotherapy and psychodiagnostics, one can see an analogy with the measurement process in quantum mechanics and a quantum leap from one mental state to another. However, the analysis of this point of view carried out in the article shows that the parallels between quantum mechanics and psychology today look insufficiently substantiated, since the mathematical model of the psyche, which allows describing human behavior on the basis of the laws of quantum mechanics, has not yet been built, which is why, firstly, the use of quantum-physical terminology in the understanding of mental experience does not rise to the level of scientific theory, remaining a metaphor, and, secondly, quantum psychology has a predictive potential, in contrast to the psychology of the classical type.
The article analyzes the effectiveness of quantum theories of mental experience in relation to two ontological problems - the problem of the existence of consciousness in the material world and the problem of the interaction of consciousness and body. A critical analysis of the quantum theories of consciousness by Penrose-Hameroff, M. Tegmark, G. Stapp, M. Fischer and M.B. Mensky shows that they fail to fully explain how complex physical systems generate mental experience without violating the principle of causal closure of the physical world and the principle of epistemological completeness of physics. Quantum mechanics provides specific processes that are the physical basis of the psyche, but do not explain the phenomenal aspect of subjective reality. Nevertheless, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle gives an understanding of how the interaction of consciousness and body within the scientific picture of the world can be carried out without violating the law of energy conservation. It is shown that the quantum theories of consciousness currently being developed have a predominantly panprotopsychic character, which faces a problem due to the fact that the protomental property of physical systems must be expressed quantitatively and correspond to the value included in the physical equations. As a result, it is concluded that in order to develop quantum theories of consciousness more effectively, it is necessary to give an emergent character, not jumping from the quantum level to the psychic, but explaining the mechanism of the emergence of systemic properties during the sequential transition between different ontological regions of existence, including physical, chemical, biological, neurophysiological and psychic.
In this paper we apply the last developments of the theory of measurement in quantum mechanics to the phenomenon of consciousness and especially to the awareness of unconscious components. Various models of measurement in quantum mechanics can be distinguished by the fact that there is, or there is not, a collapse of the wave function. The passive aspect of consciousness seems to agree better with models in which there is no collapse of the wave function, whereas in the active aspect of consciousness—i.e., that which goes together with an act or a choice—there seems to be a collapse of the wave function. As an example of the second possibility we study in detail the photon delayed-choice experiment and its consequences for subjective or psychological time. We apply this as an attempt to explain synchronicity phenomena. As a model of application of the awareness of unconscious components we study the mourning process. We apply also the quantum paradigm to the phenomenon of correlation at a distance between minds, as well as to group correlations that appear during group therapies or group training. Quantum entanglement leads to the formation of group unconscious or collective unconscious. Finally we propose to test the existence of such correlations during sessions of group training.
Quantum psychology points out that consciousness is observational,local and real,and it is similar to particle of quantum.But unconsciousness is unobservational,unlocal,and potential,it is similar to wave of quantum.In the respect of relationship between mind and body or material,quantum psychology attempts to distinguish the first-person I and the third-person He,but not the state of mind and body.In the respect of interaction of consciousness and brain or body,quantum psychology supposes that mental events and quantum events are equal,and both of them obey mathematical orders.In the respect of the effect and function of consciousness,quantum psychology regards consciousness as the agent of observation and asserts that the reality is a potential possibility,it becomes actuality by the projection of consciousness.The effect of consciousness is to make the potential possibility to appear only.Quantum psychology reestablishes the legal position of consciousness in the field of psychology by means of natural science,The theories of psychology are not the description of pure objective mental phenomena and behaviors,instead they are the action of knowledge seekers and knowledge acquirers and the description of the knowledge we get form it.
The article presents a review of foreign scientific literature on the quantum-like approach to understanding the modeling of cognition and decision-making processes. It is shown that the current application of quantum physics approaches to consciousness, psychological approaches such as perception, cognition, emotions, consciousness and learning, involves the search for a single objective mathematical model of what underlies the experience of the brain. The use of quantum physics algorithms can help in understanding the mechanisms of brain malfunctions and memory impairments that are found in pathologies such as dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, etc. Quantum physics approaches are applicable to issues of modeling cognition and decision-making processes, as well as in cognitive research, information processing by the human brain, artificial intelligence development, psychology, social and political sciences. Application of the abstract mathematical principles of quantum theory can help in understanding human consciousness and behavior. Quantum probability theory is applied to modeling human behavior due to the prevalence of uncertainty in human interaction with the world. Quantum cognitive models are especially useful in research in such areas as errors in decision making, order effects of questions, conceptual combinations, accumulation of evidence, perception, etc. Of particular interest to researchers are issues of quantum-like modeling of cognition and decision-making processes, the apparatus of quantum information and probability theory, useful for such modeling, as well as the use of such apparatus in cognitive research, the development of artificial intelligence, psychology, social and political sciences.
This article considers a partly philosophical question: What are the ontological and epistemological reasons for using quantum-like models or theories (models and theories based on the mathematical formalism of quantum theory) vs. classical-like ones (based on the mathematics of classical physics), in considering human thinking and decision making? This question is only partly philosophical because it also concerns the scientific understanding of the phenomena considered by the theories that use mathematical models of either type, just as in physics itself, where this question also arises as a physical question. This is because this question is in effect: What are the physical reasons for using, even if not requiring, these types of theories in considering quantum phenomena, which these theories predict fully in accord with the experiment? This is clearly also a physical, rather than only philosophical, question and so is, accordingly, the question of whether one needs classical-like or quantum-like theories or both (just as in physics we use both classical and quantum theories) in considering human thinking in psychology and related fields, such as decision science. It comes as no surprise that many of these reasons are parallel to those that are responsible for the use of QM and QFT in the case of quantum phenomena. Still, the corresponding situations should be understood and justified in terms of the phenomena considered, phenomena defined by human thinking, because there are important differences between these phenomena and quantum phenomena, which this article aims to address. In order to do so, this article will first consider quantum phenomena and quantum theory, before turning to human thinking and decision making, in addressing which it will also discuss two recent quantum-like approaches to human thinking, that by M. G. D'Ariano and F. Faggin and that by A. Khrennikov. Both approaches are ontological in the sense of offering representations, different in character in each approach, of human thinking by the formalism of quantum theory. Whether such a representation, as opposed to only predicting the outcomes of relevant experiments, is possible either in quantum theory or in quantum-like theories of human thinking is one of the questions addressed in this article. The philosophical position adopted in it is that it may not be possible to make this assumption, which, however, is not the same as saying that it is impossible. I designate this view as the reality-without-realism, RWR, view and in considering strictly mental processes as the ideality-without-idealism, IWI, view, in the second case in part following, but also moving beyond, I. Kant's philosophy.
A number of researchers today make an appeal to quantum physics when trying to develop a satisfactory account of the mind, an appeal still felt to be controversial by many. Often these "quantum approaches" try to explain some well-known features of conscious experience (or mental processes more generally), thus using quantum physics to enrich the explanatory framework or explanans used in consciousness studies and cognitive science. This paper considers the less studied question of whether quantum physical intuitions could help us to draw attention to new or neglected aspects of the mind in introspection, and in this way change our view about what needs explanation in the first place. Although prima facie implausible, it is suggested that this could happen, for example, if there were analogies between quantum processes and mental processes (e.g., the process of thinking). The naive idea is that such analogies would help us to see mental processes and conscious experience in a new way. It has indeed been proposed long ago that such analogies exist, and this paper first focuses at some length on David Bohm's formulation of them from 1951. It then briefly considers these analogies in relation to Smolensky's more recent analogies between cognitive science and physics, and Pylkk ö's aconceptual view of the mind. Finally, Bohm's early analogies will be briefly considered in relation to the analogies between quantum processes and the mind he proposed in his later work.