Niels Bohr was one of the central figures in the emergence of quantum mechanics and a paradigmatic example of a scientist who engaged reflectively with his own practice. For several decades, he was also a leading voice in the philosophical interpretation of the theory. Yet toward the end of the twentieth century his influence declined sharply, and his views came to be widely dismissed as obscure or irrelevant. To evaluate Bohr's contributions, we need to resist the analytic philosopher's urge to separate ontology from action---to treat questions about what there is as detachable from the concrete practices through which physical descriptions are articulated and assessed. That ontology-first stance fits uneasily with Bohr's philosophical sensibility, shaped by a Danish tradition that emphasized reflection on meaning, practice, and responsibility rather than the construction of autonomous metaphysical systems. Seen from this perspective, Bohr's philosophical project comes into focus: his central concern was not the limits of knowledge, but with how our concepts can be extended unambiguously into new domains.
Niels Bohr was one of the central figures in the emergence of quantum mechanics and a paradigmatic example of a scientist who engaged reflectively with his own practice. For several decades, he was also a leading voice in the philosophical interpretation of the theory. Yet toward the end of the twentieth century his influence declined sharply, and his views came to be widely dismissed as obscure or irrelevant. To evaluate Bohr's contributions, we need to resist the analytic philosopher's urge to separate ontology from action---to treat questions about what there is as detachable from the concrete practices through which physical descriptions are articulated and assessed. That ontology-first stance fits uneasily with Bohr's philosophical sensibility, shaped by a Danish tradition that emphasized reflection on meaning, practice, and responsibility rather than the construction of autonomous metaphysical systems. Seen from this perspective, Bohr's philosophical project comes into focus: his central concern was not the limits of knowledge, but with how our concepts can be extended unambiguously into new domains.
Niels Bohr and 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 the power to shed light on a variety of issues that have arisen only since his lifetime, as well as decoherence theory and other non-collapse interpretations. Balancing historical themes with contemporary discussions, Niels Bohr and the Philosophy of Physics establishes Bohr's on-going contribution to the philosophy of physics and examines his place in the history of philosophy.
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
Niels Bohr's philosophical view of quantum mechanics has been the subject of extensive scholarship for the better part of five decades. Yet Bohr’s writings have remained obscure, as evidenced by the variety of different scholarly interpretations of his work. In this chapter, I review the historiography of Bohr scholarship, arguing that his meaning has remained elusive because his central preoccupations lay not so much with an interpretation of the quantum-mechanical formalism, which many commentators see as the problem of quantum theory, but rather with the epistemological question of how we can acquire empirical knowledge of quantum objects by means of experiment. Bohr’s doctrine of classical concepts, I argue, is therefore best understood as a philosophy of experiment.
Niels Bohr, the founding father of modern atomic physics and quantum theory, was as original a philosopher as he was a physicist. This study explores several dimensions of Bohr's vision: the formulation of quantum theory and the problems associated with its interpretation, the notions of complementarity and correspondence, the debates with Einstein about objectivity and realism, and his sense of the infinite harmony of nature. The author's chief attention is given to Bohr's epistemological lesson, the conviction that all our description of nature is dependent on the words we use and the ways we can unambiguously use them. Against those who would view Bohr as a vague positivist, the author argues here that Bohr is best understood as using transcendental arguments and shaping a kind of descriptive metaphysics in his defence of our abilities to offer a description of the world we live in.
The article discusses a new understanding of the reality in the 20th century. Since the key figure in these changes was the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, we refer to his early and later articles to analyze the use of the term “reality”. Through an analysis of the terms, it is shown that Bohr describes discoveries in earlier articles that are inconsistent with old concepts in physics, and it is these questions that will further lead him to a new understanding of reality. In the article we also indicate how many times and in what contexts the term “reality” is used. Further, we find that the term “reality” is more common in later articles than in his earlier works (Copenhagen’s interpretation of quantum theory had not yet been formulated at the time of writing the early works). Through the analyzing of usage of certain terms, we show how the emphasis in the early and late Bohr’s articles shifts. For many years, the Danish physicist has sought to clarify quantum theory. In some later articles, we note that the problems affect not only physical, but also other areas of knowledge. We also analyze the use of the term in later articles. This analysis shows how Niels Bohr’s discoveries in the nature of the objects of the micro-world lead him to questions about the nature of reality. How discoveries in the microcosm affect the new conception of reality is best traced in controversy with other physicists. As the most striking example, we took the article “Discussion with Einstein on epistemological problems in atomic physics”. In this article, Bohr describes the specific behavior of micro-objects, features of physical experiments and proves the idea that a fundamentally new (including ontological plan) understanding of physical processes is needed. An analysis of the terms shows that, from Bohr’s point of view, reality itself is as described by its quantum mechanics. We strive to show the evolution of Bohr’s views in the context of how they influenced the revision of all physics. We conclude that the discovery of stationary states in an atom is the first step to rethinking philosophical questions of a nature of reality.
Niels Bohr was born on October 7, 1885. He was one of the great innovators in physical science in the twentieth century. It so happens that 1985 also marks fifty years since the long discussions, which had begun in the 1920s between Albert Einstein and Bohr on the philosophical problems of quantum physics, attained their apogee. An article co-authored by Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, "Can Quantum Mechanics Be Considered a Complete Description of Physical Reality?,"1 was published in 1935 in the journal Physical Review. According to Bohr, "by virtue of its clarity and, it would seem, flawless argumentation, the work of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen has created excitement among physicists and played a great role in the discussion of general philosophical questions of physics."2 Precisely as a result of the publication of this article, the critical position of Einstein concerning quantum mechanics became known to a broader circle of physicists. (Prior to this not many physicists had participated in the discussions.)3 In the same year, Bohr responded to Einstein and his co-authors with an article under the same title.4