排序方式: 共有60条查询结果,搜索用时 62 毫秒
1.
Standard quantum mechanics unquestionably violates the separability principle that classical physics (be it point-like analytic,
statistical, or field-theoretic) accustomed us to consider as valid. In this paper, quantum nonseparability is viewed as a
consequence of the Hilbert-space quantum mechanical formalism, avoiding thus any direct recourse to the ramifications of Kochen-Specker’s
argument or Bell’s inequality. Depending on the mode of assignment of states to physical systems – unit state vectors versus
non-idempotent density operators – we distinguish between strong/relational and weak/deconstructional forms of quantum nonseparability.
The origin of the latter is traced down and discussed at length, whereas its relation to the all important concept of potentiality
in forming a coherent picture of the puzzling entangled interconnections among spatially separated systems is also considered.
Finally, certain philosophical consequences of quantum non-separability concerning the nature of quantum objects, the question
of realism in quantum mechanics, and possible limitations in revealing the actual character of physical reality in its entirety
are explored. 相似文献
2.
Michael Esfeld 《Journal for General Philosophy of Science》1999,30(1):17-36
The aim of this paper is to contribute to a more balanced judgement than the widespread impression that the changes which
are called for in today's philosophy of physics and which centre around the concept of holism amount to a rupture with the
framework of Cartesian philosophy of physics. I argue that this framework includes a sort of holism: As a result of the identification
of matter with space, any physical property can be instantiated only if there is the whole of matter. Relating this holism
to general relativity, I maintain that this holism cannot be directly applied to today's philosophy of physics consequent
upon the failure of geometrodynamics. I show in what respect precisely the holism in quantum physics amounts to a revision
of the holism within Cartesianism.
This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date. 相似文献
3.
Jay Ogilvy 《World Futures: Journal of General Evolution》2014,70(1):52-87
This article is divided into three parts. The first part describes the paradox of positive scenarios: they are much harder to write than negative scenarios. The second part describes the logic of emergent systems whose properties are neither reducible to nor predictable from the properties of their component parts. The third part shows how the concept of emergence can be used to lend plausibility to those optimistic scenarios that might otherwise be rejected as mere wishful thinking. 相似文献
4.
5.
Margaret Gilbert 《The Journal of Ethics》2002,6(2):115-143
Can collectives feel guilt with respect to what they have done? It hasbeen claimed that they cannot. Yet in everyday discourse collectives areoften held to feel guilt, criticized because they do not, and so on.Among other things, this paper considers what such so-called collectiveguilt feelings amount to. If collective guilt feelings are sometimesappropriate, it must be the case that collectives can indeed beguilty. The paper begins with an account of what it is for a collectiveto intend to do something and to act in light of that intention.According to this account, and in senses that are explained, there is acollective that intends to do something if and only if the members of agiven population are jointly committed to intend as a body to do thatthing. A related account of collective belief is also presented. It isthen argued that, depending on the circumstances, a group's action canbe free as opposed to coerced, and that the idea that a collective assuch can be guilty of performing a wrongful act makes sense. The ideathat a group might feel guilt may be rejected because it is assumed thatto feel guilt is to experience a ``pang'' or ``twinge'' of guilt –nothing more and nothing less. Presumably, though, there must becognitions and perhaps behavior involved. In addition, the primacy, eventhe necessity, of ``feeling-sensations'' to feeling guilt in theindividual case has been questioned. Without the presumption that it isalready clear what feeling guilt amounts to, three proposals as to thenature of collective guilt feelings are considered. A ``feeling ofpersonal guilt'' is defined as a feeling of guilt over one's own action.It is argued that it is implausible to construe collective guiltfeelings in terms of members' feelings of personal guilt. ``Membershipguilt feelings'' involve a group member's feeling of guilt over what hisor her group has done. It is argued that such feelings are intelligibleif the member is party to the joint commitment that lies at the base ofthe relevant collective intention and action. However, an account ofcollective guilt in terms of membership guilt feelings is found wanting.Finally, a ``plural subject'' account of collective guilt feelings isarticulated, such that they involve a joint commitment to feel guilt asa body. The parties to a joint commitment of the kind in question may asa result find themselves experiencing ``pangs'' of the kind associatedwith personal and membership guilt feelings. Since these pangs, byhypothesis, arise as a result of the joint commitment to feel guilt as abody, they might be thought of as providing a kind of phenomenology forcollective guilt. Be that as it may, it is argued the plural subjectaccount has much to be said for it. 相似文献
6.
在西方环境伦理学中,生态中心论具有强烈的整体主义诉求。认为,人类只是自然整体中的一个成员和后来者;生态系统的价值具有内在性和优先性;人类对自然生态系统负有直接的、终极的道德责任和义务。这些观点受到一些学者的质疑。系统整体论理念和复杂性研究对生态系统与人类的关系,系统的目的性,整体的价值等问题提供了一定的支持和启示。 相似文献
7.
8.
ABSTRACTThis article looks at four different scholarly perspectives on ‘sacred’ – the ineffable sacred, the experienced sacred, the polarized sacred and the contextualized sacred – in order to draw out their implicit presuppositions about meaning. The first two stances presuppose that meaning depends on what bits of language are about (referentialism), and the other two stances presuppose that meaning depends on relations between bits of language (holism). The article concludes three things: these prominent views of ‘sacred’ rest on usually implicit or unrecognized assumptions about the nature of meaning; some of those assumptions explain why certain theories are contentious and problematic and others ground more promising and productive approaches. 相似文献
9.
Thomas Bartelborth 《Journal for General Philosophy of Science》2004,35(1):13-40
What Do the Data Tell Us? Justification of scientific theories is a three-place relation between data, theories, and background knowledge. Though this should be a commonplace, many methodologies in science neglect it. The article will elucidate the significance and function of our background knowledge in epistemic justification and their consequences for different scientific methodologies. It is argued that there is no simple and at the same time acceptable statistical algorithm that justifies a given theory merely on the basis of certain data. And even if we think to know the probability of a theory, that does not decide whether we should accept it or not. 相似文献
10.
Cord Friebe 《Journal for General Philosophy of Science》2004,35(2):261-281
Dividing, Separating and Unifying. EPR Without Holism. In the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics parts of composed systems are correlated in a non-causal way, they are
ontologically dependent on each other. In this paper I try to defend traditional realism giving a non-holistic interpretation
of the EPR-paradox. An analysis of events in the macroscopic world shows that dividing and unifying objects is quite dif-ferent
from changing (modifying) objects. In application to quantum mechanics I argue that a measurement at a given single-system
changes (modifies) this object, but the EPR-measurement divides the given object. Therefore this given object is an undivided
and dividable One and not a composed system. If parts are produced (by EPR-measurement) correlations do not occur.
Teilen, Trennen und Vereinen: EPR ohne Holismus相似文献