Jaksland, Rasmus
(2023)
Distinguishing two (unsound) arguments for quantum social science.
European Journal for Philosophy of Science.
ISSN 1879-4912
![[img]](https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/22455/1.hassmallThumbnailVersion/Jaksland%20%282023%29%20-%20Distinguishing%20two%20%28unsound%29%20arguments%20for%20quantum%20social%20science.pdf)  Preview |
|
Text
Jaksland (2023) - Distinguishing two (unsound) arguments for quantum social science.pdf
Download (711kB)
| Preview
|
Abstract
Quantum mechanics supersedes classical mechanics, and social science, some argue, should be responsive to this change. This paper finds that two rather different arguments are currently being used to argue that quantum mechanics is epistemically relevant in social science. One, attributed to Alexander Wendt, appeals to the presence of quantum physical effects in the social world. The other, attributed to Karen Barad, insists on the importance of quantum metaphysics even when quantum effects are negligible. Neither argument, however, is sound. Consequently, the paper concludes that neither of them offers compelling arguments for the view that quantum mechanics has epistemic relevance for social science.
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Altmetric.com
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}