By the way, pertinent more particularly to this list, this issue has an interesting interview with Michael Esfeld, Professor of Philosophy of Science at the University
of Lausanne, who (excerpts follow):
“has combined distinctive themes in metaphysics with a particular
approach to the philosophy of quantum mechanics: A dispositionalist (as opposed to Humean) approach to metaphysics (see e.g., “Humean metaphysics versus a metaphysics of powers”, in G. Ernst and A. H¨uttemann (eds.),
Time, Chance
and Reduction, Cambridge University Press 2010), the Primitive Ontology approach to the interpretation of quantum mechanics
(see e.g., with Dustin Lazarovici, Vincent Lam, and Mario Hubert, “The physics and metaphysics of primitive stuff”, forthcoming in the
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science), and a form of structural realism (see e.g., “How to account for quantum
non-locality: ontic structural realism and the primitive ontology of quantum physics”, forthcoming in
Synthese). I spoke to Michael after this year’s Philosophy of Physics summer school in the Black Forest—the third such
event that he has run with colleagues from Germany and Switzerland. Previous years were on physics and philosophy of time, and on probability in physics. This year’s theme was Ontology, which offered a fascinating mixture of physicists, philosophers of physics,
and metaphysicians.”
…
“GD: You
advocate a dispositionalist theory in metaphysics, a form of structural realism in philosophy of science, and a primitive ontology approach to physics. Could you explain for our readers a little about these, and how they interact?”
…
“Thus, the spatial or spatiotemporal relations individuate the basic physical objects, and the dynamical relations—such as the relations of entanglement
incorporated in the quantum state—tell us how the spatial or spatiotemporal relations evolve. That is why these latter relations are modal: if one is committed to them, they are dispositions or powers, fixing how an initial configuration of basic physical
objects evolves. Hence, in brief, there are basic physical substances such as point particles, but all there is to these substances are the relations in which they stand. There is no need for properties in the sense of intrinsic properties in physics or metaphysics.
Some relations individuate these substances, namely the spatial or spatiotemporal ones, while others, namely the dynamical ones, are dispositions or powers in that they fix how the configuration of spatially related substances evolves.”
…
“That’s why I search for physical consequences that can have
an impact on this issue. I first thought that quantum entanglement is such a physical consequence, but then realized that the argument is fallacious. I now think that the open physical topic of a relativistic quantum dynamics may turn out to be a field where
we can see concrete physical consequences of Humeanism and anti-Humeanism so that we can assess these metaphysical stances in the light of distinct physical consequences that go with each of them.”
…
“GD: Do you have any recommendations for those starting out in the area?
ME: Start with the relevant entries in the
Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, read a companion or introductory book
that presents the state of the art in an accurate way, then go
to the classics, such as Bell’s
Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Be sceptical whenever someone
claims that physics as such shows this or that: there always is
a—debatable—ontological presupposition behind such claims,
and it is our task to assess these presuppositions.”
Also in the issue,
http://xkcd.com/1562/:
The latest issue of The Reasoner is now freely available for download in pdf format at
http://www.thereasoner.org/
Editorial - George Darby
Interview with Michael Esfeld - George Darby
An Epistemically Modest Response to Disagreement, AGM-ified - Lee Elkin
Epistemology Workshop, 11-12 August - Jaakko Hirvelä
Uncertain Reasoning - Hykel Hosni
Evidence-based medicine - Michael Wilde
The Reasoner (www.thereasoner.org) is a monthly digest highlighting exciting
new research on reasoning, inference and method broadly construed.
The Reasoner welcomes submissions:
- Articles (100-1000 words)
- Items of news
- "What's hot" columns
- Letters
- Conference announcements
- Job announcements
- Advertisements
Jon Williamson, Editor
Lorenzo Casini, News Editor
Teddy Groves, Features Editor
Erik van Aken, Production Editor
Editorial board:
Andrew Aberdein, Humanities and Communication, Florida Institute of Technology
Albert Anglberger, Mathematical Philosophy, Munich
Catrin Campbell-Moore, Mathematical Philosophy, Munich
Gustavo Cevolani, Philosophy and Education, Turin
David Corfield, Philosophy, Kent
George Darby, Philosophy, Oxford
Franz Dietrich, CERSES, Paris-Descartes & Economics, East Anglia
Catarina Dutilh Novaes, Philosophy, Groningen
Maria Jose Garcia Encinas, Philosophy, Grenada
Ulrike Hahn, Psychology, Birkbeck
Dawn Holmes, Statistics and Applied Probability, California Santa Barbara
Kevin Korb, Information Technology, Monash
Mary Leng, Philosophy, York
Sabina Leonelli, Sociology & Philosophy, Exeter
Bert Leuridan, Philosophy, Antwerp & Ghent
Caterina Marchionni, Philosophy, Helsinki
Luca Moretti, Philosophy, Aberdeen
Matteo Morganti, Philosophy, Rome 3
Wendy Parker, Philosophy, Durham
Niki Pfeifer, Philosophy, Munich
Lavinia Picollo, Philosophy, Buenos Aires
Gabriella Pigozzi, Computer Science and Decision Making, Paris Dauphine
Amit Pundik, Law, Tel Aviv
Jan-Willem Romeijn, Philosophy, Groningen
Federica Russo, Philosophy, Amsterdam
Georg Schiemer, Mathematical Philosophy, Munich
Jonah Schupbach, Philosophy, Utah
Sonja Smets, Logic, Language and Computation, Amsterdam
Jan Sprenger, Philosophy, Tilburg
Katie Steele, Philosophy, Logic & Scientific Method, LSE
Zach Weber, Philosophy, Otago
|