Looking at Rationalism and Existentialism through the Double-Slit Experiment Lens

This is the second of a series of articles on business policy metaphysics. This series aims to look at Mitroff and Mason’s paper titled Business Policy and Metaphysics: Some Philosophical Considerations in a conversational manner with ChatGPT.

Me: Could you explain the double-slit experiment in modern physics? What does the measurement problem mean in this experiment?

ChatGPT: Certainly! The double-slit experiment is a famous experiment in quantum physics that demonstrates the wave-particle duality of matter and light. It involves shining a beam of particles or photons (such as electrons or photons of light) through a barrier that contains two closely spaced slits. Behind the barrier, there is a screen that captures the pattern formed by the particles or photons that pass through the slits.

When the experiment is conducted without any measurement or observation of the particles' paths, an interference pattern emerges on the screen. This pattern resembles the pattern created by two overlapping waves, indicating that the particles or photons exhibit wave-like behavior and interfere with each other.

However, the measurement problem arises when we try to determine which path the particles or photons take through the slits. If detectors or cameras are placed at each slit to observe the particles' paths, the interference pattern on the screen disappears. Instead, a particle-like pattern is observed, with the particles or photons appearing to pass through one slit or the other and no longer exhibiting interference.

The measurement problem refers to the discrepancy between the behavior observed when the particles' paths are measured and when they are not. It raises questions about the fundamental nature of quantum particles and the role of observation or measurement in influencing their behavior.

One interpretation of the measurement problem is given by the Copenhagen interpretation, which states that the act of measurement causes the wave function of the particles to "collapse" into a specific state. In this interpretation, the particles exist in a superposition of states (such as passing through both slits simultaneously) until an observation or measurement is made, which forces them into a definite state (either passing through one slit or the other).

The measurement problem challenges our understanding of reality at the quantum level, as it suggests that the act of observation or measurement affects the behavior and properties of particles. It raises philosophical and theoretical questions about the nature of reality, the role of consciousness, and the relationship between the observer and the observed in the quantum realm.

It's important to note that there are various interpretations of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, and it remains an active area of research and philosophical inquiry.

Me: Great! The figure below shows this behavior. Now, imagine a rationalist physicist trying to interpret the measurement problem. How could he or she do that?

ChatGPT: A rationalist physicist would approach the interpretation of the measurement problem in the double-slit experiment by emphasizing objective analysis, empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and a focus on established physical laws. Here's how a rationalist physicist might approach the interpretation:

1. Empirical Analysis: The rationalist physicist would examine the empirical evidence and experimental results of the double-slit experiment. They would focus on the observed patterns on the screen and the data collected from various measurements to understand the behavior of particles or photons.

2. Mathematical Formulations: The rationalist physicist would utilize mathematical models and formalism to describe and explain the phenomena observed in the experiment. They would rely on equations, such as the Schr?dinger equation or wave equations, to understand the wave-particle duality and the interference patterns.

3. Causality and Determinism: A rationalist physicist may emphasize the principles of causality and determinism. They would seek to establish causal relationships between the observed behavior of particles and the underlying physical processes. They might investigate how the presence of detectors or measurement apparatus at the slits affects the behavior of particles, considering factors such as interaction, disturbance, and the collapse of the wave function.

4. Existing Theoretical Frameworks: The rationalist physicist would strive to interpret the measurement problem within the existing theoretical frameworks of quantum mechanics. They would explore interpretations such as the Copenhagen interpretation, many-worlds interpretation, or pilot-wave theory, among others. The rationalist physicist would examine these interpretations' compatibility with empirical data and seek to reconcile any apparent inconsistencies.

5. Reproducibility and Peer Review: The rationalist physicist would value the principles of reproducibility and peer review. They would subject their interpretations and theories to scrutiny by the scientific community, inviting experiments and further analysis to validate or refute their proposed explanations for the measurement problem.

6. Scientific Progress and Investigation: A rationalist physicist would acknowledge the ongoing nature of scientific progress and investigation. They would recognize that the measurement problem is an active area of research, and new experiments, theoretical frameworks, or interpretations may emerge over time to provide deeper insights and explanations.

In summary, a rationalist physicist would approach the measurement problem in the double-slit experiment by analyzing empirical data, employing mathematical formulations, considering causality and determinism, exploring existing theoretical frameworks, engaging in peer review, and recognizing the dynamic nature of scientific inquiry. They would seek to interpret the phenomenon within a rational and logical framework, striving to explain the observed behavior of particles while maintaining consistency with established physical laws and experimental evidence.

Me: Would it be possible for the rationalist scientist to believe that physics could not find the answer to the measurement problem ever?

ChatGPT: While it is possible for a rationalist scientist to entertain the idea that physics may not find a definitive answer to the measurement problem in the future, it would be a more cautious and speculative belief. A rationalist scientist generally maintains an optimistic outlook that scientific progress can lead to a better understanding of the natural world, including the fundamental aspects of quantum mechanics.

However, the rationalist scientist would also acknowledge the inherent complexity and challenges associated with the measurement problem. They might consider the possibility that the nature of reality and the relationship between measurement and quantum systems may be inherently elusive or beyond the reach of our current scientific methods and frameworks.

In such a scenario, the rationalist scientist might be open to the idea that alternative or complementary fields of study, such as philosophy, consciousness studies, or even new scientific paradigms, could contribute insights to the understanding of the measurement problem.

It's important to note that the scientific community generally operates under the assumption that natural phenomena can be understood through scientific inquiry. Therefore, while a rationalist scientist might entertain the possibility of limitations, they would typically remain committed to the ongoing pursuit of knowledge and the advancement of scientific understanding, keeping an open mind to future discoveries and potential breakthroughs.

Me: Now imagine that each photon is like an organism. In other words, the photon has living organism characteristics. How could an existentialist social scientist interpret the measurement problem in this case?

ChatGPT: An existentialist social scientist, considering the double-slit experiment with the notion that each photon has living organism characteristics, may approach the interpretation from a perspective that emphasizes subjective experiences, individual agency, and the interconnectedness of phenomena. Here's a possible interpretation:

1. Subjective Perception: The existentialist social scientist might focus on the subjective experiences of the photon as a living organism. They may argue that the act of measurement or observation introduces a subjective perspective and influences the behavior of the photon. From this viewpoint, the photon's response to the measurement is not solely determined by external factors but is influenced by its own subjective perception of the situation.

2. Freedom and Agency: An existentialist perspective emphasizes individual agency and freedom of choice. The existentialist social scientist may argue that the photon, as a living organism, has the freedom to respond differently in the presence of measurement. They may posit that the photon exercises its agency by behaving in a particle-like manner when it feels observed, reflecting a choice to manifest its existence in a particular way.

3. Interconnectedness and Relationality: Existentialism often emphasizes the interconnectedness and relational nature of existence. The existentialist social scientist may view the measurement problem as a reflection of the complex relationships between the observer, the measuring apparatus, and the photon. They may highlight the dynamic and interactive nature of these relationships, suggesting that the photon's response is influenced by the context and relationships it finds itself in.

4. Embracing Uncertainty and Ambiguity: Existentialism recognizes the inherent uncertainty and ambiguity of human existence. The existentialist social scientist may argue that the measurement problem embodies this existential uncertainty. They might contend that attempting to pinpoint the photon's behavior with certainty overlooks the inherent indeterminacy and ambiguity of the photon's existence as a living organism.

In summary, an existentialist social scientist interpreting the measurement problem in the double-slit experiment with the concept of photons as living organisms may focus on the subjective experiences of the photon, emphasize individual agency and freedom of choice, highlight interconnectedness and relationality, and embrace the inherent uncertainty and ambiguity of existence. They would approach the problem through a lens that recognizes the complex and multifaceted nature of the photon's being.

Me: Does the existentialist social scientist have the possibility of believing that the answer to the measurement problem with the notion that each photon has characteristics of living organisms will never be found?

ChatGPT: From an existentialist perspective, the belief that the answer to the measurement problem, particularly with the notion that each photon has characteristics of living organisms, will never be found is a possibility. Existentialism is a philosophical approach that emphasizes individual existence, subjective experience, and the inherent uncertainties and mysteries of human existence.

An existentialist social scientist may view the measurement problem as a complex issue that extends beyond the boundaries of traditional scientific inquiry. They might consider the subjective nature of human perception and consciousness, questioning whether the measurement problem can be fully resolved within the framework of objective scientific methods.

The existentialist social scientist may also embrace the idea that there are inherent limits to human knowledge and that certain aspects of reality may forever remain beyond our complete understanding. They might view the measurement problem as an example of the fundamental mysteries and uncertainties that exist in the fabric of existence.

Rather than seeking definitive answers, the existentialist social scientist might focus on exploring the meaning and implications of the measurement problem within the context of human existence. They might engage in philosophical contemplation, artistic expression, or subjective reflection to grapple with the profound questions raised by the measurement problem and its potential connections to the nature of consciousness, perception, and reality.

In summary, the existentialist social scientist may accept the possibility that the answer to the measurement problem, particularly with the lens of each photon having characteristics of living organisms, may never be fully resolved within traditional scientific frameworks. They might embrace the inherent mysteries and uncertainties of existence and focus on exploring the existential implications and subjective meaning associated with the measurement problem.

Me: How do you compare rationalism and existentialism?

ChatGPT: Rationalism and existentialism are two distinct philosophical approaches that differ in their perspectives on knowledge, truth, human existence, and the nature of reality. Here's a comparison of the key features of rationalism and existentialism:

1. Epistemology (Theory of Knowledge):

??- Rationalism: Rationalism emphasizes the role of reason and rational thought in acquiring knowledge. It holds that knowledge is primarily derived from innate ideas, logical deductions, and the application of reason to the world.

??- Existentialism: Existentialism emphasizes subjective experience and individual interpretation. It posits that knowledge is primarily gained through personal existence, subjective reflection, and direct engagement with the world.

2. Nature of Reality:

??- Rationalism: Rationalism often assumes an objective and ordered reality that can be understood through logical analysis and scientific inquiry. It seeks to uncover universal truths and underlying principles governing the world.

??- Existentialism: Existentialism is concerned with the subjective experience of individuals and the complexities of human existence. It focuses on the unique, personal, and often existential aspects of reality, highlighting the uncertainties, ambiguities, and freedom inherent in human existence.

3. Human Agency and Responsibility:

??- Rationalism: Rationalism often emphasizes reason and rational decision-making as the basis for human agency and responsibility. It places importance on ethical principles, logical consistency, and the pursuit of universal values.

??- Existentialism: Existentialism places a strong emphasis on individual freedom, personal choice, and responsibility. It highlights the individual's role in creating meaning, making authentic choices, and taking responsibility for their actions and existence.

4. Meaning and Purpose:

??- Rationalism: Rationalism tends to seek objective meaning and purpose in the world. It often looks for universal truths, logical coherence, and the discovery of underlying principles that provide a sense of purpose.

??- Existentialism: Existentialism suggests that meaning and purpose are subjective and must be created by individuals through their own choices and actions. It emphasizes the importance of personal meaning, authenticity, and the pursuit of one's unique path in life.

5. Optimism vs. Existential Angst:

??- Rationalism: Rationalism can be optimistic about the power of reason and scientific inquiry to uncover truths and solve problems. It often seeks to understand and improve the world through systematic analysis and logical reasoning.

??- Existentialism: Existentialism acknowledges the existential angst and inherent uncertainties of human existence. It recognizes the limits of human knowledge and the potential for meaninglessness, but also emphasizes the possibilities of personal freedom, self-creation, and authentic existence.

While rationalism and existentialism differ in their approaches and emphases, it's important to note that these philosophical perspectives are not mutually exclusive. One can adopt elements of both, and various philosophers have incorporated aspects of rationalism and existentialism into their own philosophies.

Me: Great! In the next article, we will look at idealism and empiricism. Subsequently, we will investigate the Lockean, Leibnitzian, Kantian, Hegelian, and Singerinan inquiry systems as philosophical exemplars for some practical policy approaches. The aim is to highlight these systems' assumptions in decision making.