Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
Poverty - Homeless  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
worldwide creative inspiration
Ovi Language
George Kalatzis - A Family Story 1924-1967
Stop violence against women
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
The Principle of Complementarity in Bohr's Quantum Mechanics and Vico's Historicism The Principle of Complementarity in Bohr's Quantum Mechanics and Vico's Historicism
by Dr. Emanuel Paparella
2008-02-18 09:33:03
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

“The concrete without the universal becomes trivial. The universal without the concrete becomes irrelevant” - Alfred N. Whitehead

Vico was acutely aware that to treat real concrete moments of Man’s history as mere moments of something higher is not to take them very seriously. Indeed, this was Hegel flaw: by absorbing the concrete historical situation into a higher theoretical scheme he in effect distorted the reality of their contingency.

Beginning with Kierkegaard, the existentialists also pointed out that by viewing contingent situations as “moments” of something else is to have them cease being themselves. This is also the flaw of scientists who consider the mytho-poetic mentality of primitive man as a mere “moment” of a superior reflexive-rational-scientific mentality. In so doing they lose sight of mytho-poetic mentality itself. Vico’s insight is that there is more than one pole to an historical event. One can claim that there is a providential pole, a higher scheme, a telos, and yet insist that the nearest I can come to understanding this providential reality is by careful attention to the concrete circumstances of the past or present. Which is to say that in Vico’s thought the particular and the universal are also complementary.

Vico’s problematic consisted in reconciling the concrete events of history with the universal and providential when the universal happens to be a concatenation of concrete instances exhibiting a providential design. He clearly saw the Hegelian pitfall: to know things one must see them in relation, but if I stress the relation more than the thing itself I will end up trivializing it and losing sight of its uniqueness. He perceived that to undermine either pole of reality (i.e., pole n. 1: the unique concrete particular event; pole n. 2: the relationships of such an event) is to repeat what he termed “the conceit of scholars” and thereby lose contact with reality. Vico had great respect for both poles and was unwilling to abandon either. He refused to reduce the phenomena to a mere rational theoretical scheme as Descartes had done. He insists that both complementary poles are made manifest in concreto.

What is astonishing nowadays is that science itself has discovered that reality operates on two complementary poles. I am referring to the findings of quantum mechanics as they apply to the nature of light. In his book Change and Providence William Pollard points out that quantum mechanics has introduced into physics not merely a different description of the structure of the external world but also a radical modification in the relationship between the real world and our knowledge of the world. This modification patterns the modifications proposed by Vico’s historicism making man both creature and creator of history.

In Vico’s time, however, a rampant rationalistic-dualistic Cartesian approach did not permit such a reorientation as described by Pollard. We know today that quantum mechanics rests on Heisenberg’s intermediary principle of complementarity from which derives in turn Bohr’s principle. The latter applies to an essential characteristic of the way physical systems are described in quantum mechanics which prior to its discovery could only be regarded as paradoxical. A case in point is the behavior of light and electrons. The more precise the information about such behavior became the more paradoxical became the problem of its assimilation into a coherent picture of the atomic world. Bohr’s principle of complementarity asserts that light and electrons will have wave and particle properties as complementary aspects of a single reality. This paradox which seems to be inherent in the very structure of matter cannot be resolved by further scientific work but must be looked upon as reflecting an essential characteristic of reality, associated with the uncertainty principle, as a result of which physical systems present themselves to our observation in complementary aspects.

Let us now transpose this scientific discovery of the principle of complementarity to historical reality. Indeed Niels Bohr himself thought that the problem of complementarity went beyond the situation in atomic physics and was a fundamental characteristic of the human mind in search of comprehension. One of his favorite maxims was that there are two types of truths: trivial truths whose opposites are plainly absurd, and profound truths which can be recognized by the fact that the opposite is also a profound truth. It was part of the human condition to seek to embrace profound truths, such as the opposing demands of justice and love.

Bohr’s suggestion is obvious: the apprehension of reality is possible only in complementary terms. That this is still not fully accepted is due to the pervasive influence of the classical Newtonian mechanics as a model for ultimate achievement in scientific explanations. Nevertheless it is beginning to be recognized in both psychology and biology that Man’s body is as much a product of his mind, as his mind is a product of his body thus making moot the dualistic Cartesian question of whether or not Man is mind or body.

The Vichian paradigm apprehends reality in terms of both/and. For Vico Man is both a creature and a creator of history. From a formal rational standpoint this appears as a logical paradox, yet both opposites are profound complementary truths which can be distinguished but not separated. The solution to such a paradox lies in a reorientation of our thinking about the relationship between human knowledge and understanding, that is to say, the way the human mind operates in search of comprehension, on one hand, and the reality which we seek to know on the other. Having made this reorientation we will understand how in a Vichian sense it is possible that in the very nature of things the reality light can present itself to our apprehension as both wave and particle; or for that matter, how the reality Man can be both mind and body, both creature and creator of history.


   
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(7)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

AP2008-02-18 12:48:11
Thanks for the nice article.


Emanuel Paparella2008-02-18 14:53:49
Glad you enjoyed it. I have advised my students of Problems of Philosophy at Barry University to read it for tomorrow's class discussion on philosophical paradoxes. Undoubtedly the logical positivists among them, of which there is always a few, will insist that, as per Aristotelian logic, a thing cannot be and not be at the same time; but then they'll have to explain Bohr's principle of complementarity in quantum mechanics as well as Santayana's uses of "is." It should be an interesting and lively discussion. The most important rule of debate clearly displayed with a sign hung in the classroom is this: you are encouraged to disagree but you need to prove your assertions not just assert them and you need to do so without becoming disagreable to each other. So far it has worked very well. I think the comments' policy of Ovi says something similar and it is good that readers be reminded of that from time to time. Ivan Illich called it onviviality: it colors everyday life. Have a nice day.


Emanuel Paparella2008-02-18 14:56:18
Typo above: the first word on the last line is "conviviality."


Sand2008-02-22 17:10:59
Ah well. it seems counting is a problem too.


Emanuel Paparella2008-02-24 23:51:58
It appears that an exchange of views and ideas is the furthest thing from your mind. Try enlarging the font of two degrees and conviviality will appear as the first word on the last line. After trying it you ought in fairness to yourself entertain a more balanced view of where the real ineptitude and stupidity foaming at the mouth may lie.


Sand2008-02-26 19:11:36
Before we can ascend to the cloudy heights of philosophy we should be grounded in spelling and basic arithmetic.Your lack of gratitude in being properly instructed is ungracious. One must walk before one runs. Evidently you have difficulty crawling. And it seems even Ivan Illich had problems with spelling.


Emanuel Paparella2008-02-29 06:20:02
Every two bit bully expects to be properly thanked for the gracious instruction he imparts to his enablers. Once in a while they meet those ingrates who refuse the "graciousness," and point out that to defend and attack issues about which one knows precious little is to make a fool of oneself. That of course will be considered an affront by those who have become accustomed to win by intimidation and intellectual trickery. Pity.


© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi