2025/07/01 by Dave Elder‐Vass · 1 voice
Physics and Astronomy · Arts and Humanities · #Quantum Mechanics and Applications #Philosophy and History of Science #Origins and Evolution of Life
paper · pdf · doi:10.1007/s11229-025-05119-y
Abstract Ontological universalism is widespread, but this paper argues that the validity of many ontological claims is bounded, and thus that segmented (though not frag mented) ontologies may represent the world more accurately. To be more specific, it criticizes the work of Karen Barad, and of James Ladyman and Don Ross. Both draw ontological conclusions from interpretations of quantum mechanics and then attempt to universalize the reach of those conclusions. By contrast, the paper adapts a loosely Bhaskarian critical realism to develop a segmented ontology. This identifies two boundaries between three related but also substantially different ontological segments. At the boundary between the quantum and material segments, quantum particles can become entangled with larger systems in ways that provide determinate relative locations for material objects. This enables the emergence of causal powers that depend on determinate spatial relations between the parts of material objects. At the boundary between the material and social segments, mental properties provide the possibility of human agents forming intentional relations and thus enable the emergence of social causal powers. Regardless of the merits of this particular ontological scheme, I argue that segmented ontologies are likely to fit better with the causal structure of our universe.