Causality, Hume, and Quantum Mechanics

1607 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Hume's theory of causation

Causality, Hume, and Quantum Mechanics

It is my intention, in the course of this essay, to take the work of David Hume and reapply it to causality using quantum mechanical theory.

When I refer to causality, I am referring to the belief that events have a relationship of action "A" causing action "B" where "A" is considered to be the final cause of "B." I also refer to the belief that we can know and understand these causal relationships and thusly know how the system works.

This is a concept that I do not agree with. This "mechanistic causality," I feel, is a category of the mind.

I wish to make it clear, before I begin, that I am not questioning the idea that cause/effect interactions do occur in reality. I am, however, questioning that the human mind is capable of perceiving these relationships as they really are.

David Hume used the example of a man making an omelet to illustrate his view of causality. I plan to use this example and expound upon it such that the physics of quantum mechanics can be applied.

While a man is making an omelet, he loses his grip on an egg. The egg drops to the floor and breaks. The relationship between the man dropping the egg and its breaking is said to be a causal one. The effect of breaking is said to have been caused by the act of dropping. Using this example, and many others like it, most people believe that all events have causal relationships.

I would venture to say that even this basic example of causality does not prove its existence. I explain the breaking of the egg as an event limited enough that the human mind could place a false order on it. The mind does this so that the event may be related to oneself and to others more efficiently. The classification of ...

... middle of paper ...

...atoms going one way and 500 going the other. There is only one atom in the entire beam, and it splits. In the words of the article, "Suddenly you find yourself scrambling to visualize what happened - and failing miserably" It seems that, since the atom is unobserved, it acts as a wave and is able to take both routes simultaneously.

Here is a further example of this quantum weirdness: the device that is used to split the beam is a diffraction grating, a series of microscopic parallel slits in a substance. When the beam of atoms hits the grating each atom doesn't go through only one slit; it goes through all at once.

It seems, then, that the HUP is an accurate depiction of matter at the atomic and subatomic level. The consequences for causality are devastating as a result. It seems that we can never know the true nature of a system or the universe at large.

Show More
Related

  • Hume's and Anscombe's View on Causation

    1237 Words  | 3 Pages

    Later Hume asserts that we cannot perceive causation because all we perceive is the “contiguity” and “succession” of events, but not of causation itself. For example, of two events, event A (person A pushing person B) and event B (person B’s falling back), Hume argues that all we are perceiving here are causes and effects; in other words, we here are perceiving the “contiguity” and “succession” of events, but not of causation itself. This is due to Hume’s idea that events are conjoined with one another. Hume argues that when event A occurs, event B happens simultaneously along with event A. For example, the event in which person A pushes person B, and the event where person B fal...

    Read More

  • Paul Rée's The Illusion Of Free Will

    1452 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this essay I shall argue that Paul Rée is correct in saying that free will is just an illusion. Throughout the reading entitled “The Illusion of Free Will,” Rée makes numerous great points about how we believe we have free will but we really do not. He discusses how one’s childhood upbringing determines his actions for the rest of his life, which, as a result, diminishes his freedom of will. He brings about the major issues with the common thought that since you could have acted in a different way than you actually did, you have free will. Another main argument was the proof of the reality of the law of causality, which can also be referred to as determinism.

    Read More

  • The Role of the Inspector in an An Inspector Calls by J.B. Priestley

    1576 Words  | 4 Pages

    play is set in 1912, only 2 years before the outbreak of WW1, and in

    Read More

  • Kant and Causal Law in Pure Reason

    1668 Words  | 4 Pages

    There are two possible interpretations for the causal rule: first, any rule that include causal dependence, and second, a rule that necessarily determines in a given situation which state happens next. The first one is what the weak reading would suggest, which reduce the causal law to “Every event has a cause,” and the second one is the strong reading and indicates that “events type A are the cause of events type B.” In the next section, I argue that the second reading is what Kant explains here.

    Read More

  • The Question of Free Will: Descartes, Hume, and Nietzsche

    2066 Words  | 5 Pages

    Russell, Paul. “Hume on Free Will.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, CSLI, Stanford University, 14 December 2007.

    Read More

  • Kant's Second Analogy

    4263 Words  | 9 Pages

    In the Second Analogy, Kant argues that we must presuppose, a priori, that each event is determined to occur by some preceding event in accordance with a causal law. Although there have been numerous interpretations of this argument, we have not been able to show that it is valid. In this paper, I develop my own interpretation of this argument. I borrow an insight offered by Robert Paul Wolff. In Kant's argument, our need to presuppose that the causal determination of each event rests not upon our need to impose a 'necessary' and 'irreversible' temporal order upon representations of the states of an object, as Kant is usually interpreted, but upon our need to generate a comprehensive representation that includes a certain a priori conception of events in the world around us. Although the argument I attribute to Kant is valid, it cannot compel the Humean skeptic to accept the necessity of presupposing the causal determination of each event: Kant has not successfully responded to Hume in the Second Analogy.

    Read More

  • Is Compatibilism True?

    1285 Words  | 3 Pages

    Free will is the ability for a person to make their own decisions without the constraints of necessity and fate, in other words, their actions are not determined. Determinism is the view that the initial conditions of the universe and all possible worlds are the same, including the laws of nature, causing all events to play out the same. Events are determined by the initial conditions. Two prominent positions advocated concerning the relation between free will and determinism are compatibilism and incompatibilism. In this essay I shall argue that compatibilism is true. Firstly, I shall explain what compatibilism is and consider possible objections and responses to the theory. I shall then examine incompatibilism and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses and argue that compatibilism is a stronger argument and, as a result, show why it is also true.

    Read More

  • Abnormal Psychology: Mental Disorders

    2403 Words  | 5 Pages

    believing that there is more than one cause. What has been thought as the main

    Read More

  • The Elegant Universe

    1063 Words  | 3 Pages

    The author tells of how waves are effected by quantum mechanic. He also discusses the fact that electromagnetic radiation, or photons, are actually particles and waves. He continues to discuss how matter particles are also matter, but because of their h bar, is so small, the effects are not seen. Green concludes the quantum mechanics discussion by talking about the uncertainty principle.Chapter 5: The need for a New Theory: General Relativity vs.

    Read More

  • Determinism and Free Will

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    Determinism and free will are incompatible. The events in people’s lives are already chosen for us, or determined. The expected behaviors of people are explained by natural laws and by experiences that they were exposed to. But this viewpoint does not explain people’s intuition. Although, there is a chain of physical causes that lead into people’s intuition.

    Read More

  • David Hume And Spinoza

    1816 Words  | 4 Pages

    The closest we get to cause and effect are two distinct phenomena arising together often and the mind thinking one produces the other. Hume regards this as a constant conjunction, not cause and effect. Although this is a leap in reasoning, and we have no reason to believe this to be true, Hume regards this as custom, which is the great guide of life (28). Life would be chaos if we believed in things completely contrary to the regularity of our experience, but the formation of habit is where we can lead ourselves to erroneous judgments. Although Hume's skepticism appears to clear up the mind, it leads him to believe that there is no such thing as causation, which Spinoza disagrees with. Rather, Spinoza argues that nature is all a long chain of causation which gives all causes effects and all effects causes. This system recognizes nature as a mechanism. All causes are a result of nature and the conditions imposed by it. Judging cause and effect individually is missing the point. To say that a billiard ball causes the other one to move only focuses two select phenomena. Rather, God, or nature, is that which connects all phenomena. Thus, the chain of causation cannot be understood of by two simple "links, it must be assessed as a whole. Spinoza argues that there are no free causes, only necessary ones. Thus, all causes are free causes and are a result of nature. This great chain of

    Read More

  • Hume's Ideas on Cause and Effect

    684 Words  | 2 Pages

    Cause and effect is a tool used to link happenings together and create some sort of explanation. Hume lists the “three principles of connexion among ideas” to show the different ways ideas can be associated with one another (14). The principles are resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. The focus of much of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding falls upon the third listed principle. In Section I, Hume emphasizes the need to uncover the truths about the human mind, even though the process may be strenuous and fatiguing. While the principle of cause and effect is something utilized so often, Hume claims that what we conclude through this process cannot be attributed to reason or understanding and instead must be attributed to custom of habit.

    Read More

  • Agent Causation and Dualism

    1639 Words  | 4 Pages

    If we are to say that an event is not caused by another event but by something else, we are left to decipher what the cause could be. This cause, given free will, could only come from the agent himself. “If there is an event that is caused, not by other events, but by the man, then there are some events involved in the act that are not caused by other events” (Chisholm 28). I would agree with Chisholm’s assessment here, and would add that this is not only a material conditional, but is, in fact, true. There is something special about an agent, a particular property which he possesses, that allows him to cause certain events deliberately without the influence of a prior event. His decision-making processes, the neuron firings in his brain, and his own deliberative power serve as the cause for numerous actions which cannot be attributed to other events.

    Read More

  • David Hume’s Two Definitions of Cause

    3277 Words  | 7 Pages

    David Hume’s two definitions of cause found in both A Treatise of Human Nature, and An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding have been the center of much controversy in regards to his actual view of causation. Much of the debate centers on the lack of consistency between the two definitions and also with the definitions as a part of the greater text. As for the latter objection, much of the inconsistency can be remedied by sticking to the account presented in the Enquiry, as Hume makes explicit in the Author’s Advertisement that the Treatise was a “work which the Author [Hume] had projected before he left College, and which he wrote and published not long after. But not finding it successful, he was sensible of his error in going to the press to early, and he cast the whole anew in the following pieces, where some negligence in his former reasoning and more in the expression, are, he hopes, corrected.” (Hume 1772, xxxi) Generally the inconsistencies are cited from the Treatise, which fails to recognize the purpose of the Enquiry. This brings us to the possible tension between the two definitions. J.A. Robinson, for example, believes the two definitions cannot refer to the same thing. Don Garrett feels that the two definitions are possible, but only with further interpretation. I will argue that the tension arises from a possible forgetfulness on the part of the reader about Hume’s aims as a philosopher, and that Hume’s Enquiry stands on its own without any need for a critic’s extrapolations. To understand Hume’s interpretation of causation and the arguments against it, we must first follow the steps Hume took to come to his conclusion. This requires brief consideration of Hume’s copy princi...

    Read More

  • Kant Answer Hume On Causality

    1060 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hume states that in nature we observe correlated events that are both regular and irregular. For instance, we assume that the sun will rise tomorrow because it has continued to do so time and time again and we assume that thunder will be accompanied by lightning for the same reason. We never observe the causation between a new day and the sun rising or between thunder and lightning, however. We are simply observing two events that correlate in a regular manner. Hume’s skepticism therefore comes from the belief that since we do not observe causal links, we can never truly be sure about what causes anything else. He then goes so far as to say that if this is the case, it must be a fact that nothing causes anything else. In Hume’s theory, there is not only no objective causation, but no objective principle of cause and effect on the whole.

    Read More

More about Causality, Hume, and Quantum Mechanics

Open Document