Reality? - 04/24/14 10:29 PM
Jim Bagott, in his book “Farewell to Reality” says (P53) “The conclusions of quantum theory may be utterly bizarre, but this is a theory founded on solid observational and experimental fact.”
Point taken, but, earlier in the book he stressed at some length that our observations of “reality” may well not represent reality. If this is the case, and I would not dispute that it is; and if facts are an expression of reality; how can we be sure that our observations of quantum theory have any link to the reality of QT, if indeed such a reality exists?
Also, how can we know that those things we learn from our experiments are actually facts, rather than just appearances arising from our own observational bias?
It can justifiably be argued that this is philosophy rather than science, but surely such philosophical speculation must be the corollary of claiming that we cannot observe reality directly.
Point taken, but, earlier in the book he stressed at some length that our observations of “reality” may well not represent reality. If this is the case, and I would not dispute that it is; and if facts are an expression of reality; how can we be sure that our observations of quantum theory have any link to the reality of QT, if indeed such a reality exists?
Also, how can we know that those things we learn from our experiments are actually facts, rather than just appearances arising from our own observational bias?
It can justifiably be argued that this is philosophy rather than science, but surely such philosophical speculation must be the corollary of claiming that we cannot observe reality directly.