Bell’s theorem is sometimes taken to show that quantum mechanics undermines scientific realism. If so, this would be a striking empirical argument against realism. However, Maudlin has claimed that this is a mistake, since Bell’s theorem has precisely one conclusion—namely that quantum mechanics is non-local. I argue here that matters are more complicated than Maudlin acknowledges: quantum mechanics is not a unified theory, and what Bell’s theorem shows of it depends on which interpretation turns out to be tenable. I conclude that while the lesson of Bell’s theorem could be that quantum mechanics is non-local, it could equally be that measurements have multiple outcomes, or that effects can come before their causes, or even, as the anti-realist contends, that no description of the quantum world can be given.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Barrett, J. A. (2003). Are our best physical theories (probably and/or approximately) true? Philosophy of Science, 70, 1206–1218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. S. (1964). On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics, 1, 195–200. Reprinted in Bell (2004): 14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. S. (1982). On the impossible pilot wave. Foundations of Physics, 12, 989–999. Reprinted in Bell (2004): 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. S. (2004). Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohr, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 48, 696–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, P. C. W., & Brown, J. R. (1986). The ghost in the atom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, 777–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudan, L. (1981). A confutation of convergent realism. Philosophy of Science, 48, 19–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, P. J. (2006). Conspiracy theories of quantum mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 57, 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, P. J. (2010). Probability in Everettian quantum mechanics. Manuscrito, 33, 285–306.Google Scholar
Maudlin, T. (1995). Why Bohm's theory solves the measurement problem. Philosophy of Science, 62, 479–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar