Abstract:

Natural science, especially physics, is regarded to be quite simply the science. It differs from the ideologies and speculative theories about the universe, the nature of our everyday world, and human beings in former times with regard to its methods. Different to the ideologies of the various kinds natural sciences are based on empirical data by observation or experiment, such that there can given a direct of indirect proof of the thesis claimed, although the interpretations of the data might differ. To provide a proof for the consistency of an empirical proof mathematical or mathematical-logical proofs are used. Without such a mathematical formalisation it would not be possible to come up to consistent theories. A theory is sound under the condition that there exists an experiment – chain of experiments – and an appropriate mathematical formalisation of the according theory or hypothesis.

Quantum theory was already fully formulated by Bohr up to the year 1927 based on observational data and mathematical proofs. Correctly speaking, there is no room left for ontological questions, such as: are the ultimate constituents of matter material or immaterial, particle seems to be material and waves seems to be immaterial. Both showed there right of existence in physics by experimental proofs. Therefore, both are physical entities. Quantum theory offered a new framework of a consistent mathematical description of both. To load quantum theory with ontology is (a) not justified by the quantum theory, and (b) purely speculative. Nevertheless, even quantum physicists – such as our guest in honour Basarab Nicolescu – try to load quantum theory with ontology simply based on speculations, and furthermore they claim to be able to derive from there speculations some kind of thesis about the mind, the culture and more.

From these facts the questions arise:
1. Why quantum theory cannot entail an ontological commitment from the point of view of quantum theory?
2. Why quantum theory cannot entail an ontological commitment from the point of view of philosophy?