Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning

Product Information

Murris, K., & Muller, K. (2018). Finding child beyond ‘child’: A posthuman orientation to foundation phase teacher education in South Africa. In V. Bozalek, R. Braidotti, M. Zembylas, & T. Shefer (Eds.), Socially just pedagogies: Posthumanist, feminist and materialist perspectives in higher education (pp. 151–171). Palgrave Macmillan. Barad, K. (2015). TransMaterialities: Trans*/matter/realities and queer political imaginings. GLQ, 21(2–3), 387–422.

Another issue that has brought interesting discussion is Barad’s notion of objectivity as reproducible and unambiguously communicable (in contrast to Newtonian objectivity indicating observer independence). TSElosophers wondered if even this conception of objectivity might not be suitable for social science. When the object of research are humans with their own subjective meaning-structures, the question of reproducibility becomes a difficult one. Developing on Heraclitus’s thought: “no man ever steps in the same river twice”, one can wonder if even with unambiguous communication the reproduction of social phenomena is impossible and hence objectivity is impossible to reach. The subjectivity of the researcher and the concepts seem to be underexplored in this paper, perhaps due to the fact that some of the starting points of paper are in physics. As a counterargument, TSElosophers emphasized that the significance of differences in the object of study should be questioned and included in the description of the boundaries. What are the consequences the differences in the reproducible object of study make? What matters? The objectivity here relates to the description one is making, to drawing the boundaries. Objectivity in terms of unambiguous communication and critical reflexivity is more important here than perfect reproducibility.

Bohr, Niels: 1963c ,The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, Vol. III: Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. Woodbridge, Conn: Ox Bow Press. Barad, Karen: 1995, ‘A Feminist Approach to Teaching Quantum Physics’, in Teaching the Majority: Breaking the Gender Barrier in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering, edited by Sue V. Rosser. NY: Teachers College Press.

Hooker, Clifford A.: 1972, ‘The Nature of Quantum Mechanical Reality’, in Paradigms and Paradoxes, ed. R. G. Colodny, Pittsburgh: U. of Pittsburgh Press. Feyerabend, P. K.: 1962, ‘Problems in Microphysics’, in Frontiers of Science and Philosophy, ed. Robert G. Colodny. Pittsburgh: U. of Pitt. Murris, K., & Borcherds, C. (2019a). Body as transformer: ‘Teaching without Teaching’ in a Teacher Education Course. In C. Taylor & A. Bayley (Eds.), Posthumanism and higher education: Reimagining pedagogy, practice and research (pp. 255–277). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/978-3-030-14672-6_15 So the two strands of this book that are most interesting to me are the strand about interpretation and knowledge, and the strand about materiality and semiosis. Which are interconnected, because how could they not be?

Article contents

The second point emphasizes the absence of opposition between materiality and social construction. Barad introduces the concept of intra-actions, which are contextually decided and enacted in-phenomenon. This concept describes reality as being in-between, and the inseparability of nature-culture, physical-conceptual and material-discursive. Barad presents an account of reality she calls agential realism. While intuitively we understand this in pop explanations as "point of view" she radicalizes this account by extending it into the formal fields of post-structural philosophy and quantum physics. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., and Rosen, N.: 1935, ‘Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?’ Physical Review, 47, 777–780.

A]n elegant mesh of detailed explanations of social theories, scientific concepts and new pathways of technological innovation; all explored and then rewoven to form the carefully constructed foundation for her theory of agential realism.” — Jennifer M. Wilson, Feminist Review Blog Folse, Henry: 1985 ,The Philosophy of Niels Bohr: The Framework of Complementarity. NY: North-Holland.

Haraway, Donna: 1985, ‘Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s’ ,Socialist Review, 80, 65–108, (reprinted in Haraway, 1991). Barad is a professor of feminist studies using this chunk of a book to explain her interpretation of Niels Bohr's thought experiments. Niels Bohr was both a physicist as well as a philosopher and made foundational contributions to the way we understand quantum physics today. Drawing from his thought experiments, Barad introduces the concept of agential realism, which challenges the way we humans perceive and interact with our environment.

Bohr, Niels: 1949, ‘Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics’, in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, ed. P. A. Schilpp. Evanston: Northwestern U. Press. Leibowitz, B., & Bozalek, V. (2018). Towards a slow scholarship of teaching and learning in the South. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(8), 981–994. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1452730 Barad, K. (2017b). What flashes up: Theological-political-scientific fragments. In C. Keller & M.-J. Rubenstein (Eds.), Entangled worlds: Religion, science, and new materialisms (pp. 21–88). Fordham University Press. Juelskjær, M., & Schwennesen, N. (2012). Intra-active entanglements: An interview with Karen Barad. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, 21(1–2), 10–23.

Another key section which was an important part that I had to work through when writing a review of Andrea Ballestero’s book A Future History of Water was this section where Barad traces a genealogical lineage from Lefebvre through to David Harvey, Donna Haraway, Ruth Wilson Gilmore, into her own work: The book also discusses some fields of research in quantum physics that lay the foundations for the ideas presented here. Experiments like the quantum eraser experiment are explained in detail and Barad also talks about the partly contradicting theories of Einstein and Bohr. It's interesting how many questions are still left unanswered. Barad, K. (2012a). Nature’s queer performativity (the authorized version). Kvinder, Køn & Forskning/women, Gender and Research, 1–2, 25–53. Bohr, Niels: 1935, ‘Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?’ ,Physical Review, 48, 696–702.