“It is not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”
When you open the PDF, keep these questions in hand:
| Title | Author | Why Read | |-------|--------|----------| | Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics | Karl Popper | A sharp critique of Wigner’s consciousness-collapse | | The Emperor’s New Mind | Roger Penrose | Expands Wigner’s idea with Gödel’s theorem | | “The Problem of Measurement” | John S. Bell | The standard technical response to Wigner | | “Consciousness, Brain and the Physical World” | Henry Stapp | Modern defense of the Wigner interpretation | remarks on the mind-body question pdf
"" is a seminal 1961 essay by Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner that fundamentally challenged the materialistic worldview of classical physics. By exploring the intersection of quantum mechanics and philosophy, Wigner argued that human consciousness is not a mere byproduct of physical processes but a central component of physical reality. The Core Argument: Consciousness as the Collapse Agent
Wigner imagines a friend inside a lab measuring a spin-½ particle. Wigner, outside, describes the whole lab (friend + apparatus + particle) with a wavefunction that remains in superposition. But to the friend, a definite result occurred. Wigner asks: Is the friend’s conscious experience also in superposition? If not, then consciousness cannot be described by the wavefunction—meaning consciousness is outside physics. “It is not possible to formulate the laws
Instead of asking "Which substance exists?", ask:
In the landscape of 20th-century philosophy of mind, few documents are as simultaneously celebrated and misunderstood as by physicist and Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner. First published in 1961 in The Scientist Speculates , this paper has become a cornerstone of the modern mind-body debate—particularly for those interested in the intersection of quantum mechanics, consciousness, and physicalism. The Core Argument: Consciousness as the Collapse Agent
“The consciousness of a dog or a cat is, as far as we know, qualitatively similar to that of a human. But the laws of quantum mechanics would have to be different for inanimate matter.”