标题： 偶然是否隐藏着必然？ 在量子力学和概率论的视角下对“决定论-非决定论”辩论的重新评估 显示英文标题

标题： Does Chance Hide Necessity ? A Reevaluation of the Debate 'Determinism - Indeterminism' in the Light of Quantum Mechanics and Probability Theory

摘要： 在本博士论文中，将重新审视关于决定论的古老问题（“每个事件都有原因吗？”）。 在科学哲学和物理学界，正统的观点认为物理世界是不确定的：量子事件没有原因，而是通过不可约化的偶然性发生。 可以说，导致这一结论最清晰的定理是贝尔定理。 该定理的普遍接受的“解决方案”是“不确定性”，这与哥本哈根解释一致。 这里指出，不确定性并不是真正的物理假设，而是一种哲学假设，并且它有反直觉且深远的影响。 同时，贝尔定理还存在另一种解决方案，通常称为“超决定论”或“完全决定论”。 超决定论似乎是一种哲学立场，其历史可以追溯到几个世纪甚至可能数千年：例如斯宾诺莎的决定论。 如果贝尔定理既有非决定论的解，也有决定论的解，那么在决定论和非决定论之间进行选择是一个哲学问题，而不是物理实验的问题，正如广泛认为的那样。 如果无法用物理学来决定这两种立场，那么合法地询问哪些哲学理论是有帮助的是合理的。 在这里主张，概率论——更准确地说，是对概率的解释——对于推动辩论是至关重要的。 看起来，决定论的假设能够回答概率论中一系列具体的问题，而非决定论则对这些问题保持沉默。 从这个角度看，决定论最终似乎是最合理的假设。 显示英文摘要

摘要： In this PhD thesis the ancient question of determinism ('Does every event have a cause ?') will be re-examined. In the philosophy of science and physics communities the orthodox position states that the physical world is indeterministic: quantum events would have no causes but happen by irreducible chance. Arguably the clearest theorem that leads to this conclusion is Bell's theorem. The commonly accepted 'solution' to the theorem is 'indeterminism', in agreement with the Copenhagen interpretation. Here it is recalled that indeterminism is not really a physical but rather a philosophical hypothesis, and that it has counterintuitive and far-reaching implications. At the same time another solution to Bell's theorem exists, often termed 'superdeterminism' or 'total determinism'. Superdeterminism appears to be a philosophical position that is centuries and probably millennia old: it is for instance Spinoza's determinism. If Bell's theorem has both indeterministic and deterministic solutions, choosing between determinism and indeterminism is a philosophical question, not a matter of physical experimentation, as is widely believed. If it is impossible to use physics for deciding between both positions, it is legitimate to ask which philosophical theories are of help. Here it is argued that probability theory - more precisely the interpretation of probability - is instrumental for advancing the debate. It appears that the hypothesis of determinism allows to answer a series of precise questions from probability theory, while indeterminism remains silent for these questions. From this point of view determinism appears to be the most reasonable assumption, after all.