The problem of commensurability/incommensurability of different cultural codes is a key problem of modern civilizational development. This is the problem of the search for communicative unity in the world of cultural and biological diversity, which has to be protected, and the search for the cohesion of different Umwelten, of semiotically-defined artificial and natural environments, of ecological and cognitive niches, taking into account that each of them has their own identity and uniqueness. The purpose of the article is to draw attention to the fact that the question of the so-called incommensurability of different conceptual schemes, paradigms, language consciousnesses is widely discussed not only in cross-cultural studies and philosophical problems of translation but also in connection with the problems of incommensurability between the language of classical physics and the language of relativistic quantum physics. Attention is drawn to the problem of the incommensurability and correlation of different languages that are used in debates about the foundations of quantum mechanics, its interpretation, comprehension and ontology. Two approaches stand out in this debate. The first approach is based on the language of the formed being, on the language of things localized in time and on the logic of Aristotle. The second approach is based on the language of the becoming, process and nonlocality, on the search for various processual-oriented temporal logics. In this regard, we discuss the processual approach to understanding quantum mechanics, proposed in the philosophical and physical works of D. Bohm. The authors argue that the experience of constructive understanding of the metaproblems of the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the critical reception of the legacy of such philosophers of the process as Peirce, Bergson and Whitehead, the deep reflection on the problems of commensurability/ incommensurability of linguistic consciousnesses of different cultures – will eventually create a common synergetic-interdisciplinary space of cooperation for the solutions of the above-mentioned issues.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.30727/0235-1188-2019-62-7-21-36
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,078
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Order Out of Chaos.Ilya Prigogine & Isabelle Stengers - 1985 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):352-354.
Wholeness and the Implicate Order.David Bohm - 1981 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32 (3):303-305.
Jakob von Uexküll: An Introduction.Kalevi Kull - 2001 - Semiotica 2001 (134):1-59.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Conceptual Eurocentrism: Pros and Cons.Marina R. Burgete Ayala & Irina A. Gerasimova - 2019 - Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences 62 (6):11-33.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Final Solution to the Mind-Body Problem by Quantum Language.Shiro Ishikawa - 2017 - Journal of Quantum Information Science 7:140-154.
The New Quantum Logic.Robert B. Griffiths - 2014 - Foundations of Physics 44 (6):610-640.
Quantum Propensities and the Brain-Mind Connection.Henry P. Stapp - 1991 - Foundations of Physics 21 (12):1451-77.


Added to PP index

Total views
11 ( #848,831 of 2,498,794 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #421,542 of 2,498,794 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes