Quantum Perspective of Society

Published: 2007 May 9
Categories: Essays

I finished watching Noein, a part science fiction and part romance anime that incorporates the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (MWI). For the lazy, MWI stipulates that time is not linear, but instead branches out to infinite possibilities of the future. For every universe where you rolled dice and ended up with seven, there are other universes that exist simultaneously where you rolled two, three, twelve, and/or lost your shirt. Why don't these worlds affect our own world? Because these universes exhibit wave properties and can pass through each other without affecting one another. It's sorta like how two pebbles tossed into a pond produces ripples that pass through each other.

The other question is if these different possibilities exist, why did we end up with a world where we rolled seven on the dice? Why not two, five, or twelve? One of the most bizarre thought experiments by physicist Erwin Schrödinger is Schrödinger's Cat. In this thought experiment, if we have a cat inside a box without any external influence, the cat inside of the box would be in a multiple state of being both dead and alive at the same time. Once you open the box and look inside, the multiple states reduces into one state, either dead or alive, but not both simultaneously. The metaphor is that the mere act of observing a quantum particle changes (or really, affirms) its existence. Scientists call this Quantum Entanglement. You cannot separate the observer from the subject as you could in classical physics.

Quantum Entanglement and Individual Choice

That you could alter reality by your own observations has a profound impact on the way we influence the world. Quantum mechanics, although originally part of the domain of physics, is having influence upon sociology and psychology through its metaphors. I would even stipulate that every human being behaves like a quantum particle. Without going too much into the inherent paradoxes, let us say that everyday we are faced with choices that begs us to consider whether we should make a choice as a brother, a friend, a parent, or a human being. Would you turn in your own family member into the police? Would you risk your career to save your marriage? Every single person embodies multiple, simultaneously existing roles: within the family, career, academics, society, and humanity, just to name a few.

When we face a crucial junction where a choice has to be made, all of the possible consequences reduce to one choice. Currently, the physics community do not have an adequate answer as to how these wave functions collapses, and by the same token, we do not have an adequate way of determining how people ultimately make their choices. That is the attraction behind drama; even though you think you know a person, that person might end up making a choice clearly different to your own predictions. Yes, even I've had my own share of counterintuitive choices.

But in order to partly explain how these possibilities collapse into one choice, we go back to quantum entanglement: the mere act of observing affirms a certain reality. Within the philosophy of Contextualism lies a current of thought which stipulates that an action can only be understood within a certain context. In other words, what you want to see ends up becoming the reality. This is probably a very rough sketch on where choice comes from. Out of all the possibilities for the future, the future that we become stuck with in the end is the one we observe. Does this mean if I envision rolling a seven on the dice, that I will get seven? Not in the realm of probability. It applies more to our human nature to not seek impartial Truth, but instead to look for evidence to support your own version of the truth and ignore all other evidence. Things like this happen in our interpretations of history, coming up with proof for a theory in argumentation, or even relationships between people, groups, or ethnicities. We affirm a reality that we want, and ignore the rest. Is it any wonder why it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks?

But the question is, can we have a world where the cat is both dead and alive at the same time? What would be the benefit of understanding society in this context? In a nutshell, pluralism.

Discrimination vs Pluralism

Given that we tend to stick our own version of the truth (i.e. Discrimination), is this not the source of conflict within humanity? Yes and no. Discrimination is necessary to help us understand the world, but it needs to be balanced with Pluralism, the capacity to accept multiple viewpoints simultaneously. In accordance to the principle of yin yang, or complementarity in physics, both are necessary. Light is a wave and a particle. Discrimination separates itself from Pluralism, and Pluralism allows for both to be co-exist.

Anyway, without going too deep into philosophy and metaphysics, I feel there is a need for human beings to be raised under both traditions. I will delve more into the Quantum Perspective of Leadership later as an emerging paradigm in leadership philosophy, part of a growing number of tools needed to restore balance in a society that has grown so accustomed to Aristotelian (i.e. Western) philosophy.

Pluralism within Two Cultures

When we become old, we essentially become hardwired into a version of universal truth that comes from our own upbringing. It is quite possible to be conservative because our culture did not hone us to be open-minded, diversity-oriented, and pluralistic. Growing up as a Vietnamese American, I have attempted to study both American and Vietnamese societies through the lens of anthropology. Unfortunately, anthropological resources on Vietnamese society are lacking, as the field is relatively new within Vietnam. But what I was most concerned is how these cultures help instill the idea of pluralism.

Pluralism in America began in James Madison's Federalist Papers, who noted a fear of in-fighting due to factions. In order to prevent tyranny, he concludes, there must be many parties so that no single party exists to take over the whole government and impose their ideals, or as I say earlier, their version of the truth. But we ask ourselves, do we have enough tools to promote pluralism? I think the whole Civil Rights Movement in the United States is evidence enough that we were far from ideal in attaining pluralism. Even today I think we are still on the cutting edge, not just in terms of ethnic relations, but to my largely young readers, the relations among the generations too (youth vs middle-age vs elderly).

Pluralism in Vietnam is found by the sheer number of ethnicities—some 50 ethnicities unique to Vietnam. It is also found, through a Jungian interpretation of the origins of the Vietnamese people: Lac Long Quan and Au Co and the 100 Eggs to produce the precursor to the Vietnamese people, Bach Viet. Unfortunately this interpretation has not been popularized, in part because this interpretation is fairly new, and also much of the Vietnamese population are young (back in 1950s, the population of Vietnam was somewhere in the 20 million range; today it is somewhere on the order of 86 million).

Even the whole concept of the United Nations is only 50 years old. Granted, the study of Pluralist methodologies is truly a recent phenomena. As a member of the youth generation, I have to ask myself the following questions: Do my peers have the tools (e.g. philosophies imparted through our upbringing, working processes) that promotes Pluralism? How many of my peers have been affected or are aware of Pluralistic attitudes? How can I promote these tools? How can I measure our progress in restoring a balance in philosophy, a union between Western and Eastern philosophies, or Aristotelian and Platonic philosophies. (An interesting read would be Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.)

Pluralism Technologies

There are two interesting methodologies that I have had the blessing to experience and learn about. They say that if it doesn't have a name, it is difficult to teach or conceptualize. The first can be called Quantum Leadership, which is popularized in the book Principle-Centered Leadership. Unfortunately this term is a buzzword, and the book entitled Quantum Leadership seems to be a poorly-written book. But I could not pin down the whole concept with any other word, so I use Quantum Leadership to characterize this new paradigm. The second is the Unconference, an anti-conference format that relies on autopoiesis, or self-organization in complex systems.

Quantum Leadership, in popular literature, distinguishes itself from Management (traditional leadership) which focuses on efficiency within, say, a corporation; atomism. Leadership, as they say, focuses on vision—haha, quantum entanglement—or the bigger picture; holism. Actually Table 1 of the essay "An Additional Way of Thinking About Organizational Life and Leadership: The Quantum Perspective" summarizes the differences between Newtonian and Quantum paradigms, and Table 2 summarizes the difference between Newtonian Management and Quantum Leadership nicely. Applying these principles is a different matter altogether. But I think my most effective work has been with my high school protogés within the Vietnamese Student Association system. Something attracts them to the idea that they co-create their own futures, instead of adults dictating what their future should be. To be able to teach them that this whole notion has a name, and therefore is a methodology that has history, allows them to further learn about it. I suspect that within the Vietnamese tradition there are cultural/philosophical concepts similar to Quantum Leadership, but as far as I know, one man is telling me to wait until he finishes his book, which hopefully would outline more tools to work within the family, organizations, etc. But until then, I have to give something to my peers to learn!

The Unconference format seems to be a really recent development. In this format, instead of a committee deciding what the workshop topics would be and who the guest speakers are, the attendees instead create their own topics and generate their own discussion in which everyone is given a chance to contribute. It is truly a living social example of autopoiesis, self-organization within chaotic systems. I think this format is just starting to catch on, especially within the youth community. Unfortunately, a lot of students are still stuck in the traditional conference format of having to come up with topics and finding guest speakers. Again, it underlines the difference between Newtonian Management and Quantum Leadership:

Newtonian Management: Determinate; Assumes certainty & predictability; Emphasis on control.
Quantum Leadership: Indeterminate; Value in uncertainty & ambiguity; Requires trust, faith.

While I have been in a few Unconferences, I have yet to employ this technique within the Vietnamese Student Association system. I believe a good opportunity to do this will be the High School Summit that happens during the Midautumn Festival here in San Jose. We might be able to employ this at the college level, but that depends on how well I can convince college students to jump on board with this idea. You know, convincing high school students, who love to jump onto something new and different, seems a lot easier than college students, who rely so much on precedence and results.

Conclusion

So I've covered a headcase full of topics starting with a few topics within Quantum Mechanics and how it ties to Individual Choice. The choices we make relate to our personal vision of the future. Quantum Mechanics is also providing an important metaphorical framework for Pluralism, the tolerance of multiple viewpoints. But pluralistic technologies are few because the whole notion is a relatively new field of study.