NeuroQuantology | June 2013 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 171-180
Globus G., Bohr, Heidegger, the unspeakable and dis-closure
Bohr, Heidegger, the Unspeakable and
Dis-Closure:
An Exercise in Quantum Neurophilosophy
Gordon Globus
ABSTRACT
The problematic of world is considered within the horizon of Bohr and Heideggers surprisingly overlapping
formulations of the unspeakable. The process of world dis-closurethrown Existenzis discussed in terms of
dual mode quantum thermofield brain dynamics. Existence, which is sharply distinguished from consciousness, is
between-two.
Key Words: Bohr, Heidegger, quantum neurophilosophy
Introduction1
It seems prima facie silly to think the
celebrated, infamous and murky twentieth
century philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889-
1976) together with quantum brain science.
Did not Heidegger scornfully advise to leave
science to its mania for its own usefulness
(Heidegger, 1999; p.198)? Heidegger did not
even distinguish an essential difference
between quantum physics and classical
physics, dismissing both of them as having
the same Ge-stell, the same preconception of
nature (Glazebrook, 2000; p.249), a
naturalistic metaphysical framework which
Heidegger sought to deconstruct.
A central concern of Heidegger was
with the Seinsfrage, the question of Being,
which is an ontological investigation into the
meaning of Being. Physics, in contrast, is
Corresponding author: Gordon Globus M.D.,
Address: 400 Newport Center Dr. Ste. 701 Newport Beach, CA92660
Phone: + 001 275 1633 (cell)
Fax: 001 888 474 5034
e-mail: ggglobus@uci.edu
Received April 21, 2013. Revised June 22, 2013.
Accepted June 25, 2013.
171
NeuroQuantology 2013; 2: 171-180
ontic, already operating within a
commitment to Being in the guise of
observables. However, in plumbing
Heideggerian thought, a surprising
rapprochement with Neils Bohr comes into
view and a specific connection to quantum
brain theory can be established. These
considerations turn out to be crucial to the
generally unthematized but profound
problematic of the ordinary world about us.
A warning about the great difficulty in
thinking Heidegger together with Bohr is
perhaps necessary. Plotnitsky (2010; p.316)
comments that Bohrs style of expression is
ponderous and tedious, and almost
deliberately dry in aiming to avoid any poetic
appeal. Heideggers writing is absolutely
opposite: grandiose, metaphoric, obscure,
undisciplined, idiosyncratic, inconsistent, and
downright untranslatable! So when I use
locutions below such as for Heidegger, I am
really appropriating him within the context
and purposes of the present discussion, while
nonetheless remaining, I believe, consistent
with Heideggers overall vision. To my mind
engaging the surprising hermeneutic circle
www.neuroquantology.com