this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
7 points (73.3% liked)

Philosophy

2287 readers
12 users here now

All about Philosophy.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is something I've been wondering lately:
Can a question—or observation itself—bring reality into being, rather than just reveal it?

A recent paper I came across explores this idea from a scientific angle. It suggests that "reality" might not be fully real until there's a certain structural correlation between the observer and what is being observed.

That sounds abstract, I know. But in this view, observation isn't just passive—it helps stabilize what we call reality.

I wrote a short essay (in English) summarizing the idea:
👉 https://medium.com/@takamii26_37/do-questions-create-reality-on-observation-reality-and-the-shape-of-consciousness-7a9a425d2f41

Would love to hear what others think. Does this resonate with any philosophical frameworks you know of?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Laura@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you. I feel that we may be talking past each other slightly.

My interest here is not in defending or rejecting any particular philosophical realism, but in discussing the experimental results reported in the paper I linked.

In particular, the paper reports statistically significant temporal correlations between human EEG data and outcomes of remote quantum measurements.

Based on these experimental findings, the paper proposes a new framework in which subjectivity is described as a nonlocal quantum coherence state, and consciousness is understood as emerging through gravitational decoherence of that state.

With this paper in mind, I would very much appreciate hearing your views.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398259486_Empirical_Subjectivity_Intersection_Observer-Quantum_Coherence_Beyond_Existing_Theories_Unifying_Relativity_Quantum_Mechanics_and_Cosmology

[–] bunchberry@lemmy.world 1 points 12 minutes ago

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I do not believe "subjectivity" or "consciousness" even exist, so the paper is incoherent to me.