The Magical Realism of Quantum Physics: A Postcolonial Reading

Quantum physics can be understood as an epistemological rupture that transforms the foundations of modern scientific rationality. In contrast to the Newtonian mechanistic worldview that underpinned universalist notions of progress, objectivity, and control, quantum mechanics introduces uncertainty, contextuality, non-locality, and the constitutive role of observation into scientific knowledge. These features destabilize the image of reality as a unified, hierarchically structured, and fully transparent domain, thereby challenging the epistemic premises of Western universalism. At the cultural level, this rupture finds expression in forms of scientific magical realism, where the quantum world appears as strange, paradoxical, elusive and fundamentally ungraspable. Such representations allow the quantum revolution to be interpreted not only as a theoretical breakthrough in physics but as an internal epistemological transformation of modern rationality itself. The issue is not the abandonment of rationality, but the reconfiguration of its foundations: the acknowledgment of uncertainty, contextuality, and the participatory role of the observer as structural features of knowledge. This shift is comparable to the epistemological tensions identified by postcolonial theory in situations where hegemonic discourses encounter forms of knowledge that cannot be reduced to their universalist logic. In this sense, quantum physics emerges as a form of internal epistemological alterity within Western science: while remaining part of its canon, it simultaneously rearticulates its ontological assumptions and limits its claim to constitute the sole normative regime of rationality. Extending quantum logic into social theory enables a shift from mechanistic social ontology toward a quantum social ontology, in which relationality, co-constitution, and process take precedence over fixed entities and linear causality. This transformation unfolds as a form of passive revolution, in the Gramscian sense: a profound ontological reorientation achieved not through the destruction of disciplinary institutions, but through their gradual conceptual reconfiguration. The epistemological outcome of this shift is the pluralization of knowledge and the emergence of a pluriversal onto-epistemological horizon, where scientific rationality becomes compatible with multiple cosmologies and situated ways of knowing. In this sense, the quantum turn opens a pathway toward the decolonization of knowledge and the rethinking of global order beyond universalist epistemic hierarchies.

1. Daston L. (2020) Istoriya nauki i istoriya znaniya [The History of Science and the History of Knowledge], Logos, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 63–90. DOI: 10.22394/0869-5377-2020-1-63-86. (In Russian)

2. Kofman A.F. (2015) Istoki magicheskogo realizma v latinoamerikanskoy literature [The Origins of Magical Realism in Latin American Literature], Latinskaya Amerika, no. 1, pp. 90–100. (In Russian)

3. Kun T. (1975) Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions], Moscow, Ripol Classic, 320 p. (In Russian).

4. Stepin V.S. (2015) Istoricheskiye tipy nauchnoy ratsional’nosti: problemy demarkatsii i preyemstvennosti [Historical Types of Scientific Rationality: Problems of Demarcation and Continuity], Filosofiya, metodologiya i istoriya nauki, no. 1, pp. 6–27. (In Russian)

5. Feynman R. (1968) Kharakter fizicheskikh zakonov [The Character of Physical Laws], Moscow, Mir, 232 p. (In Russian)

6. Allan B. (2018) Scientific Cosmology and International Orders, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 346 p.

7. Bhabha H.K. (1990) DissemiNation: Time, narrative and the margins of the modern nation, in Bhabha H.K. (ed.) Nation and Narration, London, Routledge, pp. 291–322.

8. Bhabha H.K. (1994) The Location of Culture, London, Routledge, 444 p.

9. Capra F. (1975) The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism, Berkeley, Shambhala, 368 p.

10. Conant J.B. (1970) Harvard Case Histories in Experimental Science, vol. I, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 639 p.

11. Daston L. (2017) The history of science and the history of knowledge, KNOW: A Journal on the Formation of Knowledge, 1(1), pp. 131–154. DOI: 10.1086/691678.

12. Der Derian J., Wendt A. (eds.) (2022) Quantum international relations: a human science for world politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 416 p.

13. Escobar A. (2018) Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds, Durham, Duke University Press, 312 p.

14. Forest P. (2025) The Quantum Novel: Science and Literature, TAO, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 1–3. DOI: 10.1016/j.tao.2025.100010.

15. Gramsci A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks, New York, International Publishers, 572 p.

16. Heisenberg W. (1958) Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science, New York, Harper, 256 p.

17. Said E.W. (1978) Orientalism, New York, Pantheon, 368 p.

18. Spivak G.C. (1988) Can the subaltern speak?, in Nelson C., Grossberg L. (eds.) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, pp. 271–313.

19. Strømme M. (2025) Universal consciousness as foundational field: A theoretical bridge between quantum physics and non-dual philosophy, AIP Advances, vol. 15, no. 11, p. 115319. DOI: 10.1063/5.0290984.

20. Wendt A. (2015) Quantum Mind and Social Science: Unifying Physical and Social Ontology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 366 p.

21. Yang C.-D. (2024) Discovering Bohr’s Yin–Yang diagram in quantum physics, Physics, no. 6(3), pp. 964–989. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/physics6030059.

22. Zanotti L. (2025) Cosmologies, coloniality and quantum critique: Exploring conversations with Native American ways of knowing, Journal of International Political Theory, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 60–79. DOI: 10.1177/17550882241274505.