Distinguishing two (unsound) arguments for quantum social science

Abstract Quantum mechanics supersedes classical mechanics, and social science, some argue, should be responsive to this change. This paper finds that two rather different arguments are currently being used argue quantum is epistemically relevant in science. One, attributed Alexander Wendt, appeals the presence of physical effects world. The other, Karen Barad, insists on importance metaphysics even when negligible. Neither argument, however, sound. Consequently, concludes neither them offers compelling for view has epistemic relevance