Paradoxo EPR e Pseudo-História: Análise de livros de física moderna e contemporânea

Abstract

Science is a process in constant evolution which influences, it is influenced by its time, and it is a part of human culture, within a wide extent of cultures, that is why we should see it in motion. It is historical, it has its proper objectives, it assumes political, social, and ideological objectives, and it can be or can’t be used for good purposes. Unlike other knowledge, scientific knowledge is distinguished by the way it is constructed, as this type is multifaceted, multimethodological, and considers what has historically been constructed, and practiced socially. To understand it properly, it is necessary to get into its history deeply, which is possible through texts specific to the field of History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science (HPSC), an area of knowledge that can exist both as a line of research as a didactic approach. However, its approach is not so simple, as it requires time, adequate material, and some preparation in initial and continuing teacher training. One of the great challenges is the access to adequate mate-rial, mainly textbooks that approach, in a sufficiently adequate way, without distortions, misconceptions, or cases of pseudo-history. Hence, this research aimed to analyze the type of historical description of the historical episode of the EPR Paradox approached in textbooks of modern and contemporary Physics (MCP), trying to answer what type of historical description these textbooks present about the EPR Paradox. To reconstruct the episode about the EPR Paradox, we used primary sources - the articles by EPR and Bohr - and secondary sources - specialized research about the period. To discuss pseudo-history, we used articles by biologist and historian Douglas Allchin (2002; 2004). As textbooks were analyzed, the research methodology adopted was documentary research (CELLARD, 2012; PIMENTEL, 2001), carried out through Con-tent Analysis by Laurence Bardin (2001). The exploration and analysis of the material showed us that most textbooks tend to present pseudo-historical discourses, and when there are no major historical distortions, there are some with a greater degree of subtlety. This result alerts us that it is necessary to adapt materials that are indicated as basic bibliography, and to pay more attention to the training of teachers, enabling them to recognize these pseudo-histories and to be able to make critical and conscious choices, because, as teachers, their scientific conceptions will be disseminated in their classrooms and will reach their students.