Defining Conflict Boundary Conditions: Violent Extremism and Quantum Ontologies
Institutional Affiliation
National Defense University, College of International Security Affairs
Start Date
January 2026
End Date
January 2026
Proposal Type
Presentation
Proposal Format
On-campus
Proposal Description
Violent extremism is a complex phenomenon of interaction between the individual’s own needs and concept of identity, larger group dynamics based around functions of social violence, and those systems interacting with the State which is trying to manage its own monopoly on violence. These complexities can be observed when looking at two violent extremist groups in the West African Sahel (JNIM & Boko Haram) whose fighters identify reasons for joining as retribution for State violence, protection from the State, economic reasons, environmental stressors, and other cultural/community/sociological pressures. Ultimately these can be distilled to be centered around their perceived identity and belonging considerations, or lack thereof with the States they work to counter. Counter violent extremism strategies traditionally fail to accurately identify what this transition from non-radical to radical looks like, but what is the core epistemological reason? This article postulates that a misinterpretation or misunderstanding of meaning structures between the individual and the State is the largest culprit. To that, this argument suggests an alternative model of interpretation based on an analogous quantum mechanical model which ultimately provides clarity to the concept of a conflict boundary condition, or the physio-psychological transition between non-conflict and conflict. Using a Bohmian quantum mechanical model to interpret individual ideational entanglement (meaning making) with the State, webs of interconnected fields of meaning (analogous quantum fields) are identified. These fields are waves of type indeterminacy with which the individuals exchange information to identify their concept of meaning. Within the interpretation, this type indeterminate meaning is developed around Martin Heidegger’s concept of Dasein, or “being in the world” which is neutral until meaning is established. By measuring this information flow between the individual and the wave through concepts of the nation, or the idea of the State, via Benedict Anderson’s tripartite model, a rough sketch of these interacting fields is established. This in turn creates a new ontology via quantum methodologies which allow for an explication of dynamic entanglements of meaning making and society which further help to define the concept of the conflict boundary condition. If this dynamic can be better understood, interventions will be able to develop better resolution and conflict transformation mechanisms which build around these meaning structures.
Defining Conflict Boundary Conditions: Violent Extremism and Quantum Ontologies
Violent extremism is a complex phenomenon of interaction between the individual’s own needs and concept of identity, larger group dynamics based around functions of social violence, and those systems interacting with the State which is trying to manage its own monopoly on violence. These complexities can be observed when looking at two violent extremist groups in the West African Sahel (JNIM & Boko Haram) whose fighters identify reasons for joining as retribution for State violence, protection from the State, economic reasons, environmental stressors, and other cultural/community/sociological pressures. Ultimately these can be distilled to be centered around their perceived identity and belonging considerations, or lack thereof with the States they work to counter. Counter violent extremism strategies traditionally fail to accurately identify what this transition from non-radical to radical looks like, but what is the core epistemological reason? This article postulates that a misinterpretation or misunderstanding of meaning structures between the individual and the State is the largest culprit. To that, this argument suggests an alternative model of interpretation based on an analogous quantum mechanical model which ultimately provides clarity to the concept of a conflict boundary condition, or the physio-psychological transition between non-conflict and conflict. Using a Bohmian quantum mechanical model to interpret individual ideational entanglement (meaning making) with the State, webs of interconnected fields of meaning (analogous quantum fields) are identified. These fields are waves of type indeterminacy with which the individuals exchange information to identify their concept of meaning. Within the interpretation, this type indeterminate meaning is developed around Martin Heidegger’s concept of Dasein, or “being in the world” which is neutral until meaning is established. By measuring this information flow between the individual and the wave through concepts of the nation, or the idea of the State, via Benedict Anderson’s tripartite model, a rough sketch of these interacting fields is established. This in turn creates a new ontology via quantum methodologies which allow for an explication of dynamic entanglements of meaning making and society which further help to define the concept of the conflict boundary condition. If this dynamic can be better understood, interventions will be able to develop better resolution and conflict transformation mechanisms which build around these meaning structures.