—it’s always been done—which can simply be classified as bad faith! But, as we will see, this effect operates in a less trivial context.

• Cultural biases. All these biases or effects, whether physiological, perceptual, or cognitive, show that the human brain is far from perceiving reality objectively. Its sensory modalities and deep beliefs, both shaped by an evolution spanning over three hundred thousand years73, are inevitably tainted by a form of subjectivity.

At this point, one could argue that science, as a human but collective construct, tends toward objectivity. Indeed, the vocation of science is precisely to transcend perceptions, beliefs, and personal and subjective convictions about the world. This transcendence relies on a rigorous process of knowledge construction: it includes experimentation, analysis of results, the production and formalization of hypotheses, the building of a theory, the use of the principle of falsifiability to test and validate (or invalidate) it, as well as the constant exercise of critical scrutiny. Finally, the diffusion of this knowledge plays a central role. This pro-cess does not aim to achieve total objectivity, which would remain largely uto-pian, but to establish what is called an intersubjective consensus, meaning a shared agreement on facts, principles, and theories, considered as valid by a scientific community. The knowledge derived from this process allows not only identifying cognitive biases but also controlling them or, in some cases, partially abstracting from them through countermeasures, a process often referred to, in this context, as “debiasing”.

But can science, even in its collective strength, truly bypass human perceptual biases, illusions, and subjective impressions? It is argued that, well beyond indi-vidual subjectivity, there also exists, more insidiously, a collective subjectivity, even in the scientific field. This subjectivity also relies on deep cultural biases and remains largely dependent on our sensory experience.

Consider mathematics, often perceived as the most abstract science, which is cred-ited with the ability to produce a body of knowledge that exists independently of the human mind. Even if we willingly accept this idea, it remains true that the order in which Mathematics is discovered74 not only depends on the history of humanity but also on the deep nature of humans and their environment75. To quote an argument borrowed from Carlo Rovelli76 : if we were inhabitants of Jupiter, a gaseous planet, it is likely that we would not have initially discovered whole numbers or arithmetic, which are relevant in a world made up of countable entities. Instead, we77 would likely have developed a form of calculation suited to continuous structures, due to the specific nature of our environment. It is only later, perhaps much later, that we would have discovered arithmetic. Now, the order of discoveries is obviously crucial, especially when dealing with a body of knowledge potentially infinite. This order determines the relevant concepts used to describe phenomena that escape the immediate senses of human beings, as is the case in quantum mechanics.

Let’s go back to this discipline. Bohr strongly emphasized the importance of using classical language within quantum mechanics, not only to account for observed phenomena but also to facilitate communication within the scientific commu-nity. He considered this language essential to describe both the wave-like and particle-like aspects of quantum particles. However, he also acknowledged that this same language, while functional at a certain level, remained fundamentally insufficient for grasping the nature of quantum systems in all their complexity. To illustrate this idea and show that certain quantum concepts clearly conflict with our initial, even archaic, conceptions of the physical world, it is helpful to revisit the formalism of the theory. The example of what is called the identity—or, wrongly, indiscernibility—of particles is particularly enlightening. In fact, a fun-damental property of quantum mechanics is that two or more particles, called