We all remember the animations describing the double slit experiment to the public, laying out the foundations of the mysterious quantum world. Now take the part when we try to determine which slit the electron went through. The narrator will say something like this, in a hushed voice: „And now, the electron, as if it somehow knew we were watching, becomes a particle! It changes just because we observe it!” If I’m correct, the notion of the intelligent observer is so serious that it gave rise to the anthropic principle where consciousness interferes with quantum objects. I don’t understand something here because I see an error so glaring, it’s as bright as the Sun. How could anyone call a which-way detector an innocent little observer? For a quantum particle, it is a brutal machine, that interacts with it in a physical way. The detector has no choice by the way but to interact, after all, how else would it get any information out of that photon or electron? It places an electromagnetic field in the path of the particle, or is bombarding the path with particles, I don’t know exactly how it does it but there is no choice but to do something like that. And it is perfectly natural for an electron in its wave form to collapse into a particle after you bump it against some other particle for the purpose of measurement. Suggesting that all we do is observe gives everyone the false idea that a flying particle in the double slit experiment is bothered by an imaginary line, which we call our line of sight. I think the word „observe” should only be used if we know what we are talking about: Step one: Brutal interference Step two: Drawing conclusions after checking what happened (good luck by the way, after step one) So what am I missing here? Surely I can’t be smarter than all those scientists who had good reason to pursue the theory of the intelligent observer.