Questions related to the philosophical work of Sir Karl Popper.

learn more… | top users | synonyms

1
vote
1answer
101 views

Why are Popper's basic statements not justifiaible by experience?

In his Logik der Forschung Popper writes that basic statements are not justifiable by our immediate experiences, but are … accepted by an act, a free decision (LSD, 109) The SEP entry on Popper ...
-2
votes
4answers
245 views

Can we measure the effort to create a mathematical theory in terms of energy?

Sir Karl Popper says that products of our mind, like speech, music, math,... are things on their own. We create them. We put effort in them. I wonder where the difference of creating these things, is ...
0
votes
2answers
74 views

Can information be thought without a physical realisation?

Thoughts, memories, information, all are stored in some kind of physical representation. You might get down to a single quantum state of a electron to store one (quantum) bit. Sir Popper tells us that ...
2
votes
1answer
86 views

Is Popper the only one who discusses the “oracular philosophy”?

I did not find other reading apart from "Open society and its enemies", but it's difficult for me to believe that Popper was the first and the last one who paid attention to this phenomenon. Popper ...
1
vote
1answer
131 views

Is Poppers criticism of Kant valid?

Hume applying rationality to causality showed that it could not exist - the question is then how does it exist. Kants reply was to place it in the mind. Popper discusses this in his *Conjectures & ...
6
votes
3answers
334 views

Does Poppers theory of Falsification apply to mathematics?

Mathematics is generally & popularly judged a science in the basic duality: science - humanities. As enemies and collaborationists. The border heavily & fiercely policed. However, it seems to ...
2
votes
3answers
363 views

Positive vs. Normative--Is falsification required?

I have some confusion on positive vs. normative. I am under the impression that a positive claim is a claim regarding a state of reality, while a normative claim is one of a value judgment on ...
4
votes
1answer
411 views

How does Popper overcome this critique?

Suppose P and Q are falsifiable theories (in the Popperian sense). Then it seems to me that 'P and Q' is a falsifiable theory (we can refute it by refuting A, or by refuting B), and so too is 'P or Q' ...
6
votes
1answer
1k views

Is Poppers Solution to the Problem of Induction still valid?

Popper (negativly) solved the problem of induction by showing that there is no class of sentences (analytic/synthetic, a priori/a posteriori) in which a principle of induction can be phrased without ...
4
votes
2answers
561 views

A Popper question about corroboration

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction#Karl_Popper The rational motivation for choosing a well-corroborated theory is that it is simply easier to falsify: Well-corroborated means ...
5
votes
2answers
353 views

Was Karl Popper a “dedicated opponent of all forms of scepticism”? If so, why, or how?

While reading the Wikipedia article on Karl Popper, I was surprised to find that one of the article's sources, in its lede paragraph, claims that Karl Popper was a "dedicated opponent of all forms of ...
10
votes
1answer
233 views

Does going from a singular to existential statement make it non-scientific for Popper?

In "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" (section 15) Popper argues that an 'isolated' (a term he introduced in the English translation, which seems to be used in a very vague way) purely existential ...
1
vote
2answers
412 views

Relation of Gödel's incompleteness theorems and Karl Popper falsification

Falsifiability is considered a positive (and often essential) quality of a hypothesis because it means that the hypothesis is testable by empirical experiment and thus conforms to the standards ...
5
votes
6answers
594 views

Why do we need a reason for believing that inductive method is necessarily true?

I've been a bit perplexed about the "problem" of induction. Hume challenges other philosophers to come up with a deductive reason for the inductive connection. If the justification of induction ...
1
vote
1answer
707 views

If we can falsify hypothesis, cant we verify them by falsifying their negation?

Some people argue that we can not verify hypothesis but we can falsify them? I believe we can usually negate statements. So, if we can falsify statements, why cant we verify statements by falsifying ...
10
votes
1answer
272 views

Why does Popper think there are no a priori synthetic statements?

Lately I´ve been reading Poppers "Logic of Scientific Discovery" and I am especially interested in his critics of induction as a scientific method. When he trys to show that a principle of induction ...
9
votes
1answer
301 views

A good critique of Popper's “The Open Society and Its Enemies”

Can you recommend a good reference to answer the critiques in Popper's "The Open Society and Its Enemies"? I am especially interested in responses to the Marx section of the book.
10
votes
1answer
1k views

Modern responses to Popper's theory-laden observation

One of the most appealing parts of Karl Popper's philosophy for me is the idea of theory-laden observation. To provide an unjust summary: whenever you are making an observation-statement to question ...
11
votes
4answers
779 views

Is a theory that can only be disproved with an infeasable test still scientific?

If I understand Karl Popper's reasoning correctly, a theory is 'scientific' if there can be devised a test that tries to disprove it; i.e., it must be falsifiable. Now, imagine a theory that ...
7
votes
5answers
442 views

Does Karl Popper's work address the Principle of Uniformity of Nature?

It seems to me that Popper's solution does not address the more difficult problem of induction that Hume calls the Principle of Uniformity of Nature. In other words, we might find evidence against a ...
37
votes
7answers
1k views

What basis do we have for certainty in current scientific theories?

Given there is much past scientific belief that we now know NOT to be true, what basis do we have for the seemingly increasing certainty in our scientific beliefs held today being true? On the one ...
9
votes
2answers
631 views

What's the relevance of falsifiability in regards to logical arguments?

Is it reasonable to classify logical propositions that rely on deduction and are non-falsifiable as being inherently not worthy pursuing or does this just applies to inductive reasoning?