View topic on PhilPapers for more information
Related categories

8 found
Order:
More results on PhilPapers
  1. Susțineri ale falsificabilității lui Karl Popper.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Suporterii lui Popper au susținut că cele mai multe critici se bazează pe o interpretare neînțeleasă a ideilor sale. Ei afirmă că Popper nu ar trebui interpretat în sensul că falsificabilitatea este o condiție suficientă pentru delimitarea științei. Unele pasaje par să sugereze că el o consideră doar o condiție necesară. Alte pasaje ar sugera că, pentru ca o teorie să fie științifică, Popper impune (pe lângă falsificabilitate) și alte teste, și că rezultatele negative ale testelor sunt acceptate. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22639.79521.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Karl Popper, Science and Enlightenment: An Idea to Help Save the World.Nicholas Maxwell - 2018 - Ethical Record 123 (1):27-30.
    Natural science, properly understood, provides us with the methodological key to the salvation of humanity. First, we need to acknowledge that the actual aims of science are profoundly problematic, in that they make problematic assumptions about metaphysics, values and the social use of science. Then we need to represent these aims in the form of a hierarchy of aims, which become increasingly unproblematic as one goes up the hierarchy; as result we create a framework of relatively unproblematic aims and methods, (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Karl Popper: uma postura não essencialista da ciência.Douglas Borges Candido - 2017 - Dissertation, PUC-PR, Brazil
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Popper e o problema da predição prática.Eros Moreira De Carvalho - 2011 - Analytica (Rio) 15 (2):123-146.
    The problem of rational prediction, launched by Wesley Salmon, is without doubt the Achilles heel of the critical method defended by Popper. In this paper, I assess the response given both by Popper and by the popperian Alan Musgrave to this problem. Both responses are inadequate and thus the conclusion of Salmon is reinforced: without appeal to induction, there is no way to make of the practical prediction a rational action. Furthermore, the critical method needs to be vindicated if one (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Reseña de José DE LIRA BAUTISTA, Karl Popper: Controversias en filosofía de la ciencia, Aguascalientes: UAA-UNAM 2008, 273 pp. [REVIEW]Marc Jiménez Rolland - 2008 - Euphyía. Revista de Filosofía 2 (3):124-128.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Tug of Love (Review of Kuhn Versus Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science). [REVIEW]Ray Scott Percival - 2003 - New Scientist (2411).
    A review of Steven Fuller's excellent book. Steve Fuller, professor of sociology at the University of Warwick, argues that, unfortunately for science, Kuhn won this debate. In the wake of Kuhn, science has come to be justified more by its paradigmatic pedigree than by its progressive aspirations. In other words, science is judged by whatever has come to be the dominant scientific community.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. From Analysis/Synthesis to Conjecture/Analysis: A Review of Karl Popper’s Influence on Design Methodology in Architecture.Greg Bamford - 2002 - Design Studies 23 (3):245-61.
    The two principal models of design in methodological circles in architecture—analysis/synthesis and conjecture/analysis—have their roots in philosophy of science, in different conceptions of scientific method. This paper explores the philosophical origins of these models and the reasons for rejecting analysis/synthesis in favour of conjecture/analysis, the latter being derived from Karl Popper’s view of scientific method. I discuss a fundamental problem with Popper’s view, however, and indicate a framework for conjecture/analysis to avoid this problem.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8. Observation, Meaning and Theory: Review of For and Against Method by Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend. [REVIEW]Nicholas Maxwell - 2000 - Times Higher Education Supplement 1:30-30.
    Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend initially both accepted Popper's philosophy of science, but then reacted against it, and developed it in different directions. Lakatos sought to reconcile Kuhn and Popper by characterizing science as a process of competing research programmes, competing fragments of Kuhn's normal science. Feyerabend emphasized the need to develop rival theories to facilitate severe empirical testing of accepted theories, but then, as a result of a disastrous mistake, came to hold that theories that are incompatible with one (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation