Karl Popper’s demarcation problem

Abstract

Karl Popper, as a critical rationalist, was an opponent of all forms of skepticism, conventionalism and relativism in science. A major argument of Popper is Hume's critique of induction, arguing that induction should never be used in science. But he disagrees with the skepticism associated with Hume, nor with the support of Bacon and Newton's pure "observation" as a starting point in the formation of theories, as there are no pure observations that do not imply certain theories. Instead, Popper proposes falsifiability as a method of scientific investigation. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11481.36967

Author's Profile

Nicolae Sfetcu
Romanian Academy

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-02-10

Downloads
5,824 (#856)

6 months
1,210 (#781)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?