Karl Popper Critical Rationalism Essay

1434 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Karl Popper: Science: Conjectures and Refutations summary

Voltaire said “the perfect is the enemy of the good” (Voltaire 74). In striving for a perfect definition and application of scientific analysis, Karl Popper established an impractical and ineffective approach to science. In this paper, I will discuss the premises and principles behind Popper’s scientific method of critical rationalism. I will then explain where I believe his method succeeds, where it fails, and why I consider his method both impractical and ineffective. I will do so by first explaining his thoughts on science versus the status quo, then I will take the position that his approach is flawed and impractical, and lastly conclude with a commentary on why truth has to be flexible. My thesis is that in defining highly rigid parameters …show more content…

He urged that scientific theories could not be validated by confirming experiments, but rather could only be disproved by falsifying hypotheses. For example, if one were to hypothesize that it does not rain in Atlanta, and then if it were then to rain in Atlanta, the hypothesis would be deductively proved false. Conversely, a complete year or two without rain would not validate the hypothesis. Doctor Popper was strongly against a non-falsifiable deductive way of thinking (or what Simkin refers to as justificationism in his book Popper’s Views on Natural and Social Science) because of the aforementioned flaw with deductive reasoning: it is premised on validity, not truth. For Popper, as well as many other philosophers and scientists, the advancement of knowledge is dependent on the suggestion of new, probable ideas, not on bastardized ones derived from trite combinations of truth. According to Simkin, “Popper is against all forms of justificationism. They all involve a logical regress, as each justifying statement can be challenged, and the challenge has to be met by providing a justification for that statement itself” (Simkin 34). The reason that Popper was so against the practice of justificationism was that a scientist could exploit his data to confirm the hypothesis he

Show More
Related

  • Henry David Thoreau Analysis

    1261 Words  | 3 Pages

    When it comes to civil rights, there are two pieces of literature commonly discussed. One of these pieces is Henry David Thoreau’s persuasive lecture On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. In this work, Thoreau discusses how one must combat the government with disobedience of unjust laws and positive friction to create change. The second piece is the commonly known article Letter From a Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr. This letter covers the ways in which peaceful protest and standing up against injustice can lead to positive results. Both pieces conveyed a similar message of standing up for what is right. The strongest rhetorical methods which Thoreau uses are allusions, logos, ethos and rhetorical questions. However, King’s use of

    Read More

  • Rene Descartes: French Mathematician and Philosopher

    1852 Words  | 4 Pages

    Descartes, R. (2004). Discourse on the method of rightly conducting the reason and seeking truth in the sciences.Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, LLC

    Read More

  • Defending Longino's Social Epistemology

    3566 Words  | 8 Pages

    This discussion focuses on two issues: the relationship between evidence and hypotheses; and, the role of "contextual" values in inquiry. Longino contrasts contextual values with constitutive values. The latter, the "values generated from an understanding of the goals of scientific inquiry," "are the source of the rules determining what constitutes acceptable scientific practice or scientific method" (L1990, 4). That these values influence inquiry is not a problem. But the former, "personal, social, and cultural values," are thought to threaten the integrity of scientific inquiry (L1990, 4-5).

    Read More

  • Empiricism

    518 Words  | 2 Pages

    Consequently I propose an empiricism approach to science. Empiricism takes empirical adequacy (not truth) as the goal of science and when it accepts a theory it accepts it as empirically adequate.

    Read More

  • Methods Of Induction In Induction

    535 Words  | 2 Pages

    Reasoning is used all the time, humans use evidence of someone, something or personal experiences through time to reach a logical conclusion and accept it. In science, there are two methods of reasoning in which scientist arrive with a conclusion about a specific topic and it is by induction and deduction. In the modern scientific method induction seems to be a key element, based from specific observations and experiments. On the other hand, deductive reasoning is used in the scientific method to test hypotheses and theories in which the conclusion must be logically valid. Each of these methods of reasoning make an important contribution to our understanding of the world. This essay explains the processes of induction and deduction and their role in the modern scientific method, as well as ‘Problems of induction along with Popper’s ‘solution’ to induction through falsification will be discussed due to his rejection of inductive reasoning in the scientific method.

    Read More

  • Sex, Drugs, Disasters, and the Extinction of Dinosaurs by Stephen Jay Gould

    771 Words  | 2 Pages

    Any hypothesis, Gould says, begins with the collection of facts. In this early stage of a theory development bad science leads nowhere, since it contains either little or contradicting evidence. On the other hand, Gould suggests, testable proposals are accepted temporarily, furthermore, new collected facts confirm a hypothesis. That is how good science works. It is self-correcting and self-developing with the flow of time: new information improves a good theory and makes it more precise. Finally, good hypotheses create logical relations to other subjects and contribute to their expansion.

    Read More

  • Karl Popper's Falsifiability

    978 Words  | 2 Pages

    At first Popper seems to just be criticizing the integrity of some sciences and/or scientists who nebulously back their vague and general theories with references to observations that may be inconclusive or scanty which they presumably call "scientific method." He cites Freud and Adler's psychological theories, as well as the socio-economic or historical theory or Karl Marx as theories in which "Whatever happens always confirms it."

    Read More

  • Is Psychoanalysis Unscientific?

    1043 Words  | 3 Pages

    Revolutionary science, however, does not occur all the time. Before a revolution can occur, scientists conduct routine tests and experiments within the commonly held paradigm. This state of puzzle-solving is known as “normal science.” When the scientist carries out...

    Read More

  • Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience

    1868 Words  | 4 Pages

    A.J. Ayer, Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn. "Science and Non science: Defining the Boundary." Part 1. Pages 6-19. [...]

    Read More

  • Skepticism and the Philosophy of Language in Early Modern Thought

    3311 Words  | 7 Pages

    The revival of ancient skepticism in early XVIth century has been considered one of the major forces in the development of modern thought, especially as regards the discussion about the nature of knowledge and the sciences. Richard Popkin in his History of Skepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza (1979) has shown that skeptical arguments were influential in the attack against traditional scholastic conceptions of science, opening the way to the development of the new scientific method. The dispute between those who embraced skepticism and those who tried to refute or surpass it was central to the philosophical scene well into the XVIIIth century.

    Read More

  • Positivism Case Study

    1425 Words  | 3 Pages

    Why is it important to be able to test theories according to Popper (Falsification thesis)? Please explain your answers.

    Read More

  • Theoretical Framework and Principles

    1100 Words  | 3 Pages

    In inquiring on theoretical framework to serve as the base for the research and analysis at the core of our dissertation it is crucial to comprehend the construction and the element directing the theory we are adopting for months to come. Stewart, Harte and Sambrook (2010, p223) have determined the relation that the theory plays with the evolution of the research process and its designer “In summary then the concept of theory is inextricably connected to notions of science that, in origin at least, refers to investigating the world according to a set of rules and principles.” Those rules and principles will be the guide and limitations to direct the inquisition once adopted and accepted by the authors and its advisors the dissertation will be bound to follow the direction set by the theoretical framework. We will establish the foundation of our paper and setting two main paradigms and further decide which one will be the more pertinent.

    Read More

  • Karl Popper Falsification Essay

    1598 Words  | 4 Pages

    Popper believes that science does not begin with the collection of empirical data, but starts with the formulation of a hypothesis (Veronesi, 2014, p1). Alexander Bird outlines Popper’s view on the scientific method in his book Philosophy of Science (1998, pp.239-240). This view is that scientists use a process of imagination to invent a hypothesis. However, once this has been established, scientists must attempt to

    Read More

  • Gombrich's Theory Of Representation In Compressionist And Post-Impressionist Paintings

    1753 Words  | 4 Pages

    In general, there are two focus questions that lead the Popperian account of science: firstly, Popper asks how our (scientific) knowledge grows. Secondly, Popper faces an inductive problem, as he questions how science is able to discover universal laws through singular observations (Chalmers, 1999)

    Read More

  • Arguments Concerning Scientific Realism

    1080 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Arguments Concerning Scientific Realism” is Bas van Fraassen’s attack on the positive construction of science. He starts by defining scientific realism as the goal of science to provide a “literally true story of what the world is like;” and the “acceptance of a scientific theory” necessitates the “belief that it is true”. This definition contains two important attributes. The first attribute describes scientific realism as practical. The aim of science is to reach an exact truth of the world. The second attribute is that scientific realism is epistemic. To accept a theory one must believe that it is true. Van Fraassen acknowledges that a “literally true account” divides anti-realists into two camps. The first camp holds the belief that science’s aim is to give proper descriptions of what the world is like. On the other hand, the second camp believes that a proper description of the world must be given, but acceptance of corresponding theories as true is not necessary.

    Read More

More about Karl Popper Critical Rationalism Essay

Open Document