Karl Popper And The Scientific Method - 1372 Words

Karl Popper is commonly regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science in the 20th Century. He is well known for his rejection of the inductivist viewpoint of the scientific method, in which one uses observation to propose a law to generalize an observed pattern, and later confirm that law through more observation. Popper states that â€Å"induction cannot be logically justified† (Popper 14). Inductivism relies on the process of inductive reasoning which is a logical process in which multiple premises, all thought to be true and found to be true most of the time, are combined to obtain a conclusion and in many cases formulate a law or theory. Popper rejected the inductivist viewpoint in favor of a theory called empirical falsification which holds that a theory can never be proven, but it can be falsified, and therefore it can and needs to be scrutinized through experimentation. In his work â€Å"Conjectures and Refutations,† Popper discussed several aspects of induction including the topics of conjectures (opinions or conclusions formed on the basis of incomplete information) or tentative theories and refutations (ways to refute an argument, opinion, testimony, doctrine, or theory, through contradicting evidence) or the acts of disproving arguments through counterexamples (Oxford). Popper opines that a significant problem with the scientific method is that scientists get so caught up in evidence that supports a specific conjecture that they either 1) fail to considerShow MoreRelatedScientific Method and Sir Karl Popper1407 Words   |  6 PagesSir Karl Popper, challenging the status quo, inspiring generations to ponder on the meaning of science, the methods to find truth, is one of the most influential philosophers of the 20th century. Of particular importance to scientific methods of inquiry is the brawl between the development of theory and the criteria for science. In Popper’s own words, it is in this brawl that Popper decided to â€Å"grapple with the problem: When should a theory be ranked as scientific? or Is there a criterion for theRead MoreAn Methodology Suitable For Scientific Education958 Words   |  4 Pagesissue of determining which scientific methods will result in empirical truths The following essay aims to discuss the most appropriate methodology suitable for scientific education, and by doing so discusses the various limitations of both overarching methods, induction and deduction. In this essay, Alan Chalmers (What Is This Thing Called Science?, 1976, p. 1) will be used to present a common inductive view on science, whereas Karl Popper’s, Hypothetico Deductivism method will portray a deductiveRead MorePhilosopher Karl Popper And Empirical Falsification929 Words   |  4 PagesPhilosopher Karl Popper is widely known for his rejection of classical inductivism, the idea that scientific knowledge is derived only from observation, and also his support of empirical falsification, the idea that scientific theories cannot be proven correct, but they can be proven false. In other words, empirical falsification means that theories can and should be closely and thoroughly examined by decisive experiments. In Popper’s view, a claim must be falsifiable, or testable, in order for itRead MoreEssay on Karl Poppers Falsifiability983 Words   |  4 PagesKarl Poppers Falsifiability Sir Karl Poppers lecture was very thought provoking concerning where to draw the line. Unlike most people, the validity of the theory was not his concern as much as how that validity is determined. This is an issue that really does not get the attention that it deserves. Poppers claims concerning, When should a theory be ranked as scientific? and Is there a criterion for the scientific character or status of a theory? seems to be put together in the followingRead More Popper and Kuhn: Two Views of Science Essay1449 Words   |  6 PagesPopper and Kuhn: Two Views of Science In this essay I attempt to answer the following two questions: What is Karl Popper’s view of science? Do I feel that Thomas Kuhn makes important points against it? The two articles that I make reference to are Science: Conjectures and Refutations by Karl Popper and Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research? by Thomas Kuhn. In the article, Science: Conjectures and Refutations, Karl Popper attempts to describe the criteria that a theory must meetRead MoreEssay on Karl Popper and Falsifiability1354 Words   |  6 PagesKarl Popper and Falsifiability Karl Poppers claim that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability is a clearly viable statement. This is a natural extension of his idea about how scientific knowledge is increased (Edwards, 1967). In an attempt to define science from pseudo-science, Popper states that the growth of scientific knowledge begins with an imaginative proposal of hypotheses (Edwards, 1967). Then, the scientist must search for illustrations or situationsRead MoreComparison Of Kuhn And Popper s Understanding Of Science1262 Words   |  6 PagesIn this section we will compare and contrast Kuhn’s understanding of science with Popper’s understanding of science. These two methods are narrower when it comes to levels of scrutiny. They are also more open and willing to embrace change because they seek to change the status quo which is traditional science. Both scientists agree that the traditional method of science is too broad and ignores many different variables tha t could change the outcome of the results. They also concur on the idea thatRead MoreKarl Popper and Thomas Kuhn 21472 Words   |  6 PagesPopper and Kuhn: Two Views of Science In this essay I attempt to answer the following two questions: What is Karl Poppers view of science? Do I feel that Thomas Kuhn makes important points against it? The two articles that I make reference to are Science: Conjectures and Refutations by Karl Popper and Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research? by Thomas Kuhn. Both articles appear in the textbook to this class. In the article, Science: Conjectures and Refutations, Karl Popper attemptsRead More Does science consist in the progressive development of objective truth? Contrast the views of Kuhn with one other writer on this topic.1416 Words   |  6 Pagesnormal (that is non revolutionary) periods in a science, there is a consensus across the relevant scientific community about the theoretical and methodological rules to be followed. (Marshall 1998). Paradigms tend to shift over time as new scientific discoveries are made, and anomalies or observations that conflict with the current paradigm begin to accumulate. Eventually this leads to a scientific revolution. There is a shift from one paradigm to another and a new period of normal science beginsRead MoreThe Logic Of Scientific Discovery2172 Words   |  9 Pagesthe Scientific Method at the University of London, Karl Popper translated his own original version of The Logic of Scientific Discovery, which was originally called Logik der Forsc hung, to English (Stuermann). One statement that he makes, even before the actual text begins, is how hard answering questions and ideas in philosophy are is compared to other fields, such as the physical sciences. Compared to a physicist, for example, that is trying to prove a point by solving an equation,, Popper believes