Karl Popper: Selected Summaries: SELECTED SUMMARIES

By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

We have summarized the essentials of the following texts: The logic of scientific investigation (1934) / Science: conjectures and refutations (1963) / Popper and the hypothetico-deductive method. In addition to a useful glossary.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BOOKS AND SUMMARIES BY MAURICIO FAU
• Release date: Dec 3, 2021
• ISBN: 9798201135263

MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

Mauricio Enrique Fau nació en Buenos Aires en 1965. Se recibió de Licenciado en Ciencia Política en la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Cursó también Derecho en la UBA y Periodismo en la Universidad de Morón. Realizó estudios en FLACSO Argentina. Docente de la UBA y AUTOR DE MÁS DE 3.000 RESÚMENES de Psicología, Sociología, Ciencia Política, Antropología, Derecho, Historia, Epistemología, Lógica, Filosofía, Economía, Semiología, Educación y demás disciplinas de las Ciencias Sociales. Desde 2005 dirige La Bisagra Editorial, especializada en técnicas de estudio y materiales que facilitan la transición desde la escuela secundaria a la universidad. Por intermedio de La Bisagra publicó 38 libros. Participa en diversas ferias del libro, entre ellas la Feria Internacional del Libro de Buenos Aires y la FIL Guadalajara.

Book preview

Karl Popper: Selected Summaries

SELECTED SUMMARIES

MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

Published by BOOKS AND SUMMARIES BY MAURICIO FAU, 2021.

While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of the information contained herein.

KARL POPPER: SELECTED SUMMARIES

First edition. December 3, 2021.

Copyright © 2021 MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

ISBN: 979-8201135263

Written by MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

WHO IS POPPER?

Popper, Karl

POPPER:

Popper, Karl

V-

VIII-

3 + 5 = 7 | 2 + 6 = 7 | 3 + 5 = 2 + 6

GLOSSARY

Sign up for MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU's Mailing List

Further Reading: Pierre Bourdieu: Selected Summaries

Also By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

About the Author

About the Publisher

WHO IS POPPER?

Popper, Karl Raimund (1902-1994): Austrian philosopher of science based in England, head of falsificationism or critical rationalism and central figure of the hypothetico-deductive method. An iron enemy of totalitarianism and historicism, a Marxist in his youth and an admirer of Freud, he broke with them and dedicated himself to fighting them, arguing that they are theories not open to refutation, but only to confirmation. Although he was not a member of the Vienna Circle he followed a similar line to that of this group, although he criticized some of his thesis: verificationism and confirmationism, giving his own version of logical positivism. Among his main works we find: The logic of scientific discovery (1934), The open society and its enemies (1945) and The misery of historicism (1957).

Popper, Karl 

THE LOGIC OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY

CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW OF SOME FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES

The man of science proposes statements and contrasts them step by step. He builds hypotheses and tests them against experience through observations and experiments. THE TASK OF THE LOGIC OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY IS TO OFFER A LOGICAL ANALYSIS IN SUCH A WAY TO PROCEED.

The problem of induction

Inductive is the inference that passes from singular or particular statements (results of observations or experiments) to universal statements (such as hypotheses or theories).

However, ANY CONCLUSION WE DRAW RUN THE RISK OF BEING FALSE. Whatever number of white swans we have observed, the conclusion that all swans are white is not justified.

THE QUESTION OF IF THE INDUCTIVE INFERENCES ARE JUSTIFIED IS CALLED THE INDUCTION PROBLEM

ACCORDING TO REINCHENBACH, the principle of induction determines the truth of scientific theories. However, the question is HOW TO JUSTIFY THE PRINCIPLE OF THE INDUCTION ITSELF?

The answer would be with a higher level induction principle and so on, which would lead us to a REGRESSION TO INFINITY that does not ultimately justify anything. Neither Kant (who proposed that the principle of induction is valid a priori) nor the inductivists who speak, not of validity, but only of probability, manage to solve the problem.

INDUCTIVISM IS OPPOSED BY THE THEORY OF THE DEDUCTIVE METHOD OF CONTRASTING, THE DEDUCTIVISM

ELIMINATION OF PSYCHOLOGISM

For a statement to be logically examined, someone must have made it. However, THERE IS NO LOGICAL METHOD OF HAVING NEW IDEAS. Every discovery has an irrational element or a creative intuition.

Deductive testing of theories

Once an idea (hypothesis) is presented, conclusions are drawn from it by means of logical deduction. These conclusions are compared with each other to find logical relationships.

POPPER:

PROCEDURES

CONTRASTING OF THEORIES

• Logical comparison of the conclusions with each other, to test the internal consistency of the system

• Study of the logical form of the theory, to see if it is a scientific theory or not (for example, a tautology is not)

• Comparison with other theories

• Contrasting through the empirical application of the conclusions that can be drawn from it

THUS, THE PROCEDURE IS DEDUCTIVE: singular statements or predictions are deduced from the theory, they are put to the test by means of observations or experiments. If the result is positive, the theory passes the tests (this time) and there is no reason to reject it. But if the decision is negative, that is, if the conclusions have been falsified, this reveals that the hypothesis from which those conclusions were derived is also false.

A POSITIVE RESULT IS ALWAYS TEMPORARY, BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS THE FUTURE POSSIBILITY OF REBUTTAL, WHEN PUTTING THE HYPOTHESIS TO THE TEST IN OTHER CASES

The demarcation problem

INDUCTIVISM does not serve to distinguish a scientific hypothesis from one that is not: IT DOES NOT GIVE A DEMARCATION CRITERIA.

For positivists (empiricists), this problem is solved by admitting as scientists the concepts that, as they said, are derived from experience (such as sensations, impressions, visual or auditory memories, etc.).

Other more modern positivists say that science is not a system of concepts but of statements. Thus, only statements that can be reduced to elementary atomic statements are scientific, to put them to the test, as is the case of Wittgenstein.

But scientific laws cannot logically be reduced to elementary statements of experience.

POPPER PROPOSES A NEW DEMARCATION CRITERIA, BASED ON AN AGREEMENT OR CONVENTION, THE PRODUCT OF A DECISION THAT GOES BEYOND ANY RATIONAL ARGUMENTATION

Experience as a method

POPPER:

REQUIREMENTS YOU MUST MEET

THE EMPIRICAL THEORETICAL SYSTEM

• BE SYNTHETIC, that is, to represent a non-contradictory world, possible

• SATISFY THE DEMARCATION CRITERION, that is, not to be metaphysical, but to represent a world of possible experience

• BE DISTINGUISHED FROM OTHER SIMILAR SYSTEMS, by the fact that it has been subjected to contrast and has passed those tests

FALLABILITY AS A DEMARCATION criterion

The criterion of demarcation inherent in inductive logic is equivalent to requiring that all statements of empirical science be susceptible to a definitive decision regarding their truth and falsity. They must be shaped in such a way that it is logically possible to verify or falsify them. This is the position, among others, of Schlick and Waismann.

FOR POPPER, ON THE RISE, THEORIES ARE NEVER EMPIRICALLY VERIFICABLE

In the first place, A STATEMENT IS SCIENTIFIC ONLY IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO CONTRAST BY EXPERIENCE.

THE DEMARCATION CRITERIA TO BE ADOPTED IS NOT THAT OF VERIFICABILITY, BUT THAT OF FALSABILITY OF THE SYSTEMS. IT MUST BE POSSIBLE TO REFUTE BY EXPERIENCE AN EMPIRICAL SCIENTIFIC SYSTEM. THIS IS BASED ON THE ASYMMETRY BETWEEN VERIFICABILITY AND FALSABILITY

Some object that it is never refuted, because there are ad hoc hypotheses that save the hypothesis threatened by a negative case. However, Popper argues that