Summary Of "Falsificationism As A Criterion For Scientific Demarcation" By Karl Popper: UNIVERSITY SUMMARIES

By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

We have summarized the essential of this book by the author.

 

Fallability and the problem of demarcation

With Karl Popper's work, through his constant criticism of the Vienna Circle and empiricism, there is a turning point, a great change in the history of epistemology.
Popper proposed a demarcation criterion - that is, a criterion that serves to delimit what is science from what is not - different from the one proposed by the authors of the Vienna Circle.
The criterion proposed by the latter was, as we have seen, the "verification of meaning" criterion, according to which only those propositions that could be verified empirically had scientific meaning.
On the other hand, according to Popper, only those statements that can be refuted, that is, "falsifiable" or "refutable" propositions, may form part of science.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BOOKS AND SUMMARIES BY MAURICIO FAU
• Release date: Dec 6, 2021
• ISBN: 9798201261450

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

Summary Of Falsificationism As A Criterion For Scientific Demarcation By Karl Popper

UNIVERSITY 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.

SUMMARY OF FALSIFICATIONISM AS A CRITERION FOR SCIENTIFIC DEMARCATION BY KARL POPPER

First edition. December 6, 2021.

Copyright © 2021 MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

ISBN: 979-8201261450

Written by MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Popper, Karl | FALSIFICATIONISM AS A CRITERION OF SCIENTIFIC DEMARCATION

Sign up for MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU's Mailing List

Further Reading: Summary Of Philosophy Of Technology By Esther Díaz

Also By MAURICIO ENRIQUE FAU

About the Author

About the Publisher

Popper, Karl

FALSIFICATIONISM AS A CRITERION OF SCIENTIFIC DEMARCATION

Fallability and the problem of demarcation

With Karl Popper's work, through his constant criticism of the Vienna Circle and empiricism, there is a turning point, a great change in the history of epistemology.

Popper proposed a demarcation criterion - that is, a criterion that serves to delimit what is science from what is not - different from the one proposed by the authors of the Vienna Circle.

The criterion proposed by the latter was, as we have seen, the verification of meaning criterion, according to which only those propositions that could be verified empirically had scientific meaning.

On the other hand, according to Popper, only those statements that can be refuted, that is, falsifiable or refutable propositions, may form part of science.

Affirmations such as those of religion or astrology cannot be scientific since it is not possible to think of any experience or observation that makes them false.

Unlike what is proposed by the verificationist criterion, this falsificationist criterion does not consider claims that are not scientific as nonsense; it only maintains that they are not scientific.

According to Popper, a theory that is not refutable by any conceivable event is not scientific; irrefutable is not a virtue of a theory, but a vice. Any genuine test of a theory is an attempt to disprove it, to disprove it.

Testability equals refutability. Those theories that are more testable, that are more open to refutation than others, are preferable.

Some genuinely testable or refutable theories, after being found to be false, continue to be supported by some scientists who insist on upholding them, for example by introducing some ad hoc auxiliary assumption.

Although it is a possible procedure, it rescues the theory of refutation at the price of lowering its scientific status. For Popper, the more refutable a theory is, the better.

Another fundamental difference with the previous positions is that, according to Popper, knowledge does not begin with observation, but with one or more hypotheses or conjectures.

Subsequent empirical testing will decide the corroboration or refutation of said hypothesis or hypotheses.

According to inductivism, the scientist started from experience and then obtained, by induction, universal laws; Instead, according to Popper, he starts from a theory or conjecture and then experiments are carried out to contrast or test said theory.

Popper argues that this is the mechanism by which living beings in general, and men in particular, relate to the world: a mechanism of trial and error, or better, of trial and error.

The hypothetico-deductive method or naive refutationism

Popper called his