Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

Conjectures and Refutations The Growth of Scientific Knowledge Conjectures and Refutations is one of Karl Popper s most wide ranging and popular works notable not only for its acute insight into the way scientific knowledge grows but also for applying those ins

  • Title: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge
  • Author: Karl R. Popper Giuliano Pancaldi
  • ISBN: 9780415285940
  • Page: 294
  • Format: Paperback
  • Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

    Conjectures and Refutations is one of Karl Popper s most wide ranging and popular works, notable not only for its acute insight into the way scientific knowledge grows, but also for applying those insights to politics and to history It provides one of the clearest and most accessible statements of the fundamental idea that guided his work not only our knowledge, but ourConjectures and Refutations is one of Karl Popper s most wide ranging and popular works, notable not only for its acute insight into the way scientific knowledge grows, but also for applying those insights to politics and to history It provides one of the clearest and most accessible statements of the fundamental idea that guided his work not only our knowledge, but our aims and our standards, grow through an unending process of trial and error.

    • Free Read [Ebooks Book] ✓ Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge - by Karl R. Popper Giuliano Pancaldi ↠
      294 Karl R. Popper Giuliano Pancaldi
    • thumbnail Title: Free Read [Ebooks Book] ✓ Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge - by Karl R. Popper Giuliano Pancaldi ↠
      Posted by:Karl R. Popper Giuliano Pancaldi
      Published :2018-08-15T08:20:53+00:00

    One thought on “Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

    1. Anahita Sharma

      In my final years of high-school, I encountered Popper's theory of the process of 'Conjectures and Refutations' when studying the epistemology of science, and subsequently referenced his work in an essay - yet my understanding of it at the time was highly superficial.When writing my final year dissertation at university, in Biology, I found myself mining through scientific literature and trying to place the experiment in its wider context. I was confronted with an immense and initially overwhelm [...]

    2. Philippe Malzieu

      Popper is a point of required passage for all those which are interested in sciences. But the originality is that the method Popper bracket with other sectors and particularly with the policy.Classically we defined a science in a positive way. we choose an hypothesis, we accumulated experiments to check the veracity of its. There a completely opposite way is taken. We will imagine experiments to prove that this théory is false.For exemple, the proposal is “all the swans are white”. If I ado [...]

    3. Omar nagib

      what is the book all about?it discusses epistemology(philosophy of knowledge), philosophy of science, logic, philosophy of language and politics.every article is an independant article, which can be read separatelye book's title "conjectures and refutations" is borrowed from one of the articles within this book, it stands for popper's philosophy of science and how science procedures, science stars from problems but not observations, a scientist propose a myth or conjecture or hypothesis from his [...]

    4. Paul

      This is in places an extremely engaging and intriguing book. The history of philosophy Popper describes in the early chapters is fascinating, as is his chapter 15 demolishing Hegelian and Marxist dialectic; between Gilson and Popper I have a feeling of much stronger grip of the history of philosophy (where fortunately Gilson is strong where Popper is weak, i.e medieval philosophy).Let me quote from that chapter 15 a sentence out of a passage that I might take as a banner for the intellectual con [...]

    5. Brian

      Brilliant writer - very dense, intellectually complicated, and takes a long time to read. But if you're looking for a book that makes you feel smarter and examine life more critically and logically, then this book will help you along that path. Popper's primary argument is that science is not developed through carefully thought-out hypotheses, but by essentially random attempts at figuring things out (conjectures) and then attempts that prove them wrong (refutations).He also argues that, basical [...]

    6. David Withun

      This book is a classic of twentieth century epistemology and the philosophy of science and must-read for anyone interested in those subjects. I also recommend this book for anyone interested in the development of knowledge as well as social justice within a democratic setting. Popper's thesis is that the truth of any given matter is not obvious due to the limitations of human perception and reasoning and that, with this in mind, we should approach the process of observing and understanding the w [...]

    7. Kristoffer Berg

      Popper skriver engasjerende og klart uten å forenkle. Boken gir god innsikt i hypotesetisk-deduktiv metode samtidig som den spenner over svært mange forskjellige filosofiske tema. Dessverre er den ganske repetitiv og til tider for omstendelig. Det kan av og til virke som han slår inn åpne dører (anti-kommunisme og anti-dialektikk), men med tanke på at første utgave ble gitt ut i 1963 kan det også bety at slagene er vunnet i etterkant. Jeg liker at Popper er ærlig, litt frekk og veldig d [...]

    8. Xander

      Conjectures and Refutations (1963) is Karl Popper's extension of his original work The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934; English version published in 1956). It is a collection of philosophical essays and adresses for audiences or the radio. In a sense, this book is nothing new under the sun, if you already know Popper's philosophy of science. This doesn't mean that it isn't interesting material, but it lacks the originality and impressiveness of Popper's first work.So what is interesting abou [...]

    9. Helisa Taban

      This book has given me a lot to think about. The most important lesson that I got from it is that a good scientific theory is very specific and seeks falsification. The problem with Freudian science, astrology, and other such broad theories is that they are vague and can be applied to almost everything. Everything can be interpreted with a pseudoscientific lens. Once someone believes in Marx or Freud, it is easy to view all human interactions as manipulated by bourgeois propaganda, or simply sym [...]

    10. Ari

      Karl Popper is one of the leading figures in the 20th-century philosophy of science. He is primarily known for his emphasis on the concept of "falsification." The popular understanding of Popper goes something like this: Science is good, science is about falsification, and if it can't be falsified, it's nonsense. This "straw-Popperism" is open to a number of objections, advanced forcefully by e.g. Kuhn.As it happens, Popper's thought is much more sensible and subtle than I had realized. He's per [...]

    11. Tom

      This is a collection of papers/lectures/essays that touches on most of the major philosophical ideas of Popper's at this stage in his career. If a person has read his previous works, this will almost seem like a review of many of his previously stated positions. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. He works hard to clarify all his ideas even more, or to present them from a new perspective, which is very much appreciated as a major help in digesting his occasionally difficult and technical tho [...]

    12. Riley Haas

      "The biggest problem with Popper is that he is far from the greatest writer ever. I find I am in general agreement with many of his ideas, but he does not make it easy. He repeats himself. He is overly vague. When he restates himself, he can be ever more vague sometimes. There is little flow to his writing. The major exception to this is “Self-Reference and Meaning in Ordinary Language,” an imitation Socratic dialogue disputing Wittgenstein at all. It is far and away the best written thing i [...]

    13. Andrew

      Karl Popper is one of those philosophers for whom the reading is more a direct challenge to my own beliefs than an attempt to refine my current way of thinking. I should start by saying that Conjectures and Refutations is an uncommonly well-written book, and should if nothing else serve as a style guide for how to write engaging philosophy. And I should add that Popper's thesis of falsification, while it needed and continues to need refinement to give an accurate portrayal of what scientific kno [...]

    14. Gnuehc Ecnerwal

      One of the most challenging ideas from this book is to convince the general society to acknowledge that no amount of 'confirmative evidence' can validate a theory to the same extend as how one counter-example could invalidate a theory once and for all. We are socially conditioned not to rock the boat (argue and criticize), to trust the viewpoints of experts/elders/authority, and we are told that we have to prove our case with evidence or testimony from a trust-worthy source. Popper proposed that [...]

    15. nanto

      Review ini biang, "A hypothesis cannot be proved with a thousand supporting examples, but can be disproved by a single contrary example. Those areas that do not work like this (psychology, etc.) are not sciences but pseudo-sciences."Ada nuansa rivalitas metodologis antara science dan non-science kah? he he he menggelitik ke-Feyerabend-an saya.

    16. Mirek Kukla

      Popper is brilliant. He's a terrific writer - his thoughts are original, yet is prose is clear and straightforward. With the exception of one or two boring essays, this collection is the shit. Check it out

    17. Berry Muhl

      Fascinating and very challenging. If you haven't read his Logic of Scientific Discovery, you should read that one first, as he refers back to it frequently. Consider this a major extension of that previous work.

    18. Dax

      The best philosophical treatise I've read. Before reading it, I had always been under the assumption that Pooper was "boring" at best. But upon reading, I realize he's only "boring" because he's "right".

    19. Mafu Goonbag

      Admittedly I only read a few of the essays at the start, but enjoyable reading. His writing style is not so difficult as many philosophy texts with each chapter (after intro) being potentially stand alone and written in the style of a lecturer orating for a class.

    20. William P

      For anyone who wants to understand the scientific method or simply appreciates excellent exposition will enjoy Popper's essays. Like so many others, his principles are simple, and often misquoted or misused. Reading his words for yourself is the only way.

    21. Timothy

      Tough Reading. His entire idea makes logical sense upon reflection. A must read for anyone interested in understanding the philosophy of science. Together with The logic of Scientific Discovery, both are excellent and very tough read.

    22. Shahid

      One of the best reads in attempting to understand how scientific knowledge expands. Very insightful and thought provoking and full of information.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *