Lest I get axe-grindy, Popper is the only normative guide I've heard of. You won't get a criteria of demarcation of science out of Kuhn, for instance. His "normal science" is based on social norms, not methodological norms- which is what Karl Popper is *all about*.
-
-
Replying to @averykimball @Meaningness and
Dude, Popper is *easy* to read. He aint Wittgenstein. I mean, he really got after Hegel for obscurantism in "The Open Society And Its Enemies", he tries to be clear and straightforward. "Conjectures And Refutations" is only 500 pages and really fun weird.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes… my problem is that based on secondary sources, I’m not expecting to find a workable story there. So it’s hard to justify reading 500 pages, if it’s likely I’ll say “yup, he had no answers to the obvious objections” in the end.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
What might the obvious objections be?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
What I don’t expect to find are believable accounts of what the criteria for refutation are, and of what order to test conjectures in. (I’m happy to drop this if you don’t want to go further!)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Sorry if I seem grouchy! Feel free to suspend this convo at any time. Spoilers: Popper never gives a criteria for *ultimate* refutation, as a refutation is also never final- it can be criticized, also. If you *want* that, Popper won't deliver.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @averykimball @Meaningness and
And the order is "test the conjectures that you guess matter most to the problem you are trying to solve." Popper never shuts up about solving problems- it's the driving motivation for all his thought.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Well, if the whole story were “science means coming up with hypotheses and testing them,” no one could object, but it would be trivial. Unless there’s an account of how you guess which conjectures matter most, and why you’d tentatively discard one and move on.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think "matters most" comes down to your problematic: Do you want to solve global warming? Resolve a conflict between observation and expectation? Create a social institution to solve a systemic problem? Let the problem be your guide!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @averykimball @Meaningness and
For instance, the problem of "
@Meaningness doesn't have time to read Karl Popper" might lead me to conjecture-and-refute my way into making creative youtube explainer videos to save everybody's time, making Popper's thought accessible to more people!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That would be great! I, personally, find video the least effective way to learn—but it works for very many people, and I hope you do this!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.