Anyone have good book recommendations on the philosophy of science?
-
Why not Popper, may I ask?
His account of how science works was totally untenable and uninformed by scientific practice. Most philosophers I know (including myself) who invested in studying his sophistry feel that their time was wasted.
-
-
Nice short lecture by Lakatos (one of Popper's students) which mentions some basic problems with the falsifiability criterion:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FzaQS4noAA …
-
Just learned about this! Made total sense to me. But have never had anyone mention to me in 10 years of edu in psych that this was a problem.
-
The Ketelaar/Ellis 2000 paper on unfalsifiable evolutionary explanations might be of interest to you. Really nice paper imo
-
Thanks! Ill check it out
-
This is all very interesting to me, I'm out of my league here & haven't read his stuff but
@DavidDeutschOxf, who I'm a big fan of, has always championed Popper so I figured he should be pretty legit
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Anyone care to change this gentleman's point of view?
@Crit_Rat@ToKTeacher -
Popper was interested and did study how scientists practise science, which is shown by, for example, his fascination with Einstein's development of general relativity. But I'm not sure what
@nathancofnas' argument against Popper's epistemology is. -
The Routledge edition of "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" reprints a letter from Einstein saying that Popper is wrong.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.