The Logic of Scientific Discovery is a 1959 book about the philosophy of science by the philosopher Karl Popper. Popper rewrote his book in English from the 1934 (imprint '1935') German original, titled Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft, which literally translates as, "Logic of Research: On the Epistemology of Modern Natural Science"'.
Popper argues that science should adopt a methodology based on falsifiability, because no number of experiments can ever prove a theory, but a reproducible experiment or observation can refute one. According to Popper: "non-reproducible single occurrences are of no significance to science. Thus a few stray basic statements contradicting a theory will hardly induce us to reject it as falsified. We shall take it as falsified only if we discover a reproducible effect which refutes the theory". Popper argues that science should adopt a methodology based on "an asymmetry between verifiability and falsifiability; an asymmetry which results from the logical form of universal statements. For these are never derivable from singular statements, but can be contradicted by singular statements".
The psychologist Harry Guntrip wrote that its publication "greatly stimulated the discussion of the nature of scientific knowledge", including by philosophers who did not completely agree with Popper, such as Thomas Kuhn and Horace Romano Harré. The psychiatrist Carl Jung, founder of analytical psychology, valued the work. The biographer Vincent Brome recalls Jung remarking in 1938 that it exposed "some of the shortcomings of science". The philosopher Paul Ricœur endorsed "procedures of invalidation" similar to Popper's criteria for falsifiability. The historian Peter Gay described the work as "an important treatise in epistemology". The philosopher Bryan Magee considered Popper's criticisms of logical positivism "devastating". In his view, Popper's most important argument against logical positivism is that, while it claimed to be a scientific theory of the world, its central tenet, the verification principle, effectively destroyed all of science.
Cette page est générée automatiquement et peut contenir des informations qui ne sont pas correctes, complètes, à jour ou pertinentes par rapport à votre recherche. Il en va de même pour toutes les autres pages de ce site. Veillez à vérifier les informations auprès des sources officielles de l'EPFL.
When moving from known-input security to chosen-input security, some generic attacks sometimes become possible and must be discarded by a specific set of rules in the threat model. Similarly, common practices consist of fixing security systems, once an exp ...
La théorie vérificationniste de la signification, ou Vérificationnisme (en allemand Verifikationismus) est une conception épistémologique affirmant qu'un énoncé n'a de signification cognitive, c'est-à-dire n'est susceptible d'être vrai ou faux, que s'il est vérifiable par l'expérience : c'est pourquoi on parle aussi d'empirisme logique. Les autres énoncés sont soit analytiques, et « vides de sens » (sinnlos), soit synthétiques mais non vérifiables par l'expérience, et donc « absurdes » (unsinnig).
Une hypothèse est une proposition ou un « dit » ou une explication que l'on se contente d'énoncer sans prendre position sur son caractère véridique, c'est-à-dire sans l'affirmer ou la nier. Il s'agit donc d'une simple supposition. Une fois énoncée, une hypothèse peut être étudiée, confrontée, utilisée, discutée ou traitée de toute autre façon jugée nécessaire, par exemple dans le cadre d'une démarche expérimentale.
Critical rationalism is an epistemological philosophy advanced by Karl Popper on the basis that, if a statement cannot be logically deduced (from what is known), it might nevertheless be possible to logically falsify it. Following Hume, Popper rejected any inductive logic that is ampliative, i.e., any logic that can provide more knowledge than deductive logic. In other words if we cannot assert it logically, we should at the least try to logically falsify it, which led Popper to his falsifiability criterion.
In the work of English author/mathematician/logician Lewis Carroll (Charles L. Dodgson), questions of language and meaning constantly lurk beneath the surface. As a literary genre, Carroll’s nonsense has been shown to address changing theories of language ...