E-LOGOS 2016, 23(1):25-45 | DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.429

CRITICAL REVIEW OF SEVERAL ASPECTS OF POPPER'S WORK IN RELATION TO THE DEMARCATION PROBLEM

Petr Jedlička
Katedra filozofie, Fakulta filozofická ZČU, Czech Republic

V úvodní části zrekapitulujeme v hrubých obrysech Popperovu teorii demarkace v návaznosti na jeho další teze týkající se kritiky induktivních postupů, úlohy metafyziky ve vědě a falzifikaci. Dílo vídeňského filozofa vyvolalo značné množství reakcí, jejichž spektrum sahalo od dílčích modifikací Popperových myšlenek jeho žáky, přes návrhy nových teorií jím inspirovaných, až po zásadní kritiku. Hlavní směry této kritiky načrtneme (bez nároku na úplnost) v další části statě. Polemizujeme především s jednostranným odmítnutím indukce a pokoušíme se zde rehabilitovat některé induktivní postupy. Následně upozorníme na nedostatky Popperova pojetí falzifikace i na problémy použitelnosti jeho demarkačního kritéria na typických příkladech ze sféry metafyziky a "pseudovědy" (psychoanalýza, astrologie). Závěr věnujeme diskuzi o úloze indukce a dedukce ve vědě, posouzení užitečnosti Popperových teorií ve vztahu k současné vědě.

Keywords: demarkační problém, Karl Popper, falzifikovatelnost, induktivní metody, pseudověda.

The opening section briefly examines Popper's theory of demarcation and his views on inductive methods, the role of metaphysics in science, and falsification. Upon publication the work of this Viennese philosopher met a wide range of reactions, from partial modifications to proposals of new theories inspired by his work to complete dismissal. The main lines of critical argument against Popper's doctrine will be outlined here: I will argue that his complete rejection of inductive methodology is unjustified and will call for its partial acceptance in science. I will also challenge the shortcomings of Popper's idea of falsifiability and his demarcation criterion, the limited suitability of which will be demonstrated with typical examples of "pseudoscience" such as psychoanalysis and astrology. The last section proposes a moderate approach in the induction-deduction debate. In closing I will assess the practical value of Popper's theories in today's science.

Keywords: Demarcation problem, Karl Popper, falsifiability, inductive methods, pseudoscience.

Prepublished online: September 1, 2016; Published: June 1, 2016  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Jedlička, P. (2016). CRITICAL REVIEW OF SEVERAL ASPECTS OF POPPER'S WORK IN RELATION TO THE DEMARCATION PROBLEM. E-LOGOS, 23(1), 25-45. doi: 10.18267/j.e-logos.429
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. AGASSI, Joseph. Science in Flux. Dordreeht: D. Reidel Publishing 1975. Go to original source...
    2. AYER, Alfred J. Language, Truth and Logic. New York: Dover Publications 1952.
    3. BARTLEY, III, William. Theories of demarcation between science and metaphysics. In: LAKATOS, I. a MUSGRAVE, A. (eds.), Problems in the Philosophy of.Science. Amsterdam: North-Holland 1968, sv. 3, s. 40-64. Go to original source...
    4. BAR-HILLEL, Yehoshua. Popper's Theory of Corroboration. In: SCHLIPP, P. A. (ed.), The
    5. BOYLE, Robert. New experiments physico-mechanical, touching the air. Oxford: Miles Flesher 1682.
    6. CARROLL, Sean. 2014: What Scientific Idea Is Ready For Retirement? Falsifiability [online]. 2014. Dostupné z: < https://edge.org/response-detail/25322 > [cit. 30. 9. 2015].
    7. CATTELL, Raymond B. Psychological Theory and Scientific Method. In: CATTELL, R. B. - NESSELROADE, J. R (eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology - New York: Plenum Press 1988, s. 3-20. Go to original source...
    8. EYSENCK, Hans. Biography in the Service of Science: A Look at Astr ology." Biography, sv. 2, zima 1979, č. 1, s. 25-34. Go to original source...
    9. GRŰNBAUM, Adolf. Is Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory Pseudo -Scientific by Karl Popper's Criterion of Demarcation? American Philosophical Quarterly, sv. 16, duben 1979, č. 2 s. 131 -141.
    10. GRŰNBAUM, Adolf. Popper's Fundamental Misdiagnosis of the Scientific Defects of Freudian Psychoanalysis, In: PARUSNIKOVA, Z. & COHEN, R. S. (eds), Rethinking Popper - Dordrecht: Springer 2009, s. 117- 134. Go to original source...
    11. HAVLÍK, Vladimír. Metametodologie a naturalismus. Organon F, roč. 19, 2012, č. 1, s. 56-77.
    12. HEILBRON, John L. Electricity in the 17th and 18th Centuries: A Study of Early Modern. Physics. Berkeley: University of California Press 1979, s. 2. Go to original source...
    13. HEILBRON, John L. Elements of early modern physics. Berkeley: University of California Press 1982. s. 159- 232. Go to original source...
    14. HEINDEL, Max -FOSSOVÁ-HEINDELOVÁ, Augusta. Poselství hvězd: Učebnice obecné a lékařské astrologie. Tišnov: Sursum 1998.
    15. HOWARTH, Edgar. Birth order and personality: Some empirical findings and a biobehavioral theory. Personality and Individual Differences, sv. 3, roč. 2, 1982, s 205-210. Go to original source...
    16. HUNT, Christopher J. On Ad Hoc Hypotheses. Philosophy of Science, sv. 79, leden 2012, č. 1, s. 1-14. Go to original source...
    17. KNEALE, William C. The Demarcation of Science. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 205-217.
    18. KRAFT, Viktor. Popper and the Vienna Circle. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 185-204.
    19. KUHN, Thomas. "Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research". In LAKATOS, I. - MUSAGRAVE, A. (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press 1970, s. 1-24. Go to original source...
    20. LAKATOS, Imre. Popper on Demarcation and Induction. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 241-273.
    21. MAXWELL, Grover. Corroboration without Demarcation. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 292-331.
    22. MAXWELL, Nicholas. Critique of Popper's Views on Scientific Method". Philosophy of Science, sv. 39, červen 1972, č. 131-152. Go to original source...
    23. NEWTON-SMITH, William. The Rationality of Science. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library 2003. Go to original source...
    24. PAITLOVÁ, Jitka. Hans Albert a problém hodnotové neutrality vědy. In: Teorie vědy / Theory of Science, Vol 35, No 3, 2013, s. 381-396.
    25. PARUSNIKOVA, Zuzana. Kuhn versus Popper; Konfrontace dvou metodologií na historickém případě Ignaze Semmelweise. Filosofický časopis, 53/2, 2005, str. 219-243.
    26. POPPER, Karl. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. New York - London: Basic Books Publishers 1962.
    27. POPPER, Karl. Intelectual Autobiography. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 3-184.
    28. POPPER, Karl. Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography. London: Routledge 1992.
    29. POPPER, Karl. The Logic of Scientific Discovery Discovery, London - New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library 2005. Go to original source...
    30. PUTNAM, Hilary. The ʻCorroborationʼ of Theories. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 221-240. Bertrand RUSSEL, Problémy filozofie. Praha: ČIN 1927.
    31. SALMON, Wesley C. The Justification Of Inductive Rules of Inference. In: LAKATOS, I. (ed.), The Problem of Inductive Logic, Proceedings of the.International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science 1965, sv. 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing 1968, s. 24-65. Go to original source...
    32. SCHLICK, Moritz. Positivism and Realism. In: BOYD R., GASPER P., TROUT J. D. (eds.), The Philosophy of Science. Cambridge: MIT Press 1991, s. 37-56.
    33. SHATNER, William (režie). Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. USA, 1989.
    34. SKOLIMOWSKI, Henryk. Karl Popper and the Objectivity of Scientific Knowledge. In: SCHILPP, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle: Open Court, 1974, s. 464-519.
    35. SMOLIN, Lee. The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next. Boston: Mariner Books 2007.
    36. THAGARD, Paul R. Why Astrology is a Pseudoscience. In Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, sv. 1. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press 1978, s. 223-234. Go to original source...
    37. URBACH, Peter. Francis Bacon as a Precursor to Popper. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, svazek 33, č 2, červen 1982, s. 113-132. Go to original source...
    38. WISDOM, John O. Discussion - Refutation by observation and refutation by theory. In: LAKATOS, I. a MUSGRAVE, A. (eds.), Problems in the Philosophy of.Science. Amsterdam: North-Holland 1968, sv. 3, s. 65-67.

    Return to the content