Re: [Critical-Realism] Quick on Popper and falsification

[<gdemetrion@xxxxxxx>]

Ruth, Mervyn, others,

I think the falsification issue in Popper gets overplayed in various short commentaries on his work, particularly among those who perhaps have not studied his work closely.  What comes across much more is a rigorous and creative scientific imagination in his various comprehensive grappling of the dimensions of higher range scientific philosophy through rigorous and detailed conjecture resulting in new or refined theory construction that better account for the facts at hand and less satisfactory theoretical explanations.

Both falsification and demarcation (of what does and does not qualify as science) are more limiting qualifications in response both to the induction problem as Ruth says in his critique of logical positivism as well as that of testability or verification in his critique, among other things of Freudianism, Hegelianism and Platonism. Not that I don't have concerns about what may be viewed as his unrestrained, yet not without interesting criticism of historicism, which is another matter. His three best books in my view are (1) Realism and the Aim of Science, (2) Conjecture and Refutations, (c)  Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach.

Perhaps the following statement from Objective Knowledge can provide a flavor of his philosophy of science:

"Although we have no criteria of truth [or do we?], or no means of being quite sure of the falsity of a theory [my accent is on the word "quite"], it is easier to find out that a theory is false than to find out that it is true...We have even good reasons to think that most of our theories--are, strictly speaking, false [in that they serve primarily a heuristic purpose]; for they oversimplify or idealize the facts.  Yet a false conjecture may be nearer or less near to the truth.  Thus, we arrive at the idea of nearness to the truth that is, to the idea of versimilitude (p. 318)

His focus is problem orientation in lining up the evidence and range of explanatory potential (including lesser and better explanations) as it sheds light o the issue or problem under investigation.  On this he is no denier of a world "out there," beyond our perceptions and he seeks to shed light on identifying and articulating the best possible explanation through a conjectural process that sifts the facts on the ground (including those that may not have previously come to light) in critical dialogue with given, current explanatory rationales in a quest for a better understanding; an unending quest for truth in an expanding universe.  As with anyone there is room for critique, but there is also great potential for exploring areas of convergences which then shed more exacting light on differences as well.

George Demetrion
_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism