Popper and Likelihood Versus “Popper*”

Induction versus Popper: substance versus semantics.

This article reviews concepts of classical logic and induction, with special attention to the controversies surrounding Popperian claims that induction is impossible and does not exist. I argue that some of the controversy is semantic, and hence Popperian criticisms of induction must be translated carefully into ordinary language to be appreciated by inductively oriented epidemiologists. With t...

Social Explanation and Popper

Popper and the Omics

and other-omics generate unprecedented amounts of experimental data about cells or tissues under certain conditions. However, from an epistemological point of view, merely fitting data into a model to explain observations is not sufficient; science should strive to describe simple and logical theoretical systems that are testable and that enable predictions (Popper, 1959). This paper tries to a...

Popper and computer induction.

Introduction In a recent article in BioEssays, John F. Allen uses Popper's philosophy of science to argue on p. 107 that ``There is no induction machine'', and that looking for one will result in ``waste of resources spent on the search itself.'' This argument is of great interest to me because I started my research life as a graduate student in philosophy of science in Popper's department at t...

Karl R . Popper

I propose to begin my paper on the logic of the social sciences with two theses which formulate the opposition between our knowledge and our ignorance. First thesis: We know a great deal. And we know not only many details of doubtful intellectual interest but also things which are of considerable practical significance and, what is even more important, which provide us with deep theoretical ins...