PHILOS 8 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Pood, Bone Density, Falsifiability

60 views4 pages
26 Apr 2017
School
Department
Course
Professor

Document Summary

Another path: reject inductive skepticism (induction is just irrational) Try to give a theory of confirmation/disconfirmation: relationship between evidence and hypothesis. They think they can show induction is rational. Either way you have to say something about why the scientific process if epistemically good, why it is a reasonable process. But it seems there is a form of inductive arguments is epistemically good, what scientists are doing is rational/reasonable. Popper different from the lp (logical positivists) in two important respects. He was not trying to give an account which sentences are meaningful. He wanted to distinguish between scientific and pseudoscientific hypotheses and theories. Popper was an inductive skeptic , he did not try to give a theory of confirmation. 1 distinguish scientific theories from pseudo scientific theories. Demarcation problem: is the problem of distinguishing scientific theories from pseudoscientific theories. Important to scientists and public because we use them all the time to justify one side from the other.

Get access

Grade+20% off
$8 USD/m$10 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Grade+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
40 Verified Answers
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Class+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
30 Verified Answers

Related Documents