Karl Popper's problem of demarcation
Keywords:problem of demarcation, Karl Popper, scientific methodology, philosophical methodology, pseudo-science, science
Karl Popper, as a critical rationalist, was an opponent of all forms of scepticism, conventionalism and scientific relativism. In 1935 he wrote Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft, later translating the book into English and publishing it as The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959), considered pioneering work in his field. Many of the arguments in this book are directed against members of the "Vienna Circle", such as Moritz Schlick, Otto Neurath, Rudolph Carnap, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Hempel and Herbert Feigl. Popper agrees with them on general aspects of scientific methodology and their distrust of traditional philosophical methodology, but his solutions have been markedly different. Popper has contributed extensively to debates about general scientific methodology, the demarcation of pseudoscience, the nature of probability, and social science methodology.
Bunge, Mario. 1982. “Demarcating Science from Pseudoscience.” Fundamenta Scientiae 3.
Derksen, A. A. 1993. “The Seven Sins of Pseudo-Science.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 24 (1): 17–42.
Hansson, Sven Ove. 2017. “Science and Pseudo-Science.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2017. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/pseudo-science/.
Hume, David. 1738. A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1970. “Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?” Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge.
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. 1974. “Popper on Demarcation and Induction.” In The Philosophy of Karl Popper, edited by Karl R. Popper and Paul Arthur Schilpp, 1st ed. Vol. The Library of living philosophers. La Salle, Ill: Open Court.
Laudan, Larry. 1983. “The Demise of the Demarcation Problem.” In Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, 111–27. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7055-7_6.
Lugg, Andrew. 1992. “Pseudoscience as Nonsense.” Methodology and Science 25.
Mahner, Martin. 2007. “Demarcating Science from Non-Science.” ResearchGate. 2007. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286895878_Demarcating_Science_from_Non-Science.
Mayo, Deborah G. 1996. “Ducks, Rabbits, and Normal Science: Recasting the Kuhn’s-Eye View of Popper’s Demarcation of Science.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (2): 271–90. http://www.jstor.org/stable/687948.
Morris, Robert L. 1987. “Parapsychology and the Demarcation Problem.” Inquiry 30 (3): 241–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748708602122.
Popper, Karl. 1985. “Filosofie Socială Şi Filosofia Ştiinţei.” 1985. http://www.edituratrei.ro/carte/karl-r-popper-filosofie-sociala-si-filosofia-stiintei/1085/.
Popper, Karl, and Konrad Lorentz. 1985. Die Zukunft ist offen. Das Altenberger Gespräch. Mit den Texten des Wiener Popper-Symposiums. 2. Auflage, 9.-18. Tausend. München: Piper.
Popper, Karl Raimund. 2002a. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Psychology Press.
———. 2002b. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Psychology Press.
Siitonen, Arto. 1984. “Demarcation of Science From the Point of View of Problems and Problem-Stating.” Philosophia Naturalis 21: 339–353.
Thornton, Stephen. 2017. “Karl Popper.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2017. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/popper/.
Copyright (c) 2023 Nicolae Sfetcu (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.