Karl Popper And Thomas Kudhn Essay

Superior Essays
Science coming from the Latin word Scientia, meaning “knowledge,” is a systematic structure that builds and organizes knowledge from testable explanations and predictions about the universe. The nature of scientific progress and the rationality of scientific change lies between Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn. The two prominent philosophers of the 20th century had very distinct viewpoints of science which led to countless debates. One of them, which I believe to be the most intriguing, was the scientific method and the idea of there even being one. The traditional understanding of the scientific method, described since the ancient Greeks, was to look at the world with a scientific eye and observe it with no other preconceived notions. They both, …show more content…
He believes that science begins with problems and that these problems occur when something differs from our expectations and reality of it. When this happens, Popper believes we must jump to a solution or conjecture that tries to explain the new criteria. The conjecture will offer a hypothesis that, for example, might try to explain the world in a new way. Popper believes that a good conjecture will make bold moves and take risks by making novel predictions. It is then the job of the scientist to take this new solution and test and submit them through criticism which Popper describes as refutation. He believes science to be a continuous notion of problems that leads to tentative solutions that are then followed by attempted …show more content…
Popper’s believed that the most important aspect of the scientific method to be, “ [To] do everything they can in order to criticize and test the theory in question....” and while Kuhn believed that criticism is exceptional, much of science more focused on his idea of “normal science”. Kuhn understood the the slow and tedious part of science and that mistakes are sometime inevitable. Not every astonishing outcome is because of what was being tested but instead may involve who is testing it which is a critical part of

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    What has become common sense or second nature to scientists now is the action to develop a new theory from a failed attempt with an older theory. When working with science one is to expect such failure to occur quite often. These crises offer the opportunity to the scientists to rethink and reorganize. Following its emergence, Kuhn gives us a response to crises. He wants us to assume that a crises is a precondition, as he puts it, for the emergence of novel theories and ask how scientists react to these theories.…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Scientists form a conjecture that if true would explain observed phenomena. The theory should be bold, and the predictions it makes should be clearly falsifiable. 2. The theory should then be subject to harsh testing in an attempt to prove the theory false. 3.…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The translators understand the different in language, hence can explain the different worldviews with opposing paradigms, into a new language having all the anomalies and responses. The translations would play the role of persuasion and conversion especially for scientists and theorists helping them realize how the opposing paradigm may have solved some of the problems that may have seemed impossible to solve in their paradigm (202-203). Clearly, the patches in the theory of incommensurability were solved by the phenomenon or use of translators. The presence of meta-values that guide science is one of the main reasons why scientists may convert to new and opposing…

    • 776 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Within the modern scientific world, the pursuit of knowledge entails the purposeful advancement of the field. The discovery and development of new information fuel such advancements. Similarly, disagreement also provides a basis for extended research. Carl Sagan suggests the heart of science is “an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes–an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.” Sagan’s statement suggests that disagreements may encompass the model’s logical foundation or evidence’s value; that is, disagreement largely depends on reason and sense perception. Furthermore, disagreement may entail personality clashes…

    • 1521 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Scientists still praise Popper because of his belief that scientific theories should be constantly tested. All theories are tested and the results are analyzed by the scientific community in order to determine whether the results can be trusted or not. Some scientists believe that theories can never truly be proven but testing is necessary in order to differentiate between incorrect theories and theories that do a better job at explaining physical phenomena. According to some, a theory cannot explain the truth behind phenomena but it can highlight a…

    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    By making Berkeley idealism and solipsism the primary logical conventions in Tlön, he alludes to the possibility that the reality of modern science, and science in general, exists as a derivation of cerebral phenomena. Borges states that, “This monism or complete idealism invalidates all science” (Borges, “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius.” 23), and alludes to this philosophy throughout the narration of Tlön. While both stories clearly show skepticism toward modern scientific principles, each story alludes to the possible invalidity of the theories by utilizing contrasting philosophical principles – the dangers of contorting reality in “On Exactitude in Science”, and reality being a completely idealistic anomaly in “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis…

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is a common belief that knowledge, coming from science, must be rational. Natural philosophers, known as scientists, use a method based on experimentation to arrive to scientific knowledge. Due to the nature of this process, it is common to assume that this information must be truth. However, when determining what classifies as scientific knowledge and how science works, there is much more to take into account Therefore, the aim of this essay is to analyze the claim made by Allan Chalmers, and to discuss Popper’s perspective towards this claim. To accomplish this, I will introduce two major approaches to science, induction and falsification.…

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Despite key differences in their solutions, both Karl Popper and Paul Feyerabend noticed issues with the positivist system of scientific discoveries and attempted to develop new methods for understanding science. Popper developed new understandings surrounding the theory dependence of observation, and the flaws of induction. His system of falsificationism was a key factor in the development of sociology of science as a whole and of Feyerabend’s system of Epistemological anarchism. Feyerabend built on Popper’s ideas and criticisms and took heavy issue with the positivist model of the consistency condition, and his work has helped change our understanding of the sociology of science and the nature of scientific theories immensely. The positivist…

    • 1426 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Additionally, note what specifically about Kuhn’s perspective helps you understand how we come to know? If I imagine a conversation between Kuhn and Descartes, upon closely looking at their publications, I believe Kuhn would disagree on several of his discourses with Descartes. Using his idea of paradigm, Kuhn helped bring the philosophy of science closer to the history of science. On the other hand, Descartes’ way of knowing is based on experience and influenced by deductive reasoning to lead to the development of ideas. In this connection, Kuhn believed that Descartes caused a paradigm shift in a broad, and historical sense.…

    • 700 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The adherents of a pseudo-science are able to firmly attach the hypotheses no matter how the events unfolded. However, Popper accepted that unrestricted generalizations could not be verified. Instead, he pointed out they can only be falsified. I agreed with the account of Popper’s philosophy of science from the view that falsification is the ultimate way of understanding the various ways of scientific methods and approaches. This is simply because a universal explanatory theory is only true if it can be justified in various empirical reasons that are well outlined, and thus, achieved by assuming the truth and credibility of particular test statements or observational judgment.…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays