Titlebook: Karl Popper‘s Science and Philosophy; Zuzana Parusniková,David Merritt Book 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under ex

半身雕像

Popper on the Mind-Brain Relationxplores the idea that mind affects quantum mechanical probability fields with reference to Popper’s view that a mechanism based on quantum principles is only one of many possible mechanisms to explain the mind-brain interaction.

IRS

Karl Popper: His Philosophy and Science,ews on science it is his methodology that most appeals to scientists. He earned the highest accolades for his emphasis on criticism as the essence of progress in science. His methodological principle of criticism is the core of a dynamic epistemology, requiring an adventurous spirit and expressing t

虛情假意

Popper and the Quantum Controversys heavily influenced by the revolutionary developments of physics at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, only in recent years some attention has been devoted to the many contributions that Popper gave directly to the philosophy of physics. In this chapter, we focus on Popper’s work in t

SOBER

Popper’s Experimentomprehensible. Since the beginning of quantum theory, scientists questioned its very basic concepts and proposed ., or thought experiments, to probe its foundations. In 1934, one year before the 1935 paper of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen, Popper published a thought experiment based on his philosophy of r

concentrate

Anthology

MOND and Methodology in the direction of increasing content, and that new theories should only be accepted if some of their novel predictions are experimentally confirmed. There are currently two, viable theories of cosmology: the standard cosmological model, and a theory due to Mordehai Milgrom?called MOND. Both theor

夜晚

人充滿活力

Popper’s Falsification and Corroboration from the Statistical Perspectivesces. Yet, Popper was emphatic in his rejection of inductive probability and of the logical probability of hypotheses; furthermore, for him, the degree of corroboration cannot be a probability. Instead he proposed a deductive method of testing. In many ways this dialectic tension has many parallels i

Interregnum

Popper on Quantification and Identityween 1946 and 1949. This new system of logic did not have the influence that he had hoped for, despite being original, and despite anticipating problems which were discussed in the logic community only much later. In a previous article (Binder and Piecha, 2017) we explored in technical detail his ap

enormous

Logical Maximalism in the Empirical Sciences sciences. These two uses are governed by the following methodological constraints: in mathematical proofs one ought to use minimal logical means (.), while in the empirical sciences one ought to use the strongest available logic (.). In this paper I discuss whether Popper’s critical rationalism is