Was Feyerabend a Popperian? Methodological issues in the History of the Philosophy of Science

Collodel, Matteo

doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.08.004

Cited by 26 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…He wrote to his former student some harsh letters, 29 whose contents deserve to be extensively reproduced: After apologizing, Feyerabend accepted to include in the proofs an endnote written by Popper. 30 Yet, "he eventually prevented the note from appearing, confessing to an inquiring Agassi that he thought that the acknowledgement which Karl [Popper] had dictated was much too strong, but [he] ha[d] been afraid of quarrel" (Collodel 2016). This unfortunate episode did not really undermine the relationship between Popper and Feyerabend, who for some more years remained aligned with Popper's realist standpoint and in open opposition with CIQM.…”

Section: The Controversy With Feyerabend Over Quantum Physicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Karl Popper's forgotten role in the quantum debate at the edge between philosophy and physics in 1950s and 1960s

Santo

2019

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is not generally well known that the philosopher Karl Popper has been one of the foremost critics of the orthodox interpretation of quantum physics for about six decades. This paper reconstructs in detail most of Popper's activities on foundations of quantum mechanics (FQM) in the period of 1950s and 1960s, when his involvement in the community of quantum physicists became extensive and quite influential. Thanks to unpublished documents and correspondence, it is now possible to shed new light on Popper's central -though neglected-role in this "thought collective" of physicists concerned with FQM, and on the intellectual relationships that Popper established in this context with some of the protagonists of the debate over quantum physics (such as David Bohm, Alfed Landé and Henry Margenau, among many others). Foundations of quantum mechanics represented in those years also the initial ground for the embittering controversy between Popper and perhaps his most notable former student, Paul Feyerabend. I present here novel elements to further understand the origin of their troubled relationship.

show abstract

Section: The Controversy With Feyerabend Over Quantum Physicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Karl Popper's forgotten role in the quantum debate at the edge between philosophy and physics in 1950s and 1960s

Santo

2019

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After assessing those criteria, the theory is chosen -among its rivals -because it has a greater "degree of corroboration" than the others (Collodel, 2016).…”

Section: Karl Popper and Falsificationismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to this approach, the empirical criterion changes from agreement with the facts observed and is replaced by a better theory, referring to the one that presents new information, when compared with the previous theory, so that at least part of the informational surplus be corroborated (Collodel, 2016). This is the idea defended by Kuhn, the difference proposed by Lakatos consists in the establishment of certain requirements attributed to the sets of theories, called by him of research programmes, in order to lead the belief that this substitution is not done in an unsystematic and irrational way.…”

Section: Imre Lakatos and The Research Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contributions of Philosophy of Science, in the Perspective of Popper and Lakatos, for the Study of Innovation: An Analysis of the Neoclassical Schumpeterian and Neo-schumpeterian Theories

Mussi

Zembro

Melo

2017

Rev. fac. cien. econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Schumpeterian and neo-schumpeterian theories represent pillars on which the subject of innovation developed and gained expression. Moreover, innovation is an independent area both in national and international congresses. The objective of this essay is to investigate -from two criteria of delimitation (Popper and Lakatos) -the scientificity of innovation theory. Innovation is analyzed from three macro themes: (i) the neoclassical current of economic theory; (ii) the introduction of innovation theory and reviews of the more recent Schumpeter manuscripts; (iii) the contributions brought by the neo-chumpeterian innovation current. In concluding that the subject of innovation as analyzed meets the criteria listed to categorize the scientificity according to Popper and Lakatos, implications for the field of innovation studies are discussed, such as the construction/transmission of knowledge, the escape from "common sense", and the use of the "method" as a resource for building scientific knowledge. 10corriente neo-chumpeteriana de la innovación. Se concluye que el tema de la innovación responde a los criterios para categorizar la cientificidad, encontrándose que esto tiene implicaciones en el campo de los estudios sobre el tema en aspectos como: la construcción / transmisión del conocimiento, la evasión del "sentido común", y el uso del "método" como recurso para construir el conocimiento científico. -a cientificidade da teoria da inovação. Analisa-se a inovação a partir de três temas macro: (i) a corrente neoclássica da teoria econômica; (ii) a introdução da teoria da inovação e dos manuscritos mais recentes de Schumpeter; e (iii) as contribuições da corrente neo-chumpeteriana da inovação. Conclui-se que o tema da inovação responde aos critérios para categorizar a cientificidade, e que isto tem implicações no campo dos estudos sobre o tema em aspectos como: a construção / transmissão do conhecimento, a evasão do "sentido comum", e o uso do "método" como recurso para construir o conhecimento científico.

show abstract

“…Opis dogmatycznych elementów mitu -psychologicznego nastawienia, ale w szczególności uniemożliwiającej falsyfikację struktury -słusznie powinien nasuwać skojarzenia z filozofią Karla Poppera. W istocie, omawiane tu wykłady zostały przez Feyerabenda wygłoszone w okresie, w którym zdecydowanie pozostawał on zwolennikiem i kontynuatorem myśli autora Logiki odkrycia naukowego czy wręcz sam był krytycznym racjonalistą (Jodkowski, 1988;Collodel, 2016). Strukturalne aspekty opisywanego w nich mitu są powtórzeniem własności teorii bądź światopoglądów niemożliwych do skrytykowania i obalenia, a zatem teorii bądź światopoglądów nienaukowych (zgodnie z falsyfikacjonistycznym kryterium demarkacji) i -co tym mocniej należy w omawianym tu kontekście podkreślić-niezgodnych z duchem krytycyzmu.…”

Section: Dogmatyczny Charakter Mituunclassified

Myth and Myths in Feyerabend’s Philosophy

Mączka

2017

Analiza I Egzystencja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Was Feyerabend a Popperian? Methodological issues in the History of the Philosophy of Science

Cited by 26 publications

References 49 publications

Karl Popper's forgotten role in the quantum debate at the edge between philosophy and physics in 1950s and 1960s

Karl Popper's forgotten role in the quantum debate at the edge between philosophy and physics in 1950s and 1960s

Contributions of Philosophy of Science, in the Perspective of Popper and Lakatos, for the Study of Innovation: An Analysis of the Neoclassical Schumpeterian and Neo-schumpeterian Theories

Myth and Myths in Feyerabend’s Philosophy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About