Home / Summaries / Class notes - Economic Methodology / popper-theory-theories

Karl Popper and Duhem-Quine Thesis - Karl Popper

Q: What is (according to Popper) a central problem in the philosophy of science?

Demarcation: the distinction between science and pseudo-science.

Q: What was Popper's also sceptical of?

The problem of induction (don't use induction) - He criticized the central logical positivists view that science can be distinguished from pseudo science on the basis of its inductive methodology. - It is easy to obtain evidence in favor of any theory.

21 important questions on Karl Popper and Duhem-Quine Thesis - Karl Popper

What is an immuzing strategy accoring to Popper?

An adjustment which ensures that the theory is still correct despite the evidence that there is an error.

What did Popper suspect about the psychoanalytical theories?

--> Popper started to suspect that psychoanalytical theories were more like myths (Freud etc)
- No precise enough to have negative implications, and are immunized by experimental forgery.

Psychoanlaysts can predict that people will either repress (subdue by force) or sublimate (divert or modify into a culturally higher or socially more acceptable activity) deep emotianl experiences, but not which approach they will choose.

What is the criterion of Popper for distinguishing science from non-science?

Falsifiability is Popper's criterion for defining science from non-science: If a theory can conflict with possible empirical observations, then it is scientific.
-Should have falsifiers (observation reports)

So a theory that is consistent with all possible observations is not scientific.

However: unscientific does not mean that a theory is meaningless. An unscientific theory can become falsifiable at a given point in time, and therefore be scientific.

What is (according to Popper) a central problem in the philosophy of science?

Demarcation: the distinction between science and pseudo-science.

What was Popper's also sceptical of?

The problem of induction (don't use induction)
- He criticized the central logical positivists view that science can be distinguished from pseudo science on the basis of its inductive methodology.
- It is easy to obtain evidence in favor of any theory.

What were the implication's of Popper's idea?

1. Laws are central: a theory is true until proven otherwise
2. Scientific knowledge is falliable knowledge: by correcting mistakes within a theory it becomes increasingly more truthful (one never has certainty, but it becomes more accurate)
3. Scientists should look for denial instead of confirmation: not for certainty as with L-P, but for a criticial test that proves you wrong.

What is Popper's theory of demarcation based on?

Perception that there is a logical asymmetry between verification and falsification

- it is logically impossible to verify a universal statment (all swans are white), so instead of proving it, it needs to be refuted

How was the problem of induction solved?

Something is true unless proven otherwise.
1. Laws were back
2. Scientific knowledge became fallible (capable of making mistakes)
3. Scientists should have aimed for refutation instead of verification.

Was there a way to get to universal laws according to Popper?

No, there is no single method (such as deduction) to come to universal laws.

Science begins with problems, rather than observations (so it should be about problem solving

How can Popper's theory of demarcation be articulated?

We may say that the theory is falsifiable (scientific) if it devides the class of all possible basice statements into the following non-empty subclasses:
1. The class of those basic statements with which it is inconsistent (it is potentially falsifiable)
- Not scientific: not observable
2. The class of those basic statements which it does not contradict

Give an example of Poppers's theory regarding rain in Amsterdam

"It rains in Amsterdam, or it does not rain in Amsterdam."
= Not scientific, because it can not be proven wrong or right (it is tautologically true)

"It rains in Amsterdam."
= has empirical content, since it is riskier, there is also a falsifier (it does not always rain in Amsterdam)

How would Popper test theories? (Methodology) (4)

- The theory must be logically consistent > impossible statements say nothing about reality
- Falsifiability: at least one counter example must be found that invalidates the whole theory (demarcation criterion)
- Determine if the theory would constitute a scientific advance (it survives tests and explains the same observations as good existing theories)
- Empirical content: Only one prediction needs to be rejected, so the more predictions, the easier it is to disprove.

What is a good theory according to Popper?

1. Has a lot of empirical content (is risky) - the more precise predictions, the more falsifiers, so the more empirical content

2. Is nevertheless "corroborated" by empirical data

vb: Einstein's theory of relativity

What is the growth of knowledge according to Popper?

The growth of knowledge proceeds from problems and attempts to solve them. These attempts involve the formulation of these theories which go beyond existing knowledge and therefore require a leap of imagination

According to Popper theories weaken each other (unlike LP who think that one builds on existing knowledge). Something is right, unless proven otherwise

What is deductive testing?

Deductive procedure is an integral part of the scientific method: conclusions are compared to others to determine whether they falsify of confirm the hypotheses

--> Popper claims that findin whether one theory is better than the other by deductively testing both theories, is better than using induction

So a theory is better than another if it has a greater empirical content, and thus is better at prediciting.

How do Popper and LP differ when it comes to empiricism?

Popper states that empiricism cannot determine theory (we cannot claim or derive theory from observations)

What are Popper's spearpoints? (4)

1. All knowledge is temporary/conditional, conjectural or hypothetical

2. We can never prove our theories, but merely confirm/ refute them

3. Hence, whenever we must choose between a number of theories, we can only eliminate those theories which are false, and rationally choose between the not falsified theories

4. Reject the approach that higher probability means accepting the theory. Scientists are interested in theories that have high empirical content (these theories possess a high predicite power and are more testable)

What is "The historicicst Doctrine of the Social Sciences?"

1. The principal task of social sciences is to make predicitons about the social and political development of mankind

2. The task of politics, once the key predictions have been made, is to lessen the "birth pangs" of future social and political development of mankind

Why can Popper be called a historical indeterminist?

History does not evolve in accordance to intrinsic laws and principles, that in the absence of such laws and principals unconditional prediction in soicla sciences in impossible, and that there is no such thing as historical necessity.

How can an "open society" be achieved?

If the individual citizen is able to critically evaluate the consequences of the implementation of government policies, which can be abandoned or modified.

Piecemeal social engineering: In such a society, the rights of the individual to criticize administrative policies need to be formally safeguarded and upheld, so that the undesirable policies are eliminated.

How can one immunize against Popper's invalidation of a theory?

Immunizations ex post1. Classify others: swans are white by definition. A black one cannot be a swan.

2. Underlying theory changes: that black of that swan, is the new white. Dark white. (Re-activating)

3. Change the domain: I only check European swans, yours is Australian.

Immunizations Ex ante
4. Ceteris Paribus: beforehand. One makes every statement irrefutable. All factors must remain the same to prove they are right. So proving wrong: the circumstances have changed

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

Economic Methodology

View summary

A unique study and practice tool
Never study anything twice again
Get the grades you hope for
100% sure, 100% understanding

Remember faster, study better. Scientifically proven.

Karl Popper and Duhem-Quine Thesis - Karl Popper

21 important questions on Karl Popper and Duhem-Quine Thesis - Karl Popper

What is an immuzing strategy accoring to Popper?

What did Popper suspect about the psychoanalytical theories?

What is the criterion of Popper for distinguishing science from non-science?

What is (according to Popper) a central problem in the philosophy of science?

What was Popper's also sceptical of?

What were the implication's of Popper's idea?

What is Popper's theory of demarcation based on?

How was the problem of induction solved?

Was there a way to get to universal laws according to Popper?

How can Popper's theory of demarcation be articulated?

Give an example of Poppers's theory regarding rain in Amsterdam

How would Popper test theories? (Methodology) (4)

What is a good theory according to Popper?

What is the growth of knowledge according to Popper?

What is deductive testing?

How do Popper and LP differ when it comes to empiricism?

What are Popper's spearpoints? (4)

What is "The historicicst Doctrine of the Social Sciences?"

Why can Popper be called a historical indeterminist?

How can an "open society" be achieved?

How can one immunize against Popper's invalidation of a theory?

Summaries related to Methodologies of positive economics - Keynes-Tinbergen debate

Class notes - Economic Methodology

Corporate law notes

Corporate law Endterm notes

Research lab

Indian Economics

Global politics

Essentials of international relations

Behavioral genetics

Management and organisational behaviour

Follow Up Engels idioom 4/5 H

International Business

Marketing fundamentals