2012SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Just Say 'No' to Logical Negativism

Susan Haack

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

Karl Popper’s influential philosophy of science had the enthusiastic support of well-known scientists, and has even played a significant role in the U.S. legal system. Assessing the true value of Popper’s contribution to our understanding of science is complicated by the fact that, besides the authentic, uncompromisingly falsificationist Popper, there is also a shadow Popper who offers more modest, and more plausible, ideas. But the authentic Popper’s original and distinctive claims about science are indefensible; and the shadow Popper’s more defensible ideas are not original. The Critical Common-sensist approach developed in my Defending Science — Within Reason resolves the difficulties of Popper’s Logical Negativism, and provides a much more plausible account of the scientific enterprise.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Karl Popper’s influential philosophy of science had the enthusiastic support of well-known scientists, and has even played a significant role in the U.S. legal system. Assessing the true value of Popper’s contribution to our understanding of science is complicated by the fact that, besides the authentic, uncompromisingly falsificationist Popper, there is also a shadow Popper who offers more modest, and more plausible, ideas. But the authentic Popper’s original and distinctive claims about science are indefensible; and the shadow Popper’s more defensible ideas are not original. The Critical Common-sensist approach developed in my Defending Science — Within Reason resolves the difficulties of Popper’s Logical Negativism, and provides a much more plausible account of the scientific enterprise.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Karl Popper’s influential philosophy of science had the enthusiastic support of well-known scientists, and has even played a significant role in the U.S. legal system. Assessing the true value of Popper’s contribution to our understanding of science is complicated by the fact that, besides the authentic, uncompromisingly falsificationist Popper, there is also a shadow Popper who offers more modest, and more plausible, ideas. But the authentic Popper’s original and distinctive claims about science are indefensible; and the shadow Popper’s more defensible ideas are not original. The Critical Common-sensist approach developed in my Defending Science — Within Reason resolves the difficulties of Popper’s Logical Negativism, and provides a much more plausible account of the scientific enterprise.

Key concepts: Karl popper, Shadow (psychology), Epistemology, Critical rationalism, Philosophy, Philosophy of science, Psychology, Psychoanalysis

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Just Say 'No' to Logical Negativism — Research Paper | ScholarLens