Phil 6334: S 14
Reading/Review Questions 1: (Popper reading) Due February 13, 2014
In a well-written (~3 page, double-spaced) essay, discuss either 1 or 2. Focus on explaining the concepts in the reading. Be sure to use quotes from the text. Stick close to the text (and ignore packaged versions of Popper you might have read.) The goal is to show you understand the issues and arguments. There are many different places in the reading that address these questions. Don’t be tempted to touch on all of them. Pick one, and react to the question in relation to it.
- Induction and Corroboration.
How does Popper claim to get around Hume’s problem of induction (be sure to explain it briefly)? How does this enable Popper to view science as “rational” while still rejecting the justification of the inductive method?
How does Popperian corroboration relate to induction? What is so rational about accepting the most corroborated (best-tested) hypotheses (according to Popper)?
Some critics claim that Popper is sneaking in induction after all. What do you think?
- Induction and Demarcation
What is Popper’s solution to the demarcation problem? How does it relate to Popper’s contrast between psychological theories and Einstein’s theory?
What is Popper’s view of when positive instances confirm general hypotheses and how is it different from the inductivist?
Ponder, with respect to a science or scientific inquiry you are familiar with, whether it would (or should?) satisfy Popper’s demarcation criterion.
Error Statistics Philosophy 