Titlebook: Rethinking Popper; Zuzana Parusniková,Robert S. Cohen Conference proceedings 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Karl R. Popper

cringe

Popper’s Continuing Relevancell try to justify their views instead of trying to improve upon them by criticizing them and conjecturing alternatives. In public discourse barren forms of justification are widespread. More and better critical institutions are required, and these require political compromise on shared aims.

代替

Open Society and the European Uniontotalitarianism as an alternative mode of human existence motivated Karl Popper to define freedom, the very heart of democratic civilization, as the standard and criterion of human dignity. Dictatorships and totalitarian regimes suppress human freedom, which is the basic characteristic of open democ

Parallel

Open Rationality: Making Guesses About Nature, Society and Justicer deductive consequences. “Inductive inferences” are an illusion; either they are pure guesses, or enthymematic deductive reasonings, with an implicit “fair sample hypothesis.” Our aim is not justification or even consensus, but truth. And it is because our theories are true or truthlike that they h

聽(tīng)寫(xiě)

0068-0346 en critical discourse for both the growth of knowledge and d.In September 2007, more than 100 philosophers came to Prague with the determination to approach Karl Popper’s philosophy as a source of inspiration in many areas of our intellectual endeavor. This volume is a result of that effort. Topics

Culpable

審問(wèn),審訊

集中營(yíng)

Proof Versus Sound Inference‘s epistemology, especially to his emphasis on the distinctness of epistemology and methodology. In this paper, (1) The distinction is explained; (2) The difference is presented as the basis for Popper‘s view of the history of logic; (3) Some modern hesitations about all this are discussed.

Arctic

CANT

Popper’s Thesis of the Unity of Scientific Method: Method Versus Techniquesdistinctions that have been fashioned in contemporary philosophy of science, among others, the distinction between scientific method and scientific techniques and also between the context of discovery and the context of validation.

deviate

Critical Rationalism and the Principle of Sufficient Reasonophical position, it can also be critically discussed. If we follow the principle of critical testing, no trilemma of justification arises when we claim that it is reasonable to accept Critical Rationalism. This opens the way for a critical philosophy stressing the fallibility of human knowledge.