Sir Karl Popper was born in 1902 and died in 1994. For those of you who have never had the opportunity to try and wrap your melon around Sir Karl, you have missed a truly disconcerting journey.
Sir Karl was the father of modern debate and forwarded the idea of falsification as the only true measure of scientific discovery. In other words it is only possible to know what is false not what is true. In his premise multiple positive outcomes in an experiment cannot conclude something to be true yet one negative result can be decisive. He believes that observation is not scientific but rather anecdotal to furthering knowledge and that general knowledge progresses incrementally over time down a path with no definitive conclusion ever. Over time one can increasingly confirm different theories likelihood of being correct but here can never be a declaratory positive. If we look at what we observe about the material word around us and see how what we believe now in the fields of physics from where we were 50 years ago it is easy to see his philosophy in action. As an example let us use the premise that based on our observations that all fish live in water, until 50 years ago that held true but then it was found that some fish also bury themselves in mud and even climb trees in South America. So while the statement that all fish live in the water is practically true it is also partially false. It is these qualified truths that Popper found so objectionable in the declarative sense of Empiricism, in other words what is observed to be true is only true as far as it is observed. Another example of this is the theorem that all ducks have beaks but how can one know that with certainty unless every duck is observed and how can one know when that is the case.
In general I agree with Sir Karl, as I have seen in my lifetime certainties being disproved. So beware the person who speaks with idea that what he believes is true, it maybe more accurate to say that what he believes to be true is so based on is incomplete knowledge.
A turkey is fed everyday for 100 days, based on the turkeys observations life is good and he knows that he will be fed everyday. The turkey’s knowledge was accurate yet imperfect.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
scientific inquiry becomes even more limited when its object is the subject. Enter another Carl, Carl Jung.Attemping to objectify the subjective is where it really gets interesting. All human thought and action has irrational prehistoric roots. Our "truths" are the product of a subjective engine whose nature we only glimse. Its truths can not therefore ever be universalized.
In one sense, I agree with Sir Karl, but that leaves the problem of absolute and relative truth. One of the main problems with the secular/progressive takeover of both the public school systems and most colleges and Universities is relativistic morality.
The indoctrination of our children into believing that there is no such thing as an absolute truth, is just now showing fruits that leave many people both dumbfounded and perplexed. Events like the killings at Columbine and Virginia Tech horrify and confuse us. The rash of female teachers having sex, not only with their own students, but with some as young as 11 is almost inexplicable. Many in the MSM ask the question "How can these things happen?"
Well these are the fruits of the S/P brainwashing of our children in schools over the last 35 years. Teaching them that there are no judgments, everything is relative to the individual, you are not responsible for your actions.....these take a toll on our children. By the time they are young adults, unless they have a strong moral upbringing at home, it can really affect their lives negatively.
Post a Comment