Karl Popper: Conjectures And Refutations, The Growth Of Scientific Knowledge

Karl Popper was a 20th century Austrian-British Philosopher who authored the paper Conjectures and Refutations, The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. In this paper, Popper discussed several questions and issues that he had with the philosophy of science. He first discussed the difference between science and pseudoscience. He defined science as using an empirical method (induction) that follows observations or experiments. Pseudoscience (metaphysics) also relies on observational methods, but does not meet scientific standards. Pseudoscience also relies on the interpretation of an observation. An example of this would be the study of astrology, which relies on horoscopes and biographies. In distinguishing the differences between science and pseudoscience, Popper

He feels that induction is a myth and that we cannot make inferences after one observation. Induction acts as tests of conjectures and that the inductive process cannot determine the criteria for demarcation. Induction only makes theories probable, rather than certain. Popper’s views regarding induction are that he is accepting of an empirical method for the use of testing, but does not believe that theories can be inferred through the use of induction. The fate of a theory is decided by observation and experimentation, or the empirical methodology and the result of the tests. Only the fact that a theory can be falsified should be inferred by induction (experimentation) and this “inference is purely a deductive one”. Popper discusses the role of deduction in his philosophy further by stating that deduction has a role in science. This role is to discover the implications that a theory represents so that we can criticize them accurately rather than to prove theories. One question that one might ask is how do we really go from an observation to a theory? A theory must allow for an explanation of the problem using the process of