Philosophy of Science: Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhns Debate

Extract

[...] Conclusion Both Popper and Kuhn have made important contributions to the philosophy of science, and their theories continue to influence how we view scientific inquiry, knowledge, and the scientific method in general. Popper and Kuhn's debate never quite found a true agreement on the philosophy of science, nevertheless they have contributed two viewpoints and beliefs on the growth of scientific knowledge and both perspectives are used widely today. They have promoted constant testing and revision and have opened a door to modern science. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bird, A Thomas Kuhn. Available: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2022/entries/thomas-kuhn/ [2023, March 19]. [...]

[...] Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Popper, K Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge & K. Paul. Thornton, S Karl Popper. Available: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/popper/ [2023, March 19]. Van Niekerk, AA Rasionaliteit en relativisme. Pretoria: R.G.N. [...]

[...] They do not think they are making efforts to falsify the conjecture that Mars never had water (pp.2). Induction draws a link between observation and generalisation, both giving evidence on what is thought to be true, Popper says that is never going to work. He believed that the real link is that observation can show us that something is false, and scientists must admit when they are wrong. Popper is not concerned where ideas come from as long as they are scientific, this is testability. [...]

[...] He shifted from the standard image of science and created his own view on the image of science. I assert that we do not start from observations but always from problems - either from practical problems or from a theory which has run into difficulties. Once we are faced with a problem, we may begin to work on it. We may do so by attempts of two kinds: we may proceed by first attempting to guess or to conjecture a solution to our problem; and we may then attempt to criticize our usually somewhat feeble guess. [...]

[...] Things (Various topics/aspects) scientists considered themselves to be familiar with, are suddenly seen in a totally new light; new preferences are set; new problems present themselves (pp. 17). A paradigm shift points to a shift in the way people understand or advance towards a certain theory or problem. Kuhn emphasised that it arises when a new theory develops that protests the existing scientific or intellectual framework (Bird, 2022:5). This process of paradigm shift is often accompanied by intense debate and controversy among scientists. Yet in Kuhn's own view, paradigm decisions need not be irrational. [...]